Government Should Not Censor All Music With Violent or Explicit Lyrics
These days, every songs is evaluated by inquiry commission before they are played by mass media, and some violent or explicit lyrics are censored and prohibited so they cannot be played by mass media. Government claims that government secures the ethicality and public character through this kind of censorship. At this point, many debates deal with this topic because musicians argue that their freedom of expressions must be ensured. However, we should be aware that this censorship is unnecessary. Government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics. There are reasons why I think that music censorship is unnecessary.
The music censorship did not just begin in the past 20 years. In fact, people have been censoring music all throughout twentieth century. After the 50's, the music censorship started becoming even more prominent because of musicians with more carefree attitude and heavily involved on drugs and sex. And in the 1960s, finally, the lyrical content became the main cause for censorship.
Especially in Korea, the past government corruptly used music censorship to achieve their political purpose. The music censorship by government had extensively implemented throughout 1970s by the Korea Broadcasting Ethics Commitee and Korea Media Rating Board.
Most of rap musics include violent and explicit contents, so they are censored by government. According to the statistics, however, the data showed very little correlation between the crimes in the lyrics and their counterparts. So the argument that violent or explicit lyrics influence crimes have to be accepted incredulously.
As the Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasized, Everyone has the freedom of expression. Artists express their feelings and thoughts through their works. If the music is censored, musician's freedom of expression will be violated. Other genre of art are seemed to be censored less strictly than lyrics in music. Many songs are banned because of their violent or explicit contents and they cannot be played through mass media.
This kind of censorship unnecessarily invade the musicians' freedom of expression. Musicians cannot earn a living when their music does not receive enough attention. When the music censored and banned, It cannot be played on mass media so it won't receive enough attention. So, musicians will start to hide their real feelings and thoughts to pass the censorship, and the nature of music will be spoiled.
What's more, music censorship by government can be used inappropriately. In South Korea, for example, 1960s ~ 70s was the age of dictatorship. Many people protest against the government, and government suppressed the protest using military force. They also banned the music used in demo or seemed to be related in politics with ridiculous reasons. The most of songs banned at that time were banned with the reasons such as 'decadent lyrics', 'indecent singing method', 'encouraging distrust'.
There are plenty of people, especially parents, who will dispute my position with concerning the bad influence of violent or explicit lyrics on children. Of course, violent or explicit contents are not good for children's sentiment. However, censoring those lyrics for children's sentiment does not make sense. As the parents instruct their children before they watch movies or cartoons, parents can instruct their children before they listen to music including violent or explicit lyrics. Some people who will dispute my position can argue that violent or explicit lyrics can cause crimes. There are statistic researched the relation between explicit lyrics and crime rate, however, and the data showed very little correlation between the explicit lyrics and their counterparts. For example, there was a significant crime drop between 1993 and 1995. However, crimes mentioned in lyrics steadily increased from 1993 to 1995. This fact can prove that violent or explicit lyrics does not directly influence crimes. When we see the violent movies or dramas, most of us don't take the contents as a real thing. Many people imagine the violent scene of such movies or dramas, but they don't copy those behavior. Likewise, music with violent or explicit lyrics do not influence crimes. So government do not have to concern about the relation between explicit lyrics and crime rate.
Nowadays, the standard for music censorship has been alleviated a lot. However, it is still hard to agree that we are living in the world of 'perfect' freedom of expression. Many musicians already hide their real feelings and thoughts and make music with commercial intention. They can't freely express their feelings and thoughts because of music censorship. They must be ensured their freedom of expression. the government do this because government concern bad influences of music with violent or explicit lyrics on society. However, there is a evidence that those lyrics does not related to crime rate. Musicians are now violated their rights and freedom unnecessarily. Government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics.
2014년 10월 25일 토요일
Week 10 - Conclusion
Nowadays, the standard for music censorship has been alleviated a lot. However, it is still hard to agree that we are living in the world of 'perfect' freedom of expression. Many musicians already hide their real feelings and thoughts and make music with commercial intention. They can't freely express their feelings and thoughts because of music censorship. They must be ensured their freedom of expression. the government do this because government concern bad influences of music with violent or explicit lyrics on society. However, there is a evidence that those lyrics does not related to crime rate. Musicians are now violated their rights and freedom unnecessarily. Government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics.
