Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Music Media

ClearChannel Plays It Safe 930

mertzman writes: "Rather than wait for the government assaults on civil liberties to reach full steam, ClearChannel, one of the nation's largest radio networks, has decided to do some censorship on their own! According to F***edCompany, ClearChannel has created a list of banned songs with "questionable content" in light of the recent tragedies. Stuff ranging from Drowning Pool's "Bodies" to Nena's anti-war hit "99 Red Balloons" have made their list." ClearChannel owns many radio stations, so this probably affects you. Update: 09/18 18:30 GMT by M : The San Francisco Chronicle has more on this - ClearChannel says it isn't an official mandate, just some sort of internal memo circulating. Update: 09/18 23:18 PM GMT by T : Fuzzy points out that " has an explanation of the ClearChannel hoax. ClearChannel has also sent out a press release saying they have released no such list."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ClearChannel Plays It Safe

Comments Filter:
  • by Shivetya ( 243324 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:31AM (#2313687) Homepage Journal
    Kim Peterson, a talk show host here in Atlanta was making fun of the Clear Channel list yesterday. I thought at first it was a joke, but apparently its not.

    I wonder when Kim Peterson will get "talked to" over it (he was playing the list as bumper music. Many may not agree with what he has to say all the time, but at least he stands up for it.

    Sorry, but music doesn't make terrorist.

  • Massive Attack (Score:2, Informative)

    During gulf war, some radio stations reffered to Massive Attack as "Massive", period.

    Sofa King wee tadd deed.
  • by Dman33 ( 110217 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:33AM (#2313694)
    I mean, they have "Walk Like an Egyptian" by the Bangels on this list...

    Is this a joke or is this just a list of songs that radio stations should 'tip-toe' around for the next week or so to keep people from getting depressed??
    • I kinda get that one. The first verse has talk of tombs toppling over.

      I really can't work out the Cat Stevens version of Morning has Broken, though. I'm willing to bet that more than one church sang that last Sunday in memory of the fallen. Perhaps it's because he's now known as Yusuf Islam []?

  • Banning 99 Luftballons/Red Balloons? These people are banning songs they've never even listened to. Are individual radio stations speaking out against this?

    This reminds me of the episode of WKRP where they were told to stop playing, among others, John Lennon's Imagine because it referred to imagining there's no heaven or religion. You know, forget that the song is about world peace.
    • by Pseudonym ( 62607 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @09:02AM (#2313887)
      Banning 99 Luftballons/Red Balloons? These people are banning songs they've never even listened to.

      You've heard the English version of the lyrics, right?

      It's all over and I'm standing pretty

      In this dust that was a city
      If I could find a souvenier
      Just to prove the world was here

      Of course, personally, in this time of warrior rhetoric, I think the song is more apt than ever.

      • by Quila ( 201335 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @09:22AM (#2314037)
        Yeah, they did screw up the lyrics in the English version (not to mention her singing of it).

        The song is about WWIII, the end of the world, by accident, telling us to be careful about running off to war without a real solid reason and target (it started by them at a concert in West Berlin, wondering what would happen if the balloons floating to East Berlin were thought of as hostile).

        They took pretty much everything in the songs out of context.
  • by aetherspoon ( 72997 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:35AM (#2313708) Homepage
    Bah to it all. Why can't people just realize that human adults censor what is inputed in to their brains to begin with? I mean, come on! How does censoring music that has some relation to the NYC bombing help anything at all? Those people died for certain liberties and rights sort to speak- why take away what they died for just to try to soften the impact that they died?!!

    If I died in a terrorist bombing in the United States, the supposed country of freedom, I would be rather offended that this country of freedom that I died in is now restricting it.

    They took away the second amendment, but I didn't complain since I had no guns.
    They took away the fifth amendment, but I didn't complain since I had nothing to fear from the courts.
    They took away the first amendment, and I couldn't complain.
  • by bmongar ( 230600 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:36AM (#2313712)

    Hey, they own those stations, so they have a right to choose what to play. If they think something is in bad taste, the won't play it. That's not censorship that's choice. The government hasn't told them not to play questionable songs, they decided it was in their best interest as a business or maybe in their interest as humans. This is not censorship this is a business esercising it's freedom to choose to do what it wants.
    • by Stiletto ( 12066 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:40AM (#2313731)
      What, it's only censorship if the government is doing it?
      • Yes. Thats exactly it. Otherwise another company/individual can do it. Its their choice what they play.
        • No, this is the abuse of monopoly power in the radio markets to control the content of what we are exposed to. It's corporate censorship, not government censorship.

