If Censorship in the 'Axis of Evil'

Home , Corporate censorship, Mark LeVine, Music censorship, Political censorship, The Strokes

IF CENSORSHIP IN THE ‘AXIS OF EVIL’ IS EVIL

IS CENSORSHIP IN THE ‘AXIS OF GOOD’ THEN GOOD?

-Questions and answers on music censorship in the US...and the rest of the world

FEATURING REEBEE GAROFALO & MARK LEVINE WHY IS MUSIC CENSORED? Censorship of music has existed ever since ancient Greece. Plato distinguished between “good” and “bad music” – suggesting that the “bad” had to be controlled or banned as it had the potential to divert people from the “good life”. Today music censorship is more complex. Active censors of music are states, religions, educational systems, families, retailers and lobbying groups.

Censorship can be extreme, musicians being silenced, like the killings of musicians in Algeria, and the total ban on music in Afghanistan under the Taliban. Or it can be apparently banal, like the banning of certain songs during times of war and terrorism. Threats can lead to self-censorship and thus deprive musicians of their right to free expression.

Music is a free expression of the ideas, traditions and emotions of individuals and of peoples. These expressions may conﬂ ict with the politics of those in power. It may be as simple as South African musician Johnny Clegg said: “censorship is based on fear.”

WHAT IS FREEMUSE? FREEMUSE - THE WORLD FORUM ON MUSIC AND CENSORSHIP is an independent international membership organization advocating freedom of expression for musicians and composers world- wide. As our guide are the principles outlined in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights as they apply speciﬁ cally to musicians and composers. The FREEMUSE secretariat was established in August 2000.

FREEMUSE IN ACTION Our objectives are to: • Document violations • Inform media and the public • Describe the mechanisms of censorship • Support censored musicians and composers • Develop a global support network

YOU CAN SUPPORT US - VISIT FREEMUSE.ORG - the only website documenting music censorship globally:

News ... about censorship in more than 50 countries. Background ... comprehensive on-line library with articles, links and all the material from the Freemuse world conferences, seminars, and publications.

Reports ... buy the Freemuse reports on USA, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe, Nigeria and Romania or download free PDF versions.

Video and sound clips ... exclusive interviews with Damon Albarn, Didier Awadi, The Cure, Johnny Clegg, Chuck D, Farhad Darya, Junoon, Marcel Khalife, Femi Kuti, Ray Lema, Hugh Masekela, Nancy Sinatra, Patti Smith, Ali Farka Touré, and many more...

Contact Freemuse Nytorv 17 DK-1450 Copenhagen K, Denmark, Tel: +45 33 32 10 27 , [email protected]

1 FOOD FOR THOUGHT ON CENSORSHIP

In the new Freemuse report ”Singing in the Echo Chamber”, Eric Nuzum documents with numerous examples how musicians in the US participating in the public discourse in the weeks and months after 9/11 experienced strong resistance, sometimes resulting in censorship.

In the report Nuzum refers to what analysts call the “echo chamber” of news media, where a report, once entering the national discourse, is repeated endlessly without any sense of the checks and balances normally applied to reporting.

Several musicians in the US were severely affected by this “echo chamber”.

The report raises several important questions such as “is there censorship with good intentions?” or even “considerate censorship”, and which are the major forces behind censorship in the US today?

In a world where some political forces would like to divide the world in “civilized” and “non- civilized” and focus on clashes “between nations and peoples” rather than clashes ”within nations and civilizations,” it is relevant to ask questions such as: If censorship in the “Axis of Evil” is evil, does censorship in the “Axis of Good” then spring out of good intentions?

We’ve asked two renowned scholars cum musicians, Professor Reebee Garofalo and Associate Professor Mark LeVine, some of the complex questions that Eric Nuzum’s report raises.

We hope that the report and the questions asked may stimulate students and media to review and renew the ever vital discussions on freedom of expression in the land that put so high attention to freedom of expression in its First Amendment.