Week 9 - Refutation and Concession
There are plenty of people, especially parents, who will dispute my position with concerning the bad influence of violent or explicit lyrics on children. Of course, violent or explicit contents are not good for children's sentiment. However, censoring those lyrics for children's sentiment does not make sense. As the parents instruct their children before they watch movies or cartoons, parents can instruct their children before they listen to music including violent or explicit lyrics. Some people who will dispute my position can argue that violent or explicit lyrics can cause crimes. There are statistic researched the relation between explicit lyrics and crime rate, however, and the data showed very little correlation between the explicit lyrics and their counterparts. For example, there was a significant crime drop between 1993 and 1995. However, crimes mentioned in lyrics steadily increased from 1993 to 1995. This fact can prove that violent or explicit lyrics does not directly influence crimes. When we see the violent movies or dramas, most of us don't take the contents as a real thing. Many people imagine the violent scene of such movies or dramas, but they don't copy those behavior. Likewise, music with violent or explicit lyrics do not influence crimes. So government do not have to concern about the relation between explicit lyrics and crime rate.
Week 8 - The Confirmation
As the Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasized, Everyone has the freedom of expression. Artists express their feelings and thoughts through their works. If the music is censored, musician's freedom of expression will be violated. Other genre of art are seemed to be censored less strictly than lyrics in music. Many songs are banned because of their violent or explicit contents and they cannot be played through mass media.
This kind of censorship unnecessarily invade the musicians' freedom of expression. Musicians cannot earn a living when their music does not receive enough attention. When the music censored and banned, It cannot be played on mass media so it won't receive enough attention. So, musicians will start to hide their real feelings and thoughts to pass the censorship, and the nature of music will be spoiled.
What's more, music censorship by government can be used inappropriately. In South Korea, for example, 1960s ~ 70s was the age of dictatorship. Many people protest against the government, and government suppressed the protest using military force. They also banned the music used in demo or seemed to be related in politics with ridiculous reasons. The most of songs banned at that time were banned with the reasons such as 'decadent lyrics', 'indecent singing method', 'encouraging distrust'.
This kind of censorship unnecessarily invade the musicians' freedom of expression. Musicians cannot earn a living when their music does not receive enough attention. When the music censored and banned, It cannot be played on mass media so it won't receive enough attention. So, musicians will start to hide their real feelings and thoughts to pass the censorship, and the nature of music will be spoiled.
What's more, music censorship by government can be used inappropriately. In South Korea, for example, 1960s ~ 70s was the age of dictatorship. Many people protest against the government, and government suppressed the protest using military force. They also banned the music used in demo or seemed to be related in politics with ridiculous reasons. The most of songs banned at that time were banned with the reasons such as 'decadent lyrics', 'indecent singing method', 'encouraging distrust'.
Week 7 : The Narration
The music censorship did not just begin in the past 20 years. In fact, people have been censoring music all throughout twentieth century. After the 50's, the music censorship started becoming even more prominent because of musicians with more carefree attitude and heavily involved on drugs and sex. And in the 1960s, finally, the lyrical content became the main cause for censorship.
Especially in Korea, the past government corruptly used music censorship to achieve their political purpose. The music censorship by government had extensively implemented throughout 1970s by the Korea Broadcasting Ethics Commitee and Korea Media Rating Board.
Most of rap musics include violent and explicit contents, so they are censored by government. According to the statistics, however, the data showed very little correlation between the crimes in the lyrics and their counterparts. So the argument that violent or explicit lyrics influence crimes have to be accepted incredulously.
Especially in Korea, the past government corruptly used music censorship to achieve their political purpose. The music censorship by government had extensively implemented throughout 1970s by the Korea Broadcasting Ethics Commitee and Korea Media Rating Board.
Most of rap musics include violent and explicit contents, so they are censored by government. According to the statistics, however, the data showed very little correlation between the crimes in the lyrics and their counterparts. So the argument that violent or explicit lyrics influence crimes have to be accepted incredulously.