          It wouldn't be as *much* of a problem if Clear Channel weren't the Microsoft of the radio world. As it is, broad groups of people are effectively denied exposure to these pieces of music, without any viable feedback mechanism for voicing their dissatisfaction with the situation to the company.

          And I am certain that the artists of these songs would certainly object to their suppression in this manner.
        • It's their choice, but its still censorchip.

          Censorship has nothing to do with the government, it has to do with the act of censoring.
          • It is censorship, but most people think of censorship when it comes from the government. That is where the confusion probably lies.

            While it is commendable that they are trying to be considerate of those suffering, I still don't understand some of their choices:

            1) Kansas "Dust in the Wind". This is song is more enlightening than sad.

            2) Cat Stevens "Peace Train" & "Morning Has Broken". Cat Stevens?!? Since when were his songs inappropriate?

            3) Neil Diamond "America". As others have pointed out, this is considered a patriotic song. You would think this would be required playing.

            4) Foo Fighters "Learn to Fly". I don't know this song, but I noticed they didn't go after Pink Floyd "Learning to Fly". They longer version of the word must have confused them.

            5) Frank Sinatra "New York, New York". Wouldn't this be considered inspirational?

            Maybe everyone should find the ClearChannel station in their area and request a song off of this list.
            • You left out Louis Armstrong's "What a Wonderful World" -- which I was *highly* suprised to see on the list -- that's always a highly requested song in times of trouble.
            • Cat Stevens "Peace Train" & "Morning Has Broken". Cat Stevens?!? Since when were his songs inappropriate?

              I really hope the decision wasn't inspired by the fact that he converted to Islam.

            • 2) Cat Stevens "Peace Train" & "Morning Has Broken". Cat Stevens?!? Since when were his songs inappropriate?

              Cat Stevens is now muslim and has always been revolutionary. Maybe that's what motivated this, ClearChannel might believe his songs may contain subliminal messages that might corrupt the USA's youth, this might be the same type of thinking that added "Walk Like and Egyptian" to the list.
        • I see. So if newspapers ran an untruthful account of you doing something borderline illegal, you writing in to correct them have no grounds to complain if they refuse to publish your rebuttal becuase the newspaper is not the government, and it isn't censorship.
        • "Yes. Thats exactly it. Otherwise another company/individual can do it."

          No. Your repeated postings seem to indicate an inability to differentiate between "censorship of the American public as a whole" (for example, the FCC declaring that you can't show bare breasts on broadcast television) and "censorship by a corporate entity of its own content" (for example, Fox Family channel voluntarily censoring the word "damn" as part of the more family friendly programming they want to produce).

          Now, just because something isn't government censorship doesn't mean it's not censorship. However, just because something isn't government censorship doesn't mean it's a good thing. It also doesn't mean it's a bad thing. Each case must be examined on its own merits. Also, it being a bad thing is not synonymous with illegal. For example, if a given publisher chose to stop carrying stories on Linux, that wouldn't be illegal (as far as I know), but it would certainly be a bad thing. They would receive certainly criticism (rightfully so, IMO) for their non-illegal censorship.

          Of course all that being said, things get a little more interesting. Clear Channel isn't on equal footing with other companies. Like Microsoft, they enjoy a rather large market share. Furthermore, they've been granted the right to use a limited, public resource (part of the radio spectrum) by the government. This places there actions under much greater scrutiny. Unlike, say, the widget manufacturing industry, a new-comer can't decide to pop into the radio market and start playing the songs in question. As such, their situation is closer to government censorship. However, regardless, their overall actions are still censorship and should be scrutinized by consumers.

      • What, it's only censorship if the government is doing it?

        Umm, yeah, that's kinda the definition. []

        The Censor is grated authority by some governing body, be it political or religious (in any case, not you), and tells you what you can or can't do with your own property and ideas, giving you no say in the matter.

        • Remember kids, reading comprehension is part of the SAT, so start studying now:

          Censorship has nothing to do with the government, it has to do with the act of censoring.

          censor (snsr) "A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable."

          censored, censoring, censors
          "To examine and expurgate."

