Several Arguments For Censorship Of Music example essay topic

... ensor ship is violating peoples' rights to say whatever they want to say. There are several arguments for censorship of music, however they are not as commanding as those against censorship. One of the strongest arguments for censorship of violent and vulgar music lyrics is that it has a negative influence of the people who listen to it. For example, Valerie Smith states", a 13-year-old Canadian boy told police that rap music and watching horror movies that featured Freddy Krueger (the killer from Nightmare on Elm Street) ripping blouses off women caused him to sexually assault his 10 year-old step-Sister" (Smith). Smith believes that the youth of our country should not be exposed to the content of some lyrics. The youth of this country will respond negatively to the content of some lyrics.

There have been some isolated incidents where kids have gotten hurt imitating or doing what they see or hear in music and television. One of the most horrific incidents in the history of America occurred a few years ago in Columbine, Colorado. On a sunny spring day in April 1999, a suburban high school in Jefferson County, Colorado, found itself under attack by two of its own. In less than fifteen minutes of the first-lunch period on that Tuesday, two student gunmen, who were dressed in gothic style clothing, killed 13 and wounded 21 before they turned the guns on themselves - the most devastating school shooting in U.S. history.

This incident received a lot of media coverage. Several media outlets blamed shock rock and gothic music for influencing these students to kill. Many people in society rallied to government officials for censorship of music after this tragic event. People were devastated and needed to know how something like this could have happened. People needed someone or something to blame. This isolated incident is influences how many people feel about the topic of music's negative influence on society.

Mostly it is parents and teachers who support censorship. This argument for censorship also insists that children are easily impressionable at that age and do not make mature decisions. However, these situations should not be blamed on any kind of music. The boys' actions were their own and no one forced them to commit those actions. These incidents, and other incidents that occur like this, are partially the individual's fault and partially the parents' fault. If a child's mind is easily impressionable at that age, then the parents of the child need to supervise the child very carefully and not allow them to watch or listen to material that they feel is negative.

Millions of teenagers watch horror movies and listen to music and the majority of teenagers do not commit violent crimes. America is a democracy, where people have the freedom to do as they chose, and the actions of a minority of people should not influence the rights of the majority. Public policy should not be made in times of distress and chaos. Music is a reflection of life and the society that people live in.

The music doesn't create the problems, yet is a reflection of them. People should understand that the actual problem is much larger, and deals with violence, drugs, and underage sex being far too prevalent in our society, not just the music. People in society should solve the problem of violence, drugs, and sex in society before people focus to prevent it in all forms of the media. There are stats that prove teen violence; suicide, drug use, and sexual activity have all been on the rise. Doesn't it make sense that the catalyst promoting such ideals is to blame? This is another strong argument for censorship.

In one study done on the violence in television, films, video games and music there were surprising results. The research revealed " unequivocal evidence that media violence increases the likelihood of aggressive and violent behavior in both immediate and long term contexts" (Anderson). There have been numerous studies that support claims that music has a negative influence of the people who listen to it. Most of these studies can be discredited because they are not a complete reflection of the negative influence caused by music. Many of these studies are conducted by interest groups. Many of the studies conducted for censorship are manipulated by interest groups in an attempt to spread their viewpoints and limit the viewpoints of others.

Darrell Huff explains how statistics can easily be manipulated. Huff states, Statistics are often used to substantiate comparative claims - for example, '88% of those surveyed prefer QRS brand potato chips. ' But this statistic fails to mention the sample size. Think about it - we all know that there's a 50% chance that a tossed coin will come up heads. But if you flip a coin six times in a row you might get one head and five tails.

Does this mean that the original statistic is wrong and in fact, a coin will come up heads 16% of the time? Of course not - it's just that we didn't conduct the experiment with a large enough sample size. If we don't know what the sample size is, we have no way of evaluating the accuracy of the statement. (Huff) Suggesting that music should be censored because it has a negative influence of the people who listen to it is a comparative claim and can not be proven by statistics. The argument against censorship is based on facts and not statistics.

Censorship is clearly against the first constitutional right and it will not work because of society is attracted to forbidden material. These are not statistics but actual facts. Many arguments for censorship use statistics to strengthen its claims. Groups that argue for censorship imply that the negative actions of a minority of people should impact the rights of the majority of society by calling for censorship of music. Blanshard believes that recent calls for censorship of music, due to a few isolated incidents, are not merited. Controversial material has been around for centuries.

It has not caused a significant problem before and there is no need to censor it now. Blanshard explains, Violence in the form of murder, mayhem, rape, and war has always been an important theme in fiction, and frequently it is the climax of the best history and the noblest spiritual epic. No one has ever thought to keep the Bible out of the hands of children because the Old Testament is filled with sadism and murder, often alleged to have been perpetrated by the deity himself. American youth of the nineteenth century were fed generously on Edgar Allen Poe's tales of horror and mutilation, and Conan Doyle's mystery and horror tales trilled millions of readers long before the birth of media.

(Blanshard 230) Today's music is no different from the explicit texts that children read over a century ago. Blanshard believes that the explicit lyrics of some music artists do not have a big impact on the American youth. Blanshard believes that the music still has the same effect on people that it did centuries ago. The amount of violence, sex and drugs hasn't increased in media, however it has increased in society. Music should not be censored because it will only put a boundary on artistic and intellectual freedom even There are several concerns and issues with artistic expression through music, however censorship of the controversial music will not resolve any problems and it will only create more problems. Censorship in music is wrong.

Artists should be allowed to say whatever they want in order to express their emotions. That is what our founding fathers based this country upon: freedom. Music should not be censored due to our First Amendment right. When a parent hears foul language on their child's stereo or television, they should not complain to the network or record company, they should complain to themselves.

If they do not wish for their child to hear foul language they should have supervised their children more closely. If they take their child to a record store and buy them a new tape or c. d., the parent should have listened to the music by him or herself and scan for anything questionable. If they don't like the content, they can always return it to the store. This way they can be positive that their child is listening to music that is acceptable in their eyes.

In Paul Blanshard's book The Right To Read: The Battle Against Censorship, he speaks of censorship as a negative boundary on society. Blanshard argues that people have been given the right to express themselves fully. Martha Bayles, in the articles " The Perverse in the Popular", help aid in the understanding of the negatives effects and outcomes of censorship of music in society. When people are confronted with controversial material, they should analyze the material from all angles and should attempt to understand the material before forming a negative opinion about it. Musicians display their emotions through music and it is their form of artistic expression.

Musicians spend a lot of time and work very hard to perfect their art from. Censorship of their art form should not be accepted in any society.

Bibliography

Anderson, Craig A. et al". The Influence of Media on the Youth " Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 4.3 (1999): 81-110 Bayles, Martha".
The Perverse in the Popular". Wilson Quarterly 25 (Summer 2001): 40-47.
Blanshard, Paul. The Right To Read: The Battle Against Censorship. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1955 Goldstein, Jeffrey".
The Attractions of Violent Entertainment". Media Psychology 1.3 (1999): 271.
Huff, Darrell. Homepage. 2004.
web Charles". President Bush: Make Those Protestors Disappear". Humanist 64.1 (Jan / Feb 2004): 4 Shemite, Jon.
Homepage. June 30, 1994 - June 1, 1997 web Valerie.
Home page. April 19, 2004.
web copycat incidents. htm Music Censorship 201: U 5 Research in the Disciplines Final Draft Word count: 3,253 F. Nika Hedges Spring 2004.