Research 3
Source :
The History of Censorship in Music
http://censoryofmusic.weebly.com/the-history.html
My topic :
Government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics.
What I hope to learn from this source : I want to learn the history of music censorship and I will research the background of implementing music censorship.
Notes
1. Music censorship did not just begin in the past 20 years. In fact, people have been censoring music all throughout the twentieth century. In the earlier times, though, censors were used to block lyrics that seem hardly offensive today. The rules and regulations have changed, but the basis still remains.
2. In 1927, the United States of America's Congress enacted the The Radio Act of 1927, which was used as a way for the government to control the content that was being broadcasted. The Radio Act prohibited the use of obscene, indecent or profane language through the air. This was first used to fine a radio station in 1970, fifty-three years after the Act was passed, because of a reference to sex. Then, in 1934, congress created the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to monitor international communications through radio, television, etc. The FCC is run by five commissioners that are appointed by the government, and has been in charge of controlling music play throughout the entirety of 1934 to present day (Storr 17). Since their creation, not only have they added to the laws prohibiting music play, but they are also directly involved with censoring it themselves. The core reason music censorship is as heavily used as it is today is because of the FCC.
3. From then on, there have been many instances throughout the 1940's and 50's that have brought about question as to the motive of the FCC and music censorship. In 1952, a folk band by the name The Weavers were blacklisted because of their leftist political beliefs. As a result, they lost their recording contract causing their popularity to drop dramatically. In this case, the FCC used there power to ruin the popularity of a band, and change how people felt about them because of censorship. Another simple example is of Elvis Presley on "The Ed Sullivan Show". In 1957, he was forced to be filmed from the waist up, because the way he danced and moved his legs were considered inappropriate.
4.After the 50's, music censorship started becoming even more prominent. With artists on the rise with a more carefree attitude, and heavily involved in drugs and sex, it only seemed natural that music censorship would respond in such a way to prevent people from hearing or seeing it. In the 1960's, lyrical content became the main cause for censorship. In fact, from Ed Sullivan's insistence, The Rolling Stones changed the lyric of one song from "Let's spend the night together" to "Let's spend some time together" (Jones 76). Other extreme examples throughout the 60's included arrests and imprisonment of Jim Morrison and the Doors for indecent exposure and obscenity, and fines to Country Joe McDonald for saying "fuck" in a show. The BBC also began heavily enforcing Censorship in the 1960's. When The Beatles began experimenting with drugs and showing it in their lyrics, the British Broadcasting Corporation was quick to react to it and banned plenty of songs. The FCC followed suit by sending warnings to all broadcasts of potentially harmful lyrics (Jones 78). The rest of the of the 60's and 70's continued the same way, with the FCC responding to "outrageous" lyrical content. In 1985, the Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) was formed. Mainly formed by mothers whose husbands were in the government, they did not like the accessibility that their children had to albums with sexual content and explicit lyrics (Peterson 591). It was their push that caused a change amongst albums, creating the "clean" and "explicit" versions that we sell today. Also, it made such an affect on companies that drove some (like Walmart) to refuse to carry explicit albums altogether.
Final thoughts : I learned the brief history of music censorship in america. Since most of popular music is played on American mass media, I think knowing the history of music censorship in america is crucial. Now I can understand opposite side's point more.
The History of Censorship in Music
http://censoryofmusic.weebly.com/the-history.html
My topic :
Government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics.
What I hope to learn from this source : I want to learn the history of music censorship and I will research the background of implementing music censorship.
Notes
1. Music censorship did not just begin in the past 20 years. In fact, people have been censoring music all throughout the twentieth century. In the earlier times, though, censors were used to block lyrics that seem hardly offensive today. The rules and regulations have changed, but the basis still remains.
