Should certain subjects be banned from media?

[tippy2k2]

I'm sure you're expecting a "Rap glorifies murder!" or "Metal is da devil!" type of argument here but this is actually about this song:


I was listening to my local radio station when a listener on the phone argued that Foster the People's song "Pumped Up Kicks" should be banned because it promotes school shootings. The DJ thought that it was a stupid argument but it took a bit of a left turn. He argued that if any songs should be banned, it was The Band Perry's "If I Die Young" (he did not call for a ban, he is just making an argument here).

His reasoning: It is romanticizing death (think Romeo & Juliet) to a group of individuals (the demographic for a song like this is going to be teens) who are going to be the most likely to consider suicide.

Unlike a school shooting, suicide really does not need much of a plan to put into action. So someone inspired to shoot up a school due to "Pumped Up Kicks" is going to be forced to think about their actions just because it takes time to prepare. A song about suicide and romanticizing death ("Funny when you're dead, how people start listening") could convince the person to take their own life and you really don't need much time to pull that off.

So I was just curious if anyone agreed with this line of thinking. Is there any subject (music or otherwise) that should not exist or is everything free game?

*Notes: No, arguing Justin Bieber shouldn't exist here is not correct, go away. Also, I'm not asking about Freedom of Speech and if they're allowed to do it, obviously they are allowed to. The question is: should they?

 

[Mikodite]

Depending on the method of suicide planning can be required. Its actually a myth that someone would just jump off a bridge in a knee-jerk moment decision: other things have to be going on for them to decide that this is the method they would take.

That said, there is the question of how much power a song has on our psychie, and if it could hold enough sway to alter someone's mind. We obviously believe in the power of speech in all its forms, but the question is just how much power does it truly have.

 

[Hazy992]

They should ban that cause it's a shit song :3

OT: No songs shouldn't be banned because they're protected under freedom of speech. The only situation I can think of where it might be OK is if the song is saying 'I want you to kill X,Y or Z' and it means it. Making something horrible trivial or glorifying it is not the same as inciting something, and I'm afraid that, despite what people think, you don't have the right to not hear shit you don't like, or I could make the argument that Nickelback should be banned.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.

Anything too stupid to be said is sung.

 

[Soviet Steve]

Yes, with immediate public beheadings for anyone who broadcasts or listens to banned subjects. Just to make sure I suggest we pre-emptively behead everyone.

 

[Slaanesh]

Songs shouldn't be banned. If a person doesn't like it, they can stop listening to it. Personally, I don't like most of Cannibal Corpse's songs(the titles themselves make me uneasy), but I don't call in and complain. I change the station.

And some songs have been "banned" before in the past. Right after 9/11, most US radio stations banned songs that had lyrics or titles that seemed related to 9/11. SOAD's Chop Suey(Trust in my self righteous suicide) or Phil Collins' In the Air Tonight.

 

[Kopikatsu]

No. Banning any form of media is stupid as fuck.

Not true at all. Some media does need to be kicked in the ass a bit. Like the media. Journalism isn't what it used to be...and by that, I mean it was never what it was supposed to be. Bias for everyone!

 

[DeadlyYellow]

You won't make it stick outside your bible group.

 

[Kopikatsu]

No. Banning any form of media is stupid as fuck.

Not true at all. Some media does need to be kicked in the ass a bit. Like the media. Journalism isn't what it used to be...and by that, I mean it was never what it was supposed to be. Bias for everyone!

Banning media and firing the people responsible for news bias are two entirely different things. Now don't be silly here, simple context reading abilities should be telling you that the news networks aren't part of the discussion at all.



Oddly enough, as horribad as they are, banning them would be wrong just the same. Not allowing them to refer to themselves as news outlets would be ok, but banning them? No. Let them continue as they are now under the 'tabloid' moniker.

I know people who take what Fox News says at face value. A lot of people, actually. After listening to some of them talk for a bit, I've come to the conclusion that, yes, opinions can actually be wrong. Very wrong. Mankind did not develop flight because of the Wright brothers reverse engineering a crashed alien spaceship. (Yes, I know someone who honestly believes this...and surprise! They're one of the people who watch Fox News regularly.)

Anyway! It's more or less the same thing. The song in the OP could potentially be leading people down a bad path...and so can news networks. News networks are a more serious issue, though. Does anyone actually pay attention to the lyrics of songs?

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

I know people who take what Fox News says at face value. A lot of people, actually. After listening to some of them talk for a bit, I've come to the conclusion that, yes, opinions can actually be wrong. Very wrong. Mankind did not develop flight because of the Wright brothers reverse engineering a crashed alien spaceship. (Yes, I know someone who honestly believes this...and surprise! They're one of the people who watch Fox News regularly.)

There's two things at work here. One is ignorance - which banning opinions would increase. The second is bias - which is only allowing certain opinions.

Had we leftwing/rightwing/centre opinions that weren't controlled by a specific cabal, that would lessen the amount of bias and ignorance.

But if someone wants to believe that the Wright brothers worked with an alien spaceship, then that's not a bad thing - IN ITSELF.

It's the horrifying/stupid/mean opinions that hold our knowledge in check. And defending someone's right to believe that is a very important thing.

Proselytizing that? That's something different...and falls under cults.

 

[St.Augustine6]

Voltaire:
I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.

Right on the money. If something is created, but some government or what not decides that it is not in the best interest of the people to see/hear/read it, then the people of that country are going to be worse for it.

 

[Zen Toombs]

Is there any subject (music or otherwise) that should not exist -snip-?

Short Answer: No.
Long Answer:

Seriously though, censorship is bad. It takes a very strong reason to even consider restricting free speech, like immediate incitement to violence.

Edit: Just so that you know, I'm talking about things like shouting "FIRE!" in a crowded theater and the like. I'm a huge fan of Voltaire, and of the guy who summarized him. (Fyi, that's where that quote just above me comes from). [http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080925055220AAPcWVe]

 

[NinjaDeathSlap]

Anyone should be allowed to express how they feel in words music and pictures, and if anyone chooses to take their work a little bit too much to heart it should not be on them.

The only, and I mean THE ONLY form of censorship I would be ok with would be censoring News reports that blatantly lie or ignore crucial evidence and legitimate counter-arguments in order to incite a reaction out of a gullible and ignorant populace (Guess who I'm talking about here...). But even then, they'd have to work pretty fucking hard to make sure the wording of whatever law they put in place is so watertight that no-one could possibly abuse it.

 

[Badassassin]

This is the second thread today where people are saying the first amendment is wrong.

So whether or not you are an American I'd just like to make the point that in the first amendment it states that through rights of freedom of the press, as long as it is not libel or slander, anything is allowed. I'm not usually one to try and defend my government, but I think it's fair to say that we shouldn't change the first amendment. And personally, I wholeheartedly believe that when it comes to censorship it should be at a bare minimum.

 

[tjcross]

hate speech to be clear my definition of hate speech is: mentioning non-existent or dramatically exaggerated negative features to a specific group an example of hate speech is "all black people are evil".