          Nowhere does it say government. The word "authorized" would apply to the company that owns the radio stations. They are authorized to censor their own stations, that doesn't make it any less an act of censorship.
          • The radio station is censoring it's DJ's.

            It's DJ's have been told what they are and aren't allowed to play.

            It has not censored the general public. Members of the public are still free to play and purchase those songs.
      • My mp3 list randomified into a recent geeks in space yesterday. I decided to listen (It was about half way though when I got back into the room).

        One of them (cant remember who), said something appropiate. You're on my turf, and uner my rules. No one is forcing you to go there (the website).

        When a public entity (acting for the people) censors stuff, its bad. When a company censors stuff, you have the choice of not using htat companies services.

        There are, however, exceptions. Mainly when that company is the only provider of a service in an area, and a local law prvents anyone from competing/it is impossible to compete.

        It's not all bad though, companies are answerable. If a company refused to let a specific group of people use their services normally open to the public, then they will get into trouble.
      • What, it's only censorship if the government is doing it?

        So what are you saying? That we need to make a law that forces Clear Channel to play those songs? To give equal time to that list? I hope that's not what you think.

        If you're opposed to creating the law that forces certain songs to be played, then you are left to the will of the owner of the company to determine for themselves what they want or don't want to play. That's all there is to it. Either they have to freedom to choose which set of songs they want to play or they don't. Take your pick.

        Either way, this isn't censorship.

    • Actually it is censorship, because stations are usually free to set their own playlists. That's why stations have program directors. When the PDs and jocks are choosing what to program, because they know their audience and local market best, that's "choice". It's "censorship" if corporate HQ is telling the stations "you can't play this". It's "choice" if they're telling the stations "we recommend you don't play this". The fact that the authority making and enforcing this decision is not the government -- that's a meaningless distinction.

      Look up the definition of "censorship" if you still think that state censorship is the only kind. And guess what -- just because it's "censorship" doesn't mean it's illegal. State censorship is illegal (in the US at least), private censorship is legal. Your point should not be "it's not censorship" but "sure it's censorship, but it's perfectly legal". Or, "just because it's censorship doesn't make it bad".

      Yes, they have the right to dictate to their stations that they play this or that song and not play others. The fact that they have the legal right to censor their stations doesn't make it reasonable nor sensible. I'm sure this list made them feel like they were doing something, however reactionary and pointless.

    • Just to point this out: it's censorship when there's no other choices to broadcast that medium - even if the government is not doing the censorship. Clear Channel's a monopoly in some areas (see this article [] and this one as well [].) This means that while it's not government censorship, these songs are de facto censored in those areas.
    • by nanojath ( 265940 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @09:29AM (#2314083) Homepage Journal
      I agree completely. Nobody called ClearChannel stations' boring, repetetive, mainstream garbage marathon playlists censorship, even though there are literally millions of songs you would never have a snowballs chance of hearing because they are ethnic, or thoughtful, or somehow unique or striking in any way. Or because they aren't produced by a sufficiently huge media conglomerate to pay off the stations for the privilege of airtime.

      Accusing ClearChannel of censorship is like accusing a colon of being full of shit.

    • OK, well obviously ClearChannel doesn't have a monopoly, you can easily tune to a non-clearchannel station. But the point is that as more and more media get owned by fewer and fewer bigger companies, not only do everyone's choices diminish (duh) but even within those diminished choices you still have will be fundamentally _less_ open to pesky unprofitables such as journalistic or DJ ethics. These guys are in it for the bucks - not selling music to listeners, but selling listeners to the even-more-lovable music publishing industry.

      The solution is therefore not to squawk at ClearChannel but to push for anti-monopoly measures such as real antitrust and community low-power radio. In other words, hee hee, ITS MICROSOFT'S FAULT.
  • Partial list? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by /Wegge ( 2960 ) <> on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:36AM (#2313715) Homepage
    Is the posted list of banned songs complete? One of the more obvious candidates, "First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin" by Manfred Mann is missing.
  • Eh? (Score:2, Insightful)

    The list to me reads like some bloody good rock music. Sabbath, Floyd, Queen etc. Dare I be so cynical as to say that this is just a lame attempt for stations to push the latest manufactured crap?
  • Cultural bias? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by griblik ( 237163 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:40AM (#2313732)
    I notice The Cure's "Killing an arab" made it thru...
    • And "4.37 am (Arabs with Knives and West German Skies)", by Roger Waters is also not listed....


