*Ring Ring*

Mom: Hello? Who is this?

Ms. Osborne: Good Afternoon, this is Ms. Osborne from Johnny's 2nd grade class.

Mom: Oh Hi Mrs. Osborne, is everything alright?

Ms. Osborne: Well, yes, he's doing alright, unfortunately however, he's been involved in a conduct issue today.

Mom: I am so sorry Mrs. Osborne what did he do? 

Now there's only so much a second grader can get in trouble for while at school, and although the severity of certain misconducts can have different weights, one must first ask, Why has this child done this? What has this child been exposed to in his life that would cause him to act out? What exactly is the difference between right and wrong in the eyes of a second grader? 

The media! The media is to blame for this! If we didn't have all these television shows and vulgar music corrupting our child's lives, they'd be angels. So naturally, the best form of action is to build a support group, get it backed by parents around the country, and strike down the media machine. Force them to put labels on music, censor television and radio, and monitor all of their social lives.

Wait, hold on. We already did that in 1985 with the Recording Industry Association of America? We "attach[ed] warning stickers to albums with explicit content ...  [Leading to a] number of retail outlets, including the world's largest retailer, Wal-Mart, announce they would not stock any products with Parental Advisory stickers (Gale, 2014)." Yet, we still have these same social issues today. Seemingly, all we have done is remove artists work from potential lucrative environment, forcing those "whose work was deemed explicit faced the choice of either forfeiting a significant percentage of their potential market or issuing a censored (edited) version of the work (Gale, 2014)." So, who are we supposed to blame now for all of our children's downfalls?

Since the beginning of time, humans have created music. From beating sticks together to make rhythm, to creating thousand dollar drum machines to make beats, humans have sought after music to get them through life. Engrained in our American culture since 1776, there has never been someone to truly test the power of the first amendment. Freedom of speech. Well, does speech not include music?

Censoring music at an institutional or governmental level is not only a violation of American fundamental rights, but a slap in the face of every aspiring musician in this country. Inherently, music must be "censored within the household," allowing the individual rights of both parents and musicians to be protected. 

Many opponents of this argument would say that there is a significant correlation between exposure to vulgar language in music and changes in behaviors and attitudes. This, I ultimately cannot argue against, as the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has also seen this correlation within many studies they have conducted over the past twenty years. Published in the journal of the Council on Communications and Media, the AAP "reported that exposure to violence, sexual messages, sexual stereotypes, and use of substances of abuse in music videos might produce significant changes in behaviors and attitudes of young viewers (Council on Communications)." Furthermore, Professor Roberts and Christenson claim that music does not seem to have an immense negative effect on teenagers; however they do not consider this a reason to disregard the minute percentage of teenagers who are negatively affected by music. They claim that "ignoring this apparent relationship between teenagers and music 'Make no more sense that to ignore the cause of homicide because only a tiny minority ever commits murder (Scully).'" I am not arguing that this correlation does not exist. Instead -- I am arguing that parental monitoring and education from every stage in a child's development is what is needed. Regulating a child's media diet at home is not only "Of paramount concern ... Pediatricians and parents should be aware of this information ... it is essential to take a stand regarding music lyrics (Council on Communications)". Ultimately at-home regulation is a more feasible solution to creating a moral future generation, which also allows musicians across the country to feel that their first amendment rights will be protected -- as well as not be at risk of ridicule and harassment from enraged parents. 

Daphne Carr at the Center for Ethnomusicology at Columbia University says "I think that the generational sociological factors that contribute to drug and alcohol abuse are too complex and that there are a number of reasons, that music is too small a factor and there are much greater factors in play (Scully)."  Censoring music on the grounds of adolescent corruption is faulting Big Tobacco for teenage smoking. Yes, exposure to tobacco can allow the means. However, in a culture that constantly berates smokers, knows of its risks, it is ultimately the teenager's choicer to smoke. As a child growing up in the early 2000s, I was on the downfall of the smoking era, however it was still very much a presence in my everyday life. From acquaintances, to friends, to family, I was exposed to smoking on almost an everyday basis. However, through education, parental guidance and applied knowledge, I am able to say I have never smoked a cigarette to this day. So, can you really blame Big Tobacco for why a child tries a cigarette for the first time? No. It is the lack of knowledge and self-control that allows one to do something harmful to themselves.

