Should their music be banned?
By the way: Did you guys know that the lyrics for ''But the kid is not my son'' were originally conceived when checking in to a Truckstop motel on route 66?
Comment has been collapsed.
I am that kind of person who listen to anything i like no matter who made it, Banning stuff because one/several people who made it are scum is not really my way. Just don't give them any money.
Comment has been collapsed.
By playing the song on radio stations and streaming services, you are giving them money.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not directly, however, that's true for other scum or crappy artists that wouldn't be banned.
There's a long list of people who I'd very schadenfreude-nly would like to see having to pay the bills on a regular job instead of living off airplay rent.
Sadly, I don't get asked what radio stations should or should not be playing.
Comment has been collapsed.
you can listen to anything you want and just cause a person is a shit does not take away from that BUT advertising these people makes them money. if you don't agree with said person why would you want to make them money. then like the case of MC Donalds and MJ, if your main mascot was a clown would you really want to be connected to a pedophile?
Comment has been collapsed.
Exactly. However, if they are not earning money by it, I really see absolutely no reason to ban it, because art stands on its own. You don't have to like the artist to like the music. By banning their nonrevenue music, you're just needlessly taking away people's enjoyment of art.
Comment has been collapsed.
The standing for something despicable seems like an extreme example... of course I wouldn't want to listen to neo-nazi punk or nationalist metal. Censorship is a slippery slope, and I'm not for banning anything because that power will eventually be abused and you can't really ban anything in the internet era anyways (Streisand effect).
I think the "if it still gives money to the artist" rubric is a good one for whether or not I choose to support it personally. That's if I find them morally objectionable though like R Kelly, just because an arbitrary law or authority finds them "criminal" or "subversive" (Russia's Pussy Riot for example) doesn't mean I have an issue with them myself.
Comment has been collapsed.
What is not "criminal" about punk clowns who are famous for storming supermarket and stuffing frozen chicken into their pussy? No, literally - that's not a figure of speech - feel free to google "pussy riot chicken", just prepare some brain bleach beforehand. You think laws that consider that public order disruption are "arbitrary"? Name me any first world country while shit like this would fly.
Comment has been collapsed.
I for one would for example prefer not to pay R. Kellys legal fees against potential sexual abuse victims.
Do you right now then? If so, why? If not, then you're already not paying him, so why prefer what you're already not doing? :D
I'm just kind of startled by how non-chalant you are with the idea of banning an artist. R-Kelly isn't convicted. I personally think he's guilty, but officially he isn't. I don't listen to his music, but if I did listen to him, I wouldn't listen to him currently. I just think that to an extent, people need to make their own decisions. If he gets convicted, then I think his music shouldn't be banned either, but instead, the revenue earned from it should be forcibly directed towards charities that prevent the crime the artist was convicted of for a minimum of a year, up to however long they're in prison for (and depending on the charge, more might be added by the government). Charities would be picked through the help of organizations like Charity Navigator, to make sure the money goes to the best place.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm gonna need some context to this. Did something happen?
Comment has been collapsed.
Not really. HBO aired a new documentary called Leaving Neverland, which didn't have any really new information but brought out a lot of old allegations.
Now Jackson fans all over the world are going crazy, suing HBO and commiting suicide or whatnot.
Comment has been collapsed.
Michael Jackson documentary, although even that kid from Home Alone recently stated MJ had an alarm system that would warn him when someone came close to his bedroom (i am not passing judgement either way, but i found that more peculiar then the documentary i didn't watch..
R. Kelly has alot of women accusing him of abuse (and there is some stuff with minors).
I am sure there have been many artists that behaved bad too in the past, but now after the whole #metoo thing it comes out more (i mean with both artists their stories were known for some years now but now they and most of all their music too has to be hanged).
Comment has been collapsed.
Michael Jackson documentary, although even that kid from Home Alone recently stated MJ had an alarm system that would warn him when someone came close to his bedroom
Michael Jackson always gave me the heebie-jeebies. From his looks to his voice, to his allegations, to his demeanor, to his public stuff like when he held a baby outside the window/balcony.
But this right here... this legitimately just gave me chills and this usually never happens. Damn.
Comment has been collapsed.
And Paris, MJ's daughter made an attempt this weekend.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually I did not know that. (I'd rather not comment there since circumstances are different.) It was just something I would expect Michael Jackson fans to do.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's actually false. It was reported by TMZ and Paris told them to go fuck themselves: https://twitter.com/ParisJackson/status/1107009409136246784
Comment has been collapsed.
Well she denied it, doesn;'t make it false (or true) not really something you would want to admit, she did it before.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's true. I imagine this must be really hard for his kids, either way.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, even on her twitter people are trolling her, best if she hid her account.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know if she tried to commit suicide or not, but she also asked to please leave her be, and that is a desire that the press should respect.
If she tried suicide, her life is obviously in tatters and that's one more reason she shouldn't be abused.
If she didn't and they're lying, she is also a victim.
IOW don't side with the abusers.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd say we did get some new information. The documentary goes into very specific (and horrible) details about what happened. There's also a surveillance video showing Michael in a jewelry store with James Safechuck, which corroborates his story about how Michael would buy jewelry and give it to him in exchange of sexual favors. Many people (myself included) have found the accounts of the two men very credible and are finally coming to terms with the fact that Michael most likely did bad things.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for filling in some of the details ;) Tbh I have not seen it yet. I just heard about the outrage surrounding the movie on the news and Last Week Tonight.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you have a weak stomach, I suggest watching only the second part of the documentary and the Oprah interview that aired after it (which is just as important, in my opinion). The second part of the documentary focuses on the aftermath of the abuse and goes into the 2005 trials and all of that. The first part, however, is really hard to watch, it has very graphic descriptions of the abuse.