    • And it's not even about killing an Arab!

      What, did they actually listen to this song and let it through as opposed to all the others?
      • > And it's not even about killing an Arab!
        > What, did they actually listen to this song and let it through as opposed to all the others? li nganarab.shtml

        "Staring down the barrel
        At the arab on the ground"

        and from the chorus (sung three times):

        "I'm the stranger
        Killing an arab"
        • Re:Cultural bias? (Score:3, Informative)

          by ceswiedler ( 165311 )
          Those lyrics are a reference to the novel "The Stranger" by Albert Camus, a french existentialist writer. The main character, Meursault, finds an Arab man on the beach and kills him for no reason at all.
  • The first half of the list looks like someone's reading out my record collection :-) That said, it's not going to affect me anyway because:
    • I'm not in the USA
    • I don't listen to the radio
    • Even if I did, there aren't any radio stations that play my preferred music (apart from Totalrock, but back in January they switched to broadcasting in a format only usable by Windows Media Player, so that put a stop to that)
  • WTF! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by scott1853 ( 194884 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:41AM (#2313744)
    I listen to one of their stations here in central NY, The Nerve [] and they play a lot of these songs, or they used to.

    The fact that they banned Don McLean's "American Pie" really outrages me. This is one of America's songs. I used to like this song when I was 6 and I still do. Sorry if it's not like "Don't Worry, Be Happy" but jeesh.

    BTW, I didn't read any articles, is this ban permanent?
    • "American Pie" is a song about a plane crash. I think I can go a few weeks without songs about plane crashes unless maybe someone writes or unearths a fitting one relevant to this that makes life more bearable.
      • As others have pointed out, "American Pie" isn't as much a 'plane crash song' as it is about changing times and worldviews. Don McLean wrote about "the day the music died" as a focal point, an event after which the way everyone related to their country and their world changed. This change could only be marked (to McLean) with a melancholy, a recognition that beyond the tangible, clear losses, something intangible--but just as irreplaceable--had also been lost.

        How Clear Channel sees it is their business (literally), but it seems to me those thoughts are more timely at this moment than they've been in decades.

    • The fact that they banned Don McLean's "American Pie" really outrages me. This is one of America's songs.

      Don McLean is Canadian...
  • by vondo ( 303621 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:43AM (#2313756) (referenced in the editors comments) has done a great job covering Clearchannel and radio payola in general. The full set of articles can be found here [].

    If you care about music and still think that songs become popular because lots of people like them, you owe it to yourself to read some of this.

    Back to the subject at hand, when a major corporate conglomerate decides that the country shouldn't be listening to "Bridge over Troubled Water" it is a sad day.

    • ... just not from Clearchannel. They haven't "decided that the country (USA) shouldn't be listening" to anything, they have opted not to play it to their listeners.

      You do have more than one radio station, haven't you? If lots of people think Clearchannel are behaving like idiots, rest assured that they will change this decision fast.

      Cheers //Johan

    • IMAGINE! (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Judas96' ( 151194 )
      John Lennon's song Imagine is on the list. Isn't that song meant to promote peace? I can see why you wouldn't want people thinking about that... It would just be wrong.
      I must have missed the subliminal messages within the song that can only be heard by a Radio Executive.
      • Re:IMAGINE! (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Luminous ( 192747 )
        If the President is promoting war, anyone who is promoting peace is 'anti-American', at least in Dubya's point-of-view.
  • U2 song (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:44AM (#2313768)
    This Song is ANTI terrorism and was originally written about an act of terrorism.

    I mean the lyrics go "I cant believe the news today" and continue "How long must we sing this song?"

    Its the perfect song to be the Anthem of the whole anti terrorism campaign.

    It appears they are just stopping playing everything that could possibly remind people of the whole event. Songs about war,terrorism,suicide and fire. Even when the majority of these songs are against these things.

    Will they ban wacko and spears duet which they are recording to raise money for the relief efforts as it will remind people as well?
  • What a ..... (Score:2, Insightful)

    crock of shit. How about we get the fscking networks to stop replaying the distaster scene over and over instead of music thet might be upsetting to a minority of people.