Marie Korpe Executive Director Freemuse February 2006

2 REEBEE GAROFALO is a Professor at the tory and Politics of the Music Industry (Nelson-Hall, University of Massachusetts Boston, where he has 1977). In addition, he has written numerous articles taught since 1978. Garofalo is an internationally on digital downloading, copyright, racism, censorship, known scholar of popular music studies. His most re- the political uses of music, and the globalization of the cent book is Rockin’ Out: Popular Music in the USA, music industry for popular as well as scholarly pub- 3rd Edition (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, lications and has lectured internationally on a broad 2005). He is co-editor of Policing Pop (Temple Univer- range of subjects relating to the operations of the mu- sity Press, 2003); editor of Rockin’ the Boat: Mass Mu- sic industry. For relaxation, he enjoys drumming and sic and Mass Movements (South End Press, 1992); singing with the Blue Suede Boppers, a ﬁ fties rock ‘n’ and co-author of Rock ‘n’ Roll is Here to Pay: The His- roll band.

3 MARK LEVINE is Associate Professor of Mod- Emmy award-winning “Promises” documentary. ern Middle Eastern History, Culture and Islamic Stud- He is frequently quoted in leading magazines and ies at the University of California, Irvine. newspapers. In his latest publication “Why they don’t For most of the last decade he has lived and worked in hate us” he goes beyond the stereotypes and below the Middle East. He is also a musician and as a con- the media radar and presents an alternative roadmap sultant he worked for the Oscar-nominated and double for relations between the West and the Muslim world.

IDEA AND PRODUCTION: OLE REITOV, FREEMUSE LAYOUT: LENE AREVAD

4 FIVE QUESTIONS ON MUSIC CENSORSHIP

number of examples of this in popular music. There GOOD AND BAD CENSORSHIP are also the activities of conservative religious groups Is there such a thing as music censorship grown like Focus on the Family, which exert pressure toward out of concern for the well-being of the country, limiting certain kinds of expression, or commercial our safety from harm, and the ability of our fami- enterprises like Wal-Mart, which actually do engage lies to live in peace and comfort - a so-called “well in a privatized form of censorship of popular music. intended censorship”? Mark: Certainly the US and the Bush Administra- Mark Levine: People involved in censoring music tion in particular have a very strong belief in their might believe they are doing it for these reasons, or own righteousness, that if we censor it must be for to protect certain members of society (children, mi- good intentions and to protect certain “core values” norities), but in practice I don’t believe there is such while other people’s censorship is a violation of free a thing as positive censorship outside of the obvious speech and other rights. example of preventing minors from viewing pornogra- But also the issue of censorship runs much deeper phy or graphic violence. than just blocking a song or TV show from being But even there I think it can easily go too far, such heard or seen. In academia where I also work there as the explicit lyrics stamps that are put on so much are increasing attempts by conservative groups, metal or hip hop here, which only serve to make al- working with the Bush Administration, to stifl e aca- bums more popular with the very audience they’re demic freedom in the name of academic freedom. supposed to protect. THE US CENSORS Reebee Garofalo: I can imagine people feeling like they are motivated by positive values in advocating If we focus on powerful attempts on implement- censorship, but even in such instances the results ing music censorship in the US, by religious tend to do more harm than good. The framers of the groups, political leaders, music industry, media First Amendment to the US Constitution stated that or corporates such as Wall- Mart. Who / which “Congress shall pass no law . . .” abridging freedom group would you then say is the most infl uential of the press. This has been interpreted as a broad in the US today? based freedom of expression over the years, and it has served the country well. Mark: I think they’re inseparable from each other. Even though there are exceptions to the freedoms Americans have a long history of being against cen- covered by this Amendment, such as fi ghting words, sorship in theory, so to effectively prevent the dissem- incitement to riot, obscenity, etc, we do best when ination of threatening music the government can’t just we err on the side of allowing the broadest possible censor it the way a government in Africa or the Middle range of expression. East might do. Rather, the government, together with key social President Bush has launched the term “The axis groups and their corporate allies -and here the trium- of evil”. Applying this to music, does this mean virate of the Bush Administration, conservative Chris- that music censorship in, say, Iran or Robert Mu- tian groups, and Wal-Mart, is a classic example -must gabe’s Zimbabwe are “acts of evil” and that cen- co-operate to pursue common aims. sorship in the US are “acts of good intentions”? And the economic, political and social rationales behind the censorship must reinforce each other, which Reebee: Fortunately, there is relatively little formal becomes easier in an era such as today, when, like government censorship of music in the US. The proc- during the cold war, there is a discourse of “threat” ess is more subtle here, and therefore perhaps more against Americans. pernicious. Federal legislation such as the Patriot Act do not Reebee: Right now I would say that Wal-Mart is in a mandate censorship per se, but some would argue very powerful position because the chain accounts for that it has created a climate of fear that encourages about 9% of all recordings sold in the United States. artists to engage in self-censorship and there are any With power like that they can and do dictate titles, lyrics,