2. In 1927, the United States of America's Congress enacted the The Radio Act of 1927, which was used as a way for the government to control the content that was being broadcasted. The Radio Act prohibited the use of obscene, indecent or profane language through the air. This was first used to fine a radio station in 1970, fifty-three years after the Act was passed, because of a reference to sex. Then, in 1934, congress created the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to monitor international communications through radio, television, etc. The FCC is run by five commissioners that are appointed by the government, and has been in charge of controlling music play throughout the entirety of 1934 to present day (Storr 17). Since their creation, not only have they added to the laws prohibiting music play, but they are also directly involved with censoring it themselves. The core reason music censorship is as heavily used as it is today is because of the FCC.
3. From then on, there have been many instances throughout the 1940's and 50's that have brought about question as to the motive of the FCC and music censorship. In 1952, a folk band by the name The Weavers were blacklisted because of their leftist political beliefs. As a result, they lost their recording contract causing their popularity to drop dramatically. In this case, the FCC used there power to ruin the popularity of a band, and change how people felt about them because of censorship. Another simple example is of Elvis Presley on "The Ed Sullivan Show". In 1957, he was forced to be filmed from the waist up, because the way he danced and moved his legs were considered inappropriate.
4.After the 50's, music censorship started becoming even more prominent. With artists on the rise with a more carefree attitude, and heavily involved in drugs and sex, it only seemed natural that music censorship would respond in such a way to prevent people from hearing or seeing it. In the 1960's, lyrical content became the main cause for censorship. In fact, from Ed Sullivan's insistence, The Rolling Stones changed the lyric of one song from "Let's spend the night together" to "Let's spend some time together" (Jones 76). Other extreme examples throughout the 60's included arrests and imprisonment of Jim Morrison and the Doors for indecent exposure and obscenity, and fines to Country Joe McDonald for saying "fuck" in a show. The BBC also began heavily enforcing Censorship in the 1960's. When The Beatles began experimenting with drugs and showing it in their lyrics, the British Broadcasting Corporation was quick to react to it and banned plenty of songs. The FCC followed suit by sending warnings to all broadcasts of potentially harmful lyrics (Jones 78). The rest of the of the 60's and 70's continued the same way, with the FCC responding to "outrageous" lyrical content. In 1985, the Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) was formed. Mainly formed by mothers whose husbands were in the government, they did not like the accessibility that their children had to albums with sexual content and explicit lyrics (Peterson 591). It was their push that caused a change amongst albums, creating the "clean" and "explicit" versions that we sell today. Also, it made such an affect on companies that drove some (like Walmart) to refuse to carry explicit albums altogether.
Final thoughts : I learned the brief history of music censorship in america. Since most of popular music is played on American mass media, I think knowing the history of music censorship in america is crucial. Now I can understand opposite side's point more.
2014년 10월 24일 금요일
Week 6 - Introduction
These days, every songs is evaluated by inquiry commission before they are played by mass media, and some violent or explicit lyrics are censored and prohibited so they cannot be played by mass media. Government claims that government secures the ethicality and public character through this kind of censorship. At this point, many debates deal with this topic because musicians argue that their freedom of expressions must be ensured. However, we should be aware that this censorship is unnecessary. Government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics. There are reasons why I think that music censorship is unnecessary.
1. Attention grabber
I attracted the audience by describing the situation that every music is censored by government.
2. Explains the topic
In the attention grabber I introduce the topic and opposite standpoint against the topic.
3. My thesis
My topic is that government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics. I think it is clear to describe the reasons for this.
1. Attention grabber
I attracted the audience by describing the situation that every music is censored by government.
2. Explains the topic
In the attention grabber I introduce the topic and opposite standpoint against the topic.
3. My thesis
My topic is that government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics. I think it is clear to describe the reasons for this.
Research 2
Source:
Is This Coclusive Proof That Rap Music Does Not Influence Crime?
http://noisey.vice.com/en_uk/blog/study-proves-rap-does-not-influence-crime
My Topic:
Government should not censor all music with violence or explicit lyrics.
What I hope to learn from this source : I hope to learn whether explicit lyrics influence crime, and get some evidence that violent or explicit lyrics does not influence crime.
Notes :
1.The data showed very little correlation between the crimes in the lyrics and their counterparts. For example, a significant crime drop between 1993 and 1995 is easily seen while crimes mentioned in rap lyrics are steadily increasing.