    On the other hand, if you could add {sarcasm} any NSYNCH song to the list I'd be much abliged. Not that it has questionable lyrics, I just don't want to hear it on the radio{/sarcasm}.

  • This is disgusting. If we're going to have a war, let's have it, but for crying out loud, let's not insist on sanitizing it as well. Either we've got to turn our minds from this situation in an effort to heal (in which case the songs dealing with guns and fire can go, but the anti-war songs must stay; not only stay, but be played repeatedly) OR we've got to stay mindful of our pain and steel our resolve to fight (in which case the guns and fire songs stay and the anti-war songs go). It doesn't make sense to avoid reminding us of the tragedy while *also* calling us to battle.

    Furthermore, the ENTIRE conflict is about freedom and liberty. This censorship (and yes, if the primary broadcast company has a list of songs that affiliates are not allowed to play, that *does* constitute censorship) is against everything that we stand for. If large portions of certain communities are offended by some or all of these songs, let them speak out to their local broadcasters. Don't blanket the rest of us with this silly and misguided propaganda disguised as "sensitivity".

    I, for one, will be tuning into the public radio. A source of objective and high-quality news and information, and a lone voice in the wild for FREEDOM!!!
  • Well, I guess this old-fart of a programmer is scrathing his head saying clear who, censor what ? Desperately trying not to be a troll, I'm just wondering if this isn't more a move by some company that I've never heard of to remain profitable by makin and adjustment for the recent change in mood.

    Let's go to the site and see.

    Okay, there's a picture of Rush Limbaugh, Dr. Laura, Alan Keyes ... It's publically traded ... their ops got disrupted since they're in downtown NYC .... hmmm, Department of Justice to investigate whether Clear Channel's [] concert-promotion company is engaging in unfair business practices after some New Jersey constituents complained.

    Hey guys, I think this looks like a company that's trying to keep a low profile. In other words, this may have less to do with civil liberties than it does with their bottom line. Either giving their demographics what they want (or don't want) ... and by not pissing off "The Man."
  • Nine Inch Nails "Head Like a Hole"

    Yeah, i get this one:

    Head like a hole
    Black as your soul
    I'd rather die
    than give you control.

    Wouldn't want anyone to resist the government's control, now would we?

    Other choices though, leave me kinda puzzled:

    Bangles "Walk Like an Egyptian"
    Louis Armstrong "What A Wonderful World"

    The list goes on. I wonder what they'll be playing all day now.... Britney Spears and N'Sync? I bet they can find some 'offensive' words in there too. (Baby hit me one more time? Oops I did it again? (referring to the crash on the pentagon) and ofcourse Nsync's "bye bye bye".)

    If you feel the urge to moderate this down as flamebait/troll, read the message again, think about what it says, and then decide again.
    • The NIN song refers to control by religion, not the government.

      Of course maybe that's why it's banned, it has a negative reference to religion, and with everyone going back to church now, that might offend.

      Of course, if those people piloting the planes hadn't let religion control them, they wouldn't have done it.
      • I'm suprised some of the newer NIN songs weren't listed...

        Big Man With A Gun
        The Day The World Went Away
        Into The Void (made for a film which featured a *shudder* plane crash)
        Mr Self Destruct
        Starfuckers Inc (lot sof reference to false gods and shit)

  • by Lizard_King ( 149713 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @08:52AM (#2313820) Journal
    I noticed in the list: "All Rage Against The Machine songs"

    you've got to be kidding me. This seems like blind censorship to me. I'm doubtful they've listened to all of Rage's songs.
    • I noticed this too. I guess the song's contents don't matter if the artist has been known to express certain political opinions. This, IMO, is just WAY more offensive than banning specific songs.

      Unbelievable. Seriously; this whole list, and the thinking of the people who came up with it, just absolutely boggles the mind.
    • The entire list seems to be, much like the FBI's monitoring program, generated from keywords. I agree entirely with your comment about Rage... but check this out:

      Dave Matthews Band "Crash into me"... Apparently the word Crash is just bad stuff. Of course, every time I hear this song, it makes me want to go buy a gun.

      Smashing Pumpkins "Bullet with Butterfly Wings"... I'm assuming for the refrain "music is my airplane"... ummm. That's all I got to say. Ummm. Those lyrics sure are questionable!