5 and cover art to many artists and they can entice art- more avant-garde styles within every genre are the ists into exclusive contracts which have the effect of losers in today’s market place because it’s harder for privileging certain musics while excluding others. corporations to justify investments in them given the limited sales potential. Which are their basic motives, and what are the But ultimately I would assume that hip hop and, effects of their infl uence? ironically, country would be the biggest losers. Hip hop because it’s so hard to buck the commercial Reebee: Their basic motives are commercial, but trend and break through and sell records, and within the context of trying to play to a conservative country because, as the Dixie Chicks episode has Christian base in creating a “family friendly” shown, there is a powerful self-censorship related to atmosphere that they feel will appeal to that group. the perceived social and political conservatism off the Their infl uence has had the effect of narrowing the average country music fan that can have a chilling range of cultural offerings that are available to large effect on artists willing to take a progressive political segments of the population for whom Wal-Mart is the stance. And of course, the same would hold true for only commercial outlet available for music. issues such as openly embracing alternative sexual/ gender identities in country or hip hop Mark: Each group or force might have its own motivation. The government might want to silence Reebee: The musics that are the most highly criticized dissent, religious/conservative groups might want to and most subjected to certain kinds of pressures are impose their moral and social vision, and corporations rap music generally and certain kinds of political might want to earn points with either consumers by expression across genres in particular. Rap music demonstrating their social-corporate values (the comes under fi re for its misogynist and violent lyrics, way Blockbuster movies does not carry hardcore but I think there is also a sub-text of racism wherein pornography or Wal-Mart doesn’t sell certain music) this country fi nds it diffi cult to come to grips with young or with the government, by not carrying music that is African Americans becoming millionaires on their own critical of its policies. terms, even though that represents a version of the The question is, what’s the price that corporations are “American Dream.” willing to pay? Will Wal-Mart not carry the new Rolling It is also the case that popular musics that are critical Stones or Springsteen album because they are anti- of administration policy or our involvements in military Bush, or are they too profi table, in which case it is the actions around the globe are subject to signifi cant smaller artists who will be most adversely affected pressures. Here underground rap - artists like Paris because they don’t sell enough albums to pierce and the Coup - is in the forefront of serious criticism through the political or social censorship. and deep analysis, but such expression includes other genres and artists as well. THE POWER OF MUSIC

Which kind of music/musicians are the most censored in the US today? Why?

Mark: This is a difﬁ cult question. There is little if any overt/legal censorship of artists. What happens is what we’re hearing is now increasingly happening in the Arab world with conglomerates like Rotana, which is that mega-corporations are controlling increasing shares of the market place, and then are using their power to censor artists when it suits them. But economic motives-the need to focus resources on “sure hits” is as if not more damaging to music as direct political censorship. Both stiﬂ e creativity and freedom of expression. In that sense I think that the

