[BC] Re: Why FM took off in the 60's
Barry Mishkind
barry
Sun Oct 23 16:35:43 CDT 2005
At 02:23 PM 10/23/2005, Robert Orban wrote
>The main objection to Elvis in 1955 was his sexualization of rock
>and roll; it was a quantum leap beyond what Sinatra had done in his
>"bobby socks" era, about 10 years before Elvis. I don't have a
>problem with that.
You are quite correct. It is hard to
complain about small changes, essentially
bringing "into the light" what had been
in "pop music" - sexual and drug-laced lyrics
- for decades. The music of the 20s was
called "scandalous" in those years ...
> However, I am disturbed by popular culture that glorifies violence
> and degrades and objectifies women. I _do_ think that there is an
> absolute line regarding "corruption"; this line is not a moving
> target to be defined down with each generation. Media that
> glorifies (as opposed to examines) sociopathic, self-destructive,
> or violent behavior steps over it. This is not a healthy thing for
> media conglomerates to present as normative behavior to children
> and adolescents, all for the sake of the almighty dollar. I know
> I'm starting to sound like my parents, but there you have it.
I don't think it is necessarily "sounding
like ... parents" .... I agree with you.
The glorification of violence (no -
not violins, Emily) and the degrading
manner of treating others shown in
the "rap artists" efforts is no more
a contribution to society than
selling drugs, or making bank robbery
legal simply because banks don't have
the best security available.
>I am a firm believer in the First Amendment, but I wish that major
>entertainment conglomerates would police themselves better.
>Sometimes, it's better to leave potential revenue on the table,
>particularly if it's blood money, earned by defining deviancy down.
>
>(I can see that this discussion might be headed for AF :-)
In some ways, perhaps. I'll copy it there,
and it can meander as appropriate.
barry
More information about the Broadcast
mailing list