      Red Hot Chili Peppers, "Aeroplane"... see above

      Frank Sinatra "New York"... what were they thinking!!!

      People, if you haven't, go read the list. Some of the songs on the list are certainly questionable and callous, but a lot of them are really good music that just happens to mention a word or two. The music itself and its message doesn't come anywhere near questionable, but it has a keyword in it...

  • "Never be Rude to an Arab" By Monty Python
  • Everyone call in requests for these songs, especially things like "Walk like an Egyptian" and "Obla Di, Obla Da" which are just fun, bouncy songs that have nothing sinister about them, except what's implied by their appearance on ClearChannel's list.
  • Here are a few highlights from the list...
    REM "It's the End of the World as We Know It" - Why does everyone always pick on this song without listening to what they are really saying. Everyopne always stops after reading the first six words of the title.
    The Beatles "Obla Di, Obla Da" - The only offense I can think of for this song is that it says "Life goes on" and isn't that what everyone has been saying anyway, that we need to try and return to normal
    U2 "Sunday Bloody Sunday" - This song speaks out against terroism, rather blatantly.
    Jan and Dean "Dead Man's Curve" - What are we doing, banning any song that mentions death in any way?
    Lenny Kravitz "Fly Away" - Or any song that mentions air travel?

    I can see banning a few songs, but they have just decimated the play list, not only of Rock stations, but of oldies stations as well. I would say that about half of the list predates 1980! In my opinion they are fully within their rights to do this, but they are making an ill reasoned bussiness decision.
  • I find it ironic that radio stations are bastardizing songs with tacky media recorded overlays, yet they come up with a "do not play" list. How is it somehow sensitive and polite to take Enya's "Only Time" and overlay it with sounds of crashing, crying and voices of fear, yet it would be unsettling to play Louis Armstrong's "What A Wonderful World". I'm not making this up, and I've also heard tacky heart-tugs with Bette Middler's "From a Distance" song. Sick, just plain sick.

    These people have no foot to stand on to tell us about respect and decency in my opinion.
  • Were dongs like "Bridge over troubled water", "Mack the knife" and "Tikka to ride" anything to do with 9/11? Is there anyone in the world that doesnt like at least one song on there? They've got everything from the 30's onwards, from heavy goth to light ballards.

    OK, there are some songs on there it would have been insensitive to play on the day of the tradgedy, or shortly after, however I'd hope that radio DJ's can judge this for themselves. Fresh DJ's with only a couple of weeks under their belts at our uni radio station can.

    This conglomerate is worse then the BBC in the UK. At least they dont ahve a guarenteed income and have to answer to their listeners (unlike the BBC who's anti america, anti UK, anti Europe view scares me). I hope that listeners write in and complain to TPTB. It's not the DJ's fault, they get the sack if they play them.

    Still, there are other stations (I guess, I know very little about american radio)
  • I hope our local rock station isn't owned by clear channel...there won't be much left for them to play.
  • I fed the Story to WTDY, a locally owned talk station here in Madison, WI, they've been teasing the Competition all morning. Now WMAD, a Clear Channel station, is defying Corporate HQ, and playing banned songs too.
  • This is something I've found rather interesting in the wake of the events of 9/11. There has been a big push to pull elements directed at children that spread the wrong ideals, or so it would seem. While this is an understandable reaction (one would think), this doesn't always imply pulling "violent" messages. Quite the contrary.

    As mentioned in this story, they pulled the anti-war song "99 Red Balloons." As mentioned a few days ago, Cartoon Network pulled a cartoon called "Mobile Suit Gundam", which often times treats war as something that greedy leaders start and average soldiers have to fight, even though its meaningless.

    To me, pulling shows like this implies that Big Media is going the patriotic route, and not the critical route if and when a war starts. They clearly don't want the young men who are going to the war to have "anti-war" sentiments, as that might discourage enlistment for our upcoming battle. This disturbs me more than the pulling of entertainment with violent messages.

    As an odd side note, Cartoon Network still plays "Dragonball Z", where fighting and combat is seen as something enjoyable, fun and looked forward to. In fact, it now runs for two hours instead of one, in wake of recent events.

    Someone needs to remain critical, if for nothing else, to play Devil's Advocate. I don't like when all I have is one description of how its going to be.
  • If they think they've got ALL subversive, pacifist hippie music on the list, they've got another thing coming! They OBSVIOUSLY missed "the wall" by pink floyd. Jefferson Airplane, Frank Zappa. The list goes on. Ruby Tuesday by the Stones? What about "Sympathy for the Devil"? That must be much worse for the victims.