6 1010 QUESTIONSQUESTIONS TOTO REEBEEREEBEE GAROFALOGAROFALO

Reebee Garofalo, you and Martin Cloonan’s book In the current trajectory of copyright law the notion of “Policing Pop” is dedicated to all musicians who copyright as a balancing act managing incentives to have fought for freedom of musical expression. If create and the protection of intellectual property with you should mention a couple of musicians who free expression and the public good seems to have have played a signiﬁ cant role in the US, who been abandoned in favor of a conception of copyright would that be and why? as a set of corporate rights. In this conception things like fair use and the public domain have been I think that throughout history there have been downplayed almost to the point of disappearance. many examples of artists pushing the boundaries of expression on many fronts. The ones that mean the Would you say that one can understand US most to me are those that deal with race and political history and politics by analyzing the mechanisms analysis. In the mid 1980s, Little Steven utilized the behind the censorship of music? power of charity rock to expose the evils of South African Apartheid. On a completely different level, I would say that one can certainly understand US I thought that Vernon Reid and Living Colour made history and politics by analyzing the trajectory of what an incredible statement in reclaiming rock as a form musics become dominant at a given time. This would with roots in the African American experience. In entail a complex analysis of all the social forces the international arena, artists ranging from Victor affecting music — commercial, legal, technological, Jara and Billy Bragg to the Clash and Rage Against political, etc. The processes of censorship and the the Machine have pushed the political envelope. various ways in which musical expression is either More recently in the US artists like Steve Earle, limited or encouraged would deﬁ nitely be part of such Ani DiFranco, and Sage Francis have maintained a an analysis. sense of thoughtful dissent in a period of tremendous conservative pressure to do otherwise. Immediately after the airplane attack on the Twin Towers, many artists and music companies felt the In principle you can distinguish state censorship need to display some new-found sensitivity: The from corporate censorship. First Amendment is band ’Bush’ changed the title of their new single very important in the US constitution. from ‘Speed Kills’ to ‘The People that We Love’, Does a focus on First Amendment confuse the Cranberries pulled their video for ‘Analyze’ people’s idea of censorship in the sense that because of its repeated images of skyscrapers they do not question or discuss corporate and aircraft, The Strokes removed the song ‘New censorship? York City Cops’ from the US version of their album ‘Is This It.’ Were these actions examples of Many people take the term censorship to mean direct ”tasteful self censorship?” government intervention. There tends to be relatively little of that in the US. Part of the reason for this is Since 911, there has been a thin line between that the marketplace often tends to accomplish the sensitivity and self-censorship in the US. Clear same goals without the heavy hand of government. Channel defended its list of nearly 200 songs to be Commercial pressures underpinned by certain moral/ avoided as an act of sensitivity. When one looked religious leanings and a particular political climate at some of the songs on the list —Carole’s King’s “I can produce a culture with a very limited range of Feel the Earth Move” or the Bangle’s “Walk like an expression getting the most exposure. Egyptian” — their defense made little sense. Including “All Rage Against the Machine Songs” raised the You have written a lot on copyright issues. Are specter of censorship. Artists who freely choose to these issues in any way related to censorship? alter some aspect of their art following 911 were How? commonplace. To the extend that they felt compelled to do so for fear of reprisals of some kind brings us Copyright law and our conceptions of intellectual face-to-face with pressures toward self-censorship property tend to be one of the things that limit access that should be opposed. to information and freedom of expression in the US.