The world will constantly contain unhealthy, illicit, and sometimes even vile material. Unfortunately, no matter how hard we try, our children will eventually be exposed to many things we wish they wouldn't. Keeping them in your bubble at home can only last so long, so what will they do when it bursts? Will you simply blame the world for anything bad that comes their way? If you do, then good luck, more power to you, but you might want to move to a more autocratic region in the world. According to Timothy Jay, "By the time kids go to school now, they're saying all the words that we try to protect them from ...  until there's harder proof that profanity can harm children ...  one thing can make all the difference about how kids experience swearing: Parents (Johnson, 2014)." The only apparent solution to the world's evils is education of children from a young age. 

Ms. Osborne: Johnny said, 'Fuck you I won't do what ya tell me' in the middle of class when I asked him to line up for recess

Mom: Oh goodness, I'm so sorry about that, it's probably all that Rage Against the Machine he's been listening to. What can I do about it?

Rage Against the Machine was one of the most prolific American rap metal bands in the world. They are well known for the members' leftist and revolutionary political views, which are expressed in many of the band's songs. The band's debut album, Rage Against the Machine, reached triple platinum status, driven by heavy radio play of the song "Killing in the Name", a heavy, driving track featuring only eight lines of lyrics. The "Fuck You" version, which contains 17 iterations of the word fuck, was once accidentally played on the BBC Radio 1 Top 40 singles show on February 21, 1993 (Robinson, 2000). Rage against the Machine not only paved the way for many artists in their genre, but also inspired an American public to not allow "Big Brother" to control their lives. Their "Fuck You, I won't do what ya tell me" lyrics were a "howling, expletive-driven tirade against the ills of American society. The song repeats six lines of lyrics that associate police brutality with racism, as well as an allusion to the KKK. Rage not only helped illustrate the wrongdoings of a corrupt society, but also allowed future generations to truly feel the angst and anger that people felt during this time. 

Some may find that Rage is simply a vulgar, loud, and obnoxious group of rebels that want their voices to be heard, however that is America. Our forefathers fought and died so that we may speak our minds without fear of ridicule and condemnation. We cannot allow ourselves to simply pass the power of regulation to the government, we must seize it ourselves. Taking the easy way out only pushes us back to a time of cookie cutter, assembly line way of life that we cannot regress to. Of course, this concept is not one of original conception, as the "greatest generation ... [founded on] obedience, respect for authority" was replaced by "attitudes craving individuality, questioning authority, and exploring freedom, drugs, and sex ... [that] in fact, many times ... flaunted these things to society's elders (Sparrow, 2016)." 

Unfortunately, changing of social values and norms is not the only thing at stake when we begin to censor music. "In 1955, for example, Houston's Juvenile Delinquency and Crime Commission banned more than 30 songs  --  many by black artists. A Chicago radio station promised to censor 'any controversial music, especially R&B,' after receiving letters from angry listeners (Sparrow, 2016)." Race has played a significant role in music censorship throughout American history. As it may not come as a surprise that some racist people in power sought to belittle the efforts of aspiring musicians in the 50's and 60's, it is even more shocking to discover the "racially motivated music censorship is not a practice limited to the past ...  more recent cases involve MTV refusing to air videos from many black artists in the infancy of the network. (Nuzum, 1986)." It was not until David Bowie, a prominent white rock artist, in an interview "Why it tool MTV so long," questioned "Why are there practically no black artists on the network," that finally Michael Jackson's "Billie Jean" was "credited with being the first black video aired on MTV in heavy rotation (Nuzum, 1986)." While no legal actions took place in these instances, it only further illustrates the dangers between government and music censorship. 

Johnny should not have said what he said to Ms. Osborne, it was out of place and extremely distracting within the confines of a classroom. However, who is to blame for this? Rage Against the Machine? No says Donald Roberts, in his study of the effects of violence on youth. "For violent lyrics to promote youth violence or for substance abuse use portrayals to encourage experimentation with illicit drugs, young audiences presumably must ... go a step farther and connect such messages to their own lives (Roberts, 2003)." In essence, It's the lack of education within the household. It's the fault of not monitoring Johnny through his development, teaching him of different words and what is right and wrong to say -- seeing that he is only allowed to listen to Rage one he reaches a certain age -- so that he may understand the true reasoning behind why those words were being used. So, who's truly responsible for this?  There's No One But Yourself To Blame.