    This sounds more like a jippo than a real concern, though I resent them for banning peaceloving music. Oh. And there is almost NO teen-bop in the list. I guess that's what the classic rock stations will have to play, now that all relevant music is boycotted.
  • by MxTxL ( 307166 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @09:14AM (#2313973)
    Not that I believe this list is true, which I don't, but if it were, this list would make excellent input to your favorite Gnutella client, don't rest until you've downloaded all of them.

    If you're interested in a little geektavisim, you could then burn all the MP3s to CD audio and distribute them for free at all Clear Channel(TM) events with some propaganda stating how evil they are and how they've banned these (whichever 13 or so are on the CD) and other songs, include the list if you like.

    • And then get arrested for distributing copyrighted matierial.
      • Haha, that's true. Wouldn't THAT be a slap in the face? Well, at least you would be a martyr for The Cause(tm).

        If you wanted to be really tricky, and again only if the list were true, you could argue that you were practicing your first ammendment rights in taking a stand against the evil corporate censorship. I bet you could get a judge to buy it. Besides, you weren't charging money for them.

  • I am listening to my local coperate alt rock station (WXEG Clear Channel Dayton Ohio). In the last hour I have heard:

    Bullet with Butterfly Wings
    Head Like a Hole
    Speed Kills

    Here in Ohio we don't have to worry about the list.
  • ... that Alanis Morrisette made the list, but Was (Not Was)'s "I Blew Up the United States" didn't?

    Dontcha think?
  • Is this the theme music to my favorite cancelled show, Cleopatra 2525?

    In the yeaaaaaaar 2525, she has the will to surviiiive

  • "I Don't Wanna Get Drafted" (Frank Zappa)
    "Alice's Restaurant" (Arlo Guthrie)
    "Working for the Clampdown" (Clash)
    "Ain't Gonna Work on Maggie's Farm No More" (Dylan)

    which their DJs should play as they empty their desks.
  • '911 is a Joke'... But it's not as if any stations ever played it anyway.

  • "Bridge over Troubled Water" and "Stairway to Heaven" are somehow monsterous evils that must be eradicated.

    At the same time, how much Death Metal got on the list? I don't recall seeing "South of Heaven" or "Blood for the Blood God" on there.

    What this is REALLY about - and you'll see more and more of it, as time goes on - is hostility towards people on the fringes of society. Being "different" is to be an "enemy of the State". We've seen it before. We'll no doubt see it again.

    THAT is why "extremist" music is just fine, but anti-hate music is being burned at the stake.

    Sure, the radio stations have the "right" to play what they like. That's part of living in a free country. On the other hand, selective discrimination on grounds other than appropriateness for the channel and the time-slot is censorship. Self-censorship, sure, but censorship none-the-less.

    What is FAR more disturbing than the censorship, though, is the subliminal message this puts across - that of "Pro-hate" and "Pro-war". If you want a sure-fire way of turning America into a hot-bed of sectarian violence, this is the perfect recipe.

  • I sent an e-mail to my local clear channel radio station after reading this and this is the response:

    no. its just a list of songs that may be inappropriate (and thats left to the broadcasters discretion) when
    coming out of a news report....

    you know, a news story about the world trade center into "Bodies" by Drowning Pool....would not sound right.
    Its just a guide...

    No banning. At least not that anyone's told me..


    I hope this shed's some light on the issue!

  • by mickeyreznor ( 320351 ) on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @09:42AM (#2314155) Homepage Journal
    Did anyone else no that there was NOT A SINGLE HIP-HOP SONG! Also there were VERY FEW pop songs. Call me paranoid, but I think this a direct attack on rock and roll. Does anyone else think we're slipping into the 50's, where rock and roll is now the scapegoat for anything that goes wrong in america?
  • by vaxer ( 91962 ) <> on Tuesday September 18, 2001 @02:59PM (#2316539) Homepage
    I'm grabbing a copy of each of these songs on Gnutella. I'll burn it to CD-R and call it the "September 11 Collection".

    Yet more evidence that censorship always backfires...

"my terminal is a lethal teaspoon." -- Patricia O Tuama