7 Within hours of the attacks in Washington The Freemuse report is entitled ‘Singing In the and New York, programmers at Clear Channel Echo Chamber: Music Censorship in the U.S. radio stations across the United States began After September 11th’. The title refers to the informally circulating lists of songs that might “echo chamber” of news media, where a report, be distasteful to play in the wake of the tragedy, once entering the national discourse, is repeated each containing literal or metaphorical references endlessly without any sense of the checks and a bit too close to recent events .Among the songs balances normally applied to reporting. listed in the Clear Channel email were “Fly,” “Jet Would you say that musicians critical to the war in Airliner,” “Devil in Disguise,” “Only the Good Die Iraq have been affected by this “echo chamber”? Young,” “Great Balls of Fire,” “Crash Into Me,” “Dancing in the Streets,” and many more. Now if Musicians who are critical of almost any aspect of you were to receive such a list from the offi ce of a Bush Administration policy have been subjected to corporate management how would you perceive it threats and reprisals that certainly violate the spirit of – and how do you think this would be understood the First Amendment. Things as simple as the Dixie by a DJ or a local station manager? Chicks one line criticism of Bush at a London concert, Linda Ronstadt simply dedicating a song to fi lm maker Clear Channel is a very centralized corporation. Michael Moore in a Las Vegas show, or Steve Earle Indeed some of its 1200 radio stations are trying to understand the motivations of John Walker programmed by remote. Clear Channel initially tried to Lindh “the American Taliban” without condoning his describe the list of songs to be avoided as something actions, were blown out of all proportion in the media that bubbled up from their staff out of sensitivity to and continued for a long time, earning the artists the victims families. But for anyone who knows how death threats and accusations of treason. Clear Channel operates, and this certainly includes their on air staff, anything coming out of corporate The report refers to incidents where groups like headquarters that has a list of songs to be avoided is the Dixie Chicks were considered unpatriotic going to be read as much more than a suggestion. for their critical views and subsequently were attacked by media and their songs were lifted out After September 11, several concert tours by from playlists. Is this “censorship of music”, or is artists from the Middle East and Asia have been this just “media like Clear Channel taking part in cancelled due to very restrictive immigration a confl ict”? procedures. Is this music censorship? We are in a tricky terrain here because we are talking I think countries have a legitimate need to provide for about the corporate use of publicly own radio waves national security and this certainly includes the US in the case of terrestrial radio. Opinion shows surely after 911. However, I also believe that the provisions have a right to express their opinions, but news of our Patriot Act, the operations of the Dept. of shows, it seems to me, have an obligation to be fair Homeland Security, and the practices of the Bush and balanced. The political center of gravity in the Administration — especially the nature and scope of news media has shifted markedly to the right over the their current wiretapping activity — have overstepped past 30 years despite conservative protestations of a the bounds of legitimate national security and have liberal bias in media. That conservative bias extends entered the territory of curtailing civil rights and rights to music shows when a selection of the Dixie Chicks to privacy. A climate like this creates the conditions is removed from a playlist for political reasons. Even wherein nations may become overly cautious about more disturbingly, conservative corporations like immigration and certain groups — and in this case Clear Channel have adopted an activist posture certain musicians may be excluded for reasons that — sponsoring rallies in favor of administration policy have little to do with national security. For example, — that was almost unheard of in corporate radio. it is almost impossible for Cuban musicians to tour the US at this point because of heightened fears of terrorism.

8 The Freemuse charter accepts the UN Declaration of Human Rights which include certain restrictions for free speech such as hate speech. Is there in your opinion a clear deﬁ nition of hate speech in the application of the US First Amendment - and if so, how does this apply to music in the US?

Hate speech is one of those ill-deﬁ ned categories that opens the door to further restrictions on free expression. The American Civil Liberties Union argues that the correct response to hate speech is more speech, not new legislation. There are already a number of exceptions to speech protected by the First Amendment such as inciting to riot, ﬁ ghting words, obscenity, etc. But making these determinations inevitably relies on subjective judgments that change from place to place and over time. The charge of obscenity has often been leveled at popular music. But because the three-pronged test for obscenity in the US is so stringent, these cases always get thrown out of court or overturned on appeal.

9 10 QUESTIONS TO MARK LEVINE

Mark LeVine, in your latest book “Why they same time they resist a lot of western music. Why don’t hate us” - lifting the Veil on the Axis of is that? Evil, you describe heavy metal bands in the Middle East as an internal “resistance” against Well, fi rst of all, it depends on the country. In Islamic fundamentalism. Isn’t it quite natural that Turkey the videos can be as if not more risque than governments in the Middle East censor these their “western” counterparts. But even this kind of groups? comparison is misleading because there is a lot of cross-fertilization and increasingly even working First, I should point out that when I say they are part together between artists and video makers across of the internal resistance to religious extremism, we the seeming divide of cultures. shouldn’t assume that the musicians are all secular hedonists with about as much respect for their But when western music is “resisted” we need to look religious traditions as the average American or British at each individual case. In some cases is for reasons metal head. similar to the policies of the French state vis-a-vis foreign cultural products: i.e., to protect local culture In fact, many of these artists consider themselves to from the onslaught of globalized and supposedly be religious, or at least spiritual people, and certainly Americanized culture. Muslims. On the other hand, because of the complexity of the But the fact that they play a form of music that is relationship between aesthetic and religious/moral easily (if usually wrongly) labeled “satanic” or at least sensibilities, some Western artists, especially female irreligious in the West, makes them easy targets artists, might be considered acceptable despite the for regimes who see any challenge to the dominant sexual nature of their videos while others might not. culture as a threat to their power and legitimacy. It’s not that different in America, where someone like Britney Spears is a favorite of conservatives because So they go after the bands in the same way that they she supports President Bush, yet her stage act and go after the artists, writers, and activists, and the farther videos verge towards the pornographic. an artists has seemingly walked away from her or his cultural norms, the easier it is for the government to And fi nally, money is a crucial issue, if we’re attack them, or at least attempt to censor them. talking about an artist whose presence on a station represents signifi cant revenue because of viewership Don’t the regimes sometimes overestimate the and thus increased ad rates, the corporate or state infl uence musicians have? owners might let them through, while other artists who are slightly less risque might not be. Musicians don’t have incredible infl uence on their own, but they’re a crucial part of a larger political process. A lot of artists from Arab countries claim that They’re a necessary but not suffi cient element in any after 9/11 they have faced a lot of problems movement for positive social and political change. getting permission to perform in the US. Is that Similar to the role of heavy metal in Eastern Europe just “Arabic paranoia”? and the former Soviet Union, or the role of hip hop in the US and across the globe, popular music in the Absolutely not, and it’s not just artists. Academics, Middle East and North Africa acts as an important students, activists, in fact most people from Muslim conduit for voicing criticisms of the government or the countries face increased scrutiny and hurdles in dominant culture. trying to come here to work or study. Yet at the same Since the region has the highest percentage of young time, it should be pointed out that interest in Middle people in the world, these forms of cultural production Eastern and Muslim artists has rarely, if ever been are that much more important. higher among the American public than it is now. So it’s a complicated situation. Some TV stations in the Middle East show videos Americans want to be exposed to positive experiences of rather undressed female singers but at the of culture from the Muslim world, but their government