2. Using the lyrics, a study by the Lab's Emmanuel Kohdra plotted the mentions of crime in rap music against actual crime rates. And what did he find? A lack of correlation, of course.
Final Thoughts : I could get evidence that violent or explicit lyrics does not influence crime. Although the graph only talks about rap music, I think it is reliable because most of rap music include violent and explicit contents. These sources will help me a lot to claim my thesis.
Is This Coclusive Proof That Rap Music Does Not Influence Crime?
http://noisey.vice.com/en_uk/blog/study-proves-rap-does-not-influence-crime
My Topic:
Government should not censor all music with violence or explicit lyrics.
What I hope to learn from this source : I hope to learn whether explicit lyrics influence crime, and get some evidence that violent or explicit lyrics does not influence crime.
Notes :
1.The data showed very little correlation between the crimes in the lyrics and their counterparts. For example, a significant crime drop between 1993 and 1995 is easily seen while crimes mentioned in rap lyrics are steadily increasing.
2. Using the lyrics, a study by the Lab's Emmanuel Kohdra plotted the mentions of crime in rap music against actual crime rates. And what did he find? A lack of correlation, of course.
Final Thoughts : I could get evidence that violent or explicit lyrics does not influence crime. Although the graph only talks about rap music, I think it is reliable because most of rap music include violent and explicit contents. These sources will help me a lot to claim my thesis.
2014년 10월 23일 목요일
Research 1
Source:
The History of Music Censorship In Korea
http://music.naver.com/todayMusic/index.nhn?startDate=20091114
My Topic:
Government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics.
What I hope to learn from this source:
I want to learn what kind of lyrics had banned or censored from government and what would be happen when the music censorship misused.
Notes :
1. 정권에 의한 가요 검열은 1962년 설립된 한국방송윤리위원회(방윤)와 1966년 설립된 한국예술문화윤리위원회(예륜)에 의해 1970년대를 통틀어 광범위하게 실시되었다. 당시 금지된 곡들은 대부분 '가사퇴폐', '창법저속', '불신감 조장' 같은 유치한 이유들로 금지되었다.(The music censorship by government had extensively implemented throughout 1970s by the Korea Broadcasting Ethics Committee which was established in 1962 and Korea Media Rating Board which was established in 1966.)
Final Thoughts :
I could learn how our past government misused music censorship to maintain their political power, and i could learn some examples. However, I need more examples. I have to research more.
The History of Music Censorship In Korea
http://music.naver.com/todayMusic/index.nhn?startDate=20091114
My Topic:
Government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics.
What I hope to learn from this source:
I want to learn what kind of lyrics had banned or censored from government and what would be happen when the music censorship misused.
Notes :
1. 정권에 의한 가요 검열은 1962년 설립된 한국방송윤리위원회(방윤)와 1966년 설립된 한국예술문화윤리위원회(예륜)에 의해 1970년대를 통틀어 광범위하게 실시되었다. 당시 금지된 곡들은 대부분 '가사퇴폐', '창법저속', '불신감 조장' 같은 유치한 이유들로 금지되었다.(The music censorship by government had extensively implemented throughout 1970s by the Korea Broadcasting Ethics Committee which was established in 1962 and Korea Media Rating Board which was established in 1966.)
2. 지금은 대중음악이 정치적인 이유로 금지당하는 경우가 거의 없지만(90년대 후반에도 가사에 현직 대통령의 이름이 나온다고 해서 금지된 경우도 있었다) 그렇다고 표현에 있어서 완전히 자유로운 시대라고 하기엔 마뜩잖다.(These days, prohibiting music for political reasons is uncommon case-in 1990s, certain lyric had been prohibited because it includes the name of the incumbent president-however, we cannot say that we are living in the world of perfect freedom of expression.
Final Thoughts :
I could learn how our past government misused music censorship to maintain their political power, and i could learn some examples. However, I need more examples. I have to research more.
Week 3 Outline
1. The introduction, which warms up the audience, establishes goodwill and rapport with the readers, and announces the general theme or thesis of the argument.