10 has made it harder to do so for all but the most threat to artistic integrity and freedom of speech than established and apolitical artists. Hopefully the government or even corporate censorship. If the frustrations of Americans in this regard will lead to public wanted a more activist musical culture, then a greater awareness of the larger issues behind this we would have one. kind of government censorship. Does music censorship in the US have any effect Would you say that one can understand US on the rest of the world? If yes, how? history and politics by analyzing the mechanisms behind the censorship of music? I think it has two effects: fi rst, it keeps people in other cultures from realizing that there is a diversity Art is always at the forefront of the larger confl icts of opinion in the US and that many artists, and by within a culture. And Music is the most immediately extension, average Americans, are against US accessible and powerful form of art, because of its policies. The second is more positive, in that artists immediacy, ease of communication, and aesthetic- who do take a defi ant stand, such as Public Enemy, spiritual power. So when we look at how certain art fi nd themselves far more popular abroad than at forms, say hip hop in the 1980s, were censored- home. not just by the government, but by corporations-the power of the music to challenge the political status Immediately after the airplane attack on the Twin quo becomes apparent. Same with the FBI spying Towers, many artists and music companies felt the on the great artists of the fi fties through seventies. need to display some new-found sensitivity: The On the other hand, it should be pointed out that the band ‘Bush’ changed the title of their new single censorship has rarely worked, as most artists in the from ‘Speed Kills’ to ‘The People that We Love’, contemporary era who were censored, like Ice-T the Cranberries pulled their video for ‘Analyze’ or NWA, found other ways to get the message out. because of its repeated images of skyscrapers Far more damaging is how such critical artists have and aircraft, The Strokes removed the song ‘New either been co-opted- and here, Ice-T, who once York City Cops’ from the US version of their scandalized the establishment with his song “Cop album Is This It. Were these actions examples of Killer” has played a series of roles as policemen in “tasteful self censorship”? fi lm and TV is a great example- or gradually toned down their rhetoric. Self-censorship, yes; tasteful, no! Compare them to the group Ozomatli, whose album “Embrace the What are, in your opinion, the most essential Chaos,” was due to come out on September 11, and effects of music censorship in USA, say in the was quite political (as usual for them). There was a past 35 years? lot of pressure on them to delay the release and/or change the songs, they refused to. Other hip hop Without a doubt, the single most important impact, and rock groups did not. But the bands you’re talking similar to television and mainstream fi lms (although about are the kind of mainstream bands that, when this is changing today) has been in the self- they rarely try to make a political statement, can be censorship of artists, most of whom have not taken more easily scared off. a strong stand against various US military exploits, On the other hand, having been in NYC and watched from the invasion of Panama to Iraq, with groups the destruction of the towers with my own eyes, I such as the Dixie Chicks serving as the example for would have been the fi rst to say that a song that was those in mainstream (and here, “subversive” forms of gratuitously violent or otherwise touched too close to music like metal or hip hop are more immune) pop or the events should perhaps have been withheld for a country of the costs to coming out against the policy bit, but the examples you’re citing are not at all of that of the US government. variety. But I think there’s a bigger problem than censorship, And certainly 9/11 should have been a call to arms which is the rise of a hyper-consumerist culture for more intensely politicized music, not more self- that is defi ned by its broad depoliticization, both of censorship. artists and the public/consumers. This is a far greater

11 The Freemuse report is entitled ‘Singing In the ready to go; otherwise they can act as witnesses, Echo Chamber: Music Censorship in the U.S. as did the musicians in South Africa or the pre-Civil After September 11th. The title refers to the “echo Rights American south. chamber” of news media, where a report, once But the fact that so few leading mainstream artists entering the national discourse, is repeated have taken a stand against the war in Iraq, the larger endlessly without any sense of the checks and erosion of civil rights and liberties in the US, or similar balances normally applied to reporting. Would issues, reveals a problem much deeper in American you say that musicians critical to the war in Iraq culture than traditional censorship of musicians or have been affected by this “echo chamber”? other artists; and at the same time I think the lack of vitality in mainstream music here is directly related to Yes and No. There are several levels that have to the lack of political relevance. be discussed. On the one hand, the most important If you compare today to the sixties and early seventies, issue was who was involved. Big bands such as when mainstream music was so much more political Green Day or System of a Down or similar platinum and vibrant, or to the mid-late seventies in Britain selling hard rock or hip hop groups could still get their when punk was born, or the late seventies and early message and songs through, because in the end it’s eighties in the American ghettos, when hip hop was money that talks in the the US, and in their genres born, you can see that pushing political and aesthetic (as opposed to country music, with the Dixie Chicks) boundaries went hand in hand most fans either couldn’t care less about their politics or shared it. The Freemuse charter accepts the UN Declaration On the other hand, many groups that were more of Human Rights, which include certain grass roots or underground had a lot of trouble getting restrictions for free speech such as hate speech. their critical music out there. But these groups have Do you believe that there should be restrictions trouble getting their music to a mainstream audience at all? under normal circumstances, so I’m not sure how much censorship had to do with the lack of airplay or As an artist, academic, activist and journalist, my news they received. I’m sure there was censorship, deepest instinct is to protect free speech at almost any but I’m also sure that many artists had other means, cost. On the other hand, however, I can certainly see using the internet and live shows, to disseminate their cases where limits on speech are appropriate: in schools music and message. or jobs, for example, where racist or other bigoted What the lack of airplay did do however was create or insulting language against students or workers, an impression among the public in the US and the especially by those who are in positions of power over world that most artists, and because of this, most them (teachers, bosses) can become too harmful to people, either supported the war or didn’t have an allow. Also, the situation in Germany after World War II, opinion. But of course, for a while it was true that where the Nazi party was outlawed, makes sense. But most Americans either supported the war or didn’t with music we are rarely if ever in such a situation. actively oppose it. Even the most bigoted, insulting or rebellious music It’s not surprising that as public opposition to the war doesn’t have the power that words uttered by a person rose, commercial music outlets felt more comfortable with direct control over one’s life or livelihood has. So airing anti-war themed songs. Yet at the same time it’s hard to imagine a case today for censoring any kind we must remember that it’s not like these songs were of artistic production. What we have to do, however, is unavailable. Public and community radio stations press for free speech across the board in a society. In played them a lot, the music press mentioned them, other words, in a dictatorship like Syria, certain artists and they were obviously available on the internet. or preachers might be “free” to spew out anti-Jewish But even if all the 150 or more songs by rap and rock diatribes, while other artists or preachers or writers are artists against the war on terror and the invasion of censored from critiquing the regime. Iraq speciﬁ cally were played more often, it’s hard This kind of combination of “freedom” and censorship to imagine that this alone would have changed. is clearly unhelpful to the causes that Freemuse is Ultimately, artists have the power to show the way ﬁ ghting for, not to mention the ideals of the Declaration and sometimes to push a culture in a direction it’s of Human Rights.