I will start by describing the situation that every popular music is censored by government before they are played by mass media. Then I will shift attention to whether this censorship is appropriate. I will end with my thesis, "Government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics."2. The narration, which summarizes relevant background material, provides any information the audience needs to know about the environment and circumstances that produce the argument, and set up the stakes-what’s at risk in this question. In academic writing, this often takes the form of a literature review.
I will summarize the research I've done and provide an explanation for why I think that the censorship is unnecessary. I will give a brief history of the music censorship in Korea, especially in 1970s - 1980s3. The confirmation,which lays out in a logical order (usually strongest to weakest or most obvious to most subtle) the claims that support the thesis, providing evidence for each claim.
I will start by emphasizing the importance of the freedom of expression. I will argue that musicians express their thoughts and feelings through their music. I will describe the problem which can caused by misuse of this censorship.4. The refutation and concession, which looks at opposing viewpoints to the writer’s claims, anticipating objections from the audience, and allowing as much of the opposing viewpoints as possible without weakening the thesis.
I will concede that violent or explicit lyrics are bad for children's emotion, but It can be solved by parent or teachers' education. Then I will emphasize that most of us do not take the contents as real when we watch violent or explicit movies or dramas, and music is also another form of art.5. The summation, which provides a strong conclusion, amplifying the force of the argument, and showing the readers that this solution is the best at meeting the circumstances.
I will close with a summary of my previous points, then a brief consideration of the situation that musicians cannot freely express what they feel because of censorship. I will end with a reaffirmation of my original thesis.
2014년 10월 21일 화요일
Week 3 Articulate
1) My argument
I want to argue that the government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics.
Government has censored music with violent and explicit lyrics, so some musicians cannot
freely express their intention through their music. So, I want to emphasize that freedom of expression
must be assured.
2) How I found my argument
I thought that the government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics when I first decided my topic. So, I started to research opposite opinion and history of music censorship. I could know the brief history of music censorship from this article and this article. However, I realized that the most case was the unjust censorship in Korea, and still there are unjust censorship. So, I didn't change my opinion and decided to write persuasive essay about this censorship.
3) New research questions What do you still need to know? What is your research plan?
I have several questions that need to be resolved.
1) Is there any examples that violent or explicit lyrics had directly influenced criminals to do the crime?
2) Does the government censor other fields of art when it includes explicit contents?
3) Is there any movements that musicians try to stop or alleviate the government's censorship?
If so, what was their supporting grounds?
I'll continue browsing the internet and looking for interesting articles and keeping track of my research with blog posts.
4) Connections to the Harvard Sampler
This argument has some connections to the Havard Sampler. First, it is related to the human mind because this topic is related to if violent or explicit lyrics directly influence human mind. Second, it is related to liberty and security in cyberspace because the government censor musics uploaded on the internet with violent or explicit lyrics.
I want to argue that the government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics.
Government has censored music with violent and explicit lyrics, so some musicians cannot
freely express their intention through their music. So, I want to emphasize that freedom of expression
must be assured.
2) How I found my argument
I thought that the government should not censor all music with violent or explicit lyrics when I first decided my topic. So, I started to research opposite opinion and history of music censorship. I could know the brief history of music censorship from this article and this article. However, I realized that the most case was the unjust censorship in Korea, and still there are unjust censorship. So, I didn't change my opinion and decided to write persuasive essay about this censorship.
3) New research questions What do you still need to know? What is your research plan?
I have several questions that need to be resolved.
1) Is there any examples that violent or explicit lyrics had directly influenced criminals to do the crime?
2) Does the government censor other fields of art when it includes explicit contents?
3) Is there any movements that musicians try to stop or alleviate the government's censorship?
If so, what was their supporting grounds?
I'll continue browsing the internet and looking for interesting articles and keeping track of my research with blog posts.
4) Connections to the Harvard Sampler
This argument has some connections to the Havard Sampler. First, it is related to the human mind because this topic is related to if violent or explicit lyrics directly influence human mind. Second, it is related to liberty and security in cyberspace because the government censor musics uploaded on the internet with violent or explicit lyrics.
피드 구독하기:
덧글 (Atom)