Comment has been collapsed.
They testified in court nothing happened then years later came out to say something happened.
Comment has been collapsed.
False. Only Wade Robson testified. James Safechuck did not, and he says in the documentary that he warned his mother to stay away from the 2005 trials. And the documentary, as well as the Oprah interview, delves into that subject. It's normal for victims of child abuse to defend their abuser, because they don't really view it as abuse. Michael made them feel safe, made them feel loved. They thought they were in a love relationship with him, not an abusive one.
Also, Kesha testified in court that Dr. Luke never did anything to her, yet years later claimed he abused her. Everyone believed Kesha, but everyone seems to have a problem believing Michael's victims. I wonder why...
Comment has been collapsed.
Not false at all. Just people believing in bullshit because they happen to say it years later after already saying the opposite.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, it's false. James Safechuck did say that Michael never did anything to him, but he did not testify to that. Only Wade Robson testified. And James was just a child when he said that, he never defended Michael as an adult. You should look into the trauma that child abuse victims experience.
Comment has been collapsed.
It shouldn't be banned from stores, but I can easily see how some (probably a lot of) people can dislike an idea of hearing certain music in public places. Personally I don't think that songs by an alleged pedophile are appropriate for a family caffee, for instance.
Comment has been collapsed.
Michael Jackson was, in my opinion, a victim.
Banning his music is very stupid because his music never harmed someone and not tried to make people angry or spread hate.
If they ban RAP Music or such stuff, after something CLEAR appeared (not only rumors) around the artist, i can understand that but not for music that don't use bad words, don't spread hate and so on.
Each one can decide if he want to spend money for music. So each have power about this part of a musicans work.
Comment has been collapsed.
And the thing is his music is also used/influenced in other songs, what's about alien ant farm's - smooth criminal?)
Comment has been collapsed.
i agree, such accusing medially journalist/companies should be banned, for how long they will make money on black propaganda attacking famous persons? there are other places for finding truth and there MJ won his cases, end of story.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you're asking whether radio stations or private businesses should be able to remove certain songs and artists from their playlists... of course. It's their decision.
If you're asking whether the government should officially ban certain songs and artists from being played anywhere... of course not. That's censorship.
Comment has been collapsed.
In general, I'm anti-censorship. That said, however, ban the music in public places. That seems perfectly fine to me. Ban it from the radio. Also fine.
However, what you listen to in your own personal home/space is one hundred percent up to you. If they try to erase the music from existence, that is a problem.
I recognize the logic behind "separate the works from the artist," but I don't believe in glorifying individuals OR their work when you know the person is or has done something reprehensible.
It's painful, but we have to come to terms with people we've let slide for far too long. That's why I'm no longer a Clinton-supporter, for example. It is what it is, and we have to learn how to co-exist in this world. As long as you're allowed to listen to what you want and support who you want in your own personal lives, I don't see that there is any harm in any of this.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, I think Michael Jackson's music needs to be banned from radio stations and streaming services. What people listen to in their own private homes is their own problem, but I don't think we should be blasting songs from pedophiles in public. I think that sends a very wrong message for society.
And this "music should be separated from the artist" argument is bullshit, especially in Michael Jackson's case, because he used his art to groom kids. Kids are essentially a part of his art, how can you just ignore that? If you read some of his lyrics, they are very creepy. Would you listen to a song that was recorded by Hitler just because the song was good? There are millions of songs in the world. Surely you won't die if you never listen to a song from a horrible human being again. Listen to Janet Jackson, she's not a pedophile.
Comment has been collapsed.
Couldn't agree more.
As an aside, Hitler was a painter:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paintings_by_Adolf_Hitler
So, you can make a more direct comparison.
Comment has been collapsed.
Here's a little reminder that it's entirely possible that your favorite NFL, NCAA or high school team's "spirit band" or DJ is probably playing a song by convicted child rapist and (kid-) sex tourist Gary Glitter.
If you're hearing "Rock'N'Roll Part 1" or "Doctoring the TARDIS" at sporting events, Gary likely gets some portion of the licensing fees that the venue pays every year to maintain the right to play music without getting sued.
Comment has been collapsed.
I say... no.... Why not?
There is simply not enough time to worry myself about what bad stuff people in the entire world do.
For example. We all use Asian products and even if they aren't technically an Asian product it is often made in those countries.
Should I not buy Nike's because there is a big chance they are made in a sweatshop (maybe even by child labor)?
Should I not buy a Korean motherboard because the people there work 12 hours a day, sleep in a small pull out bed at work during weeks days, and they are only at home during the weekend for a crappy wadge?
Should I not listen to Elvis who died of drugs and by buying drugs he helps to finance criminals?
If you start worrying about ALL the bad people do then you won't have time to live yourself. It is better to mind your own business.
To me it doesn't matter if it's a celebrity or "John Smith". The deed stays just as evil.
Btw. Of course it is horrible what these people did, if it is true (I simply don't know). I also didn't watch Michael Jackson's docu or anything and I also don't read tabloids so I don't know much about it and I would like to keep it that way.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's different when you know about it. It's the same with food. You could eat in a restaurant where the waiter spits on your food and think it's the most delicious food in the world, but as soon as you find out that they're doing it, I bet you'll never step foot in that restaurant again. So yes, if we find out that Nike's shoes are made by child labor we should stop buying their shoes, there are plenty of other shoes out there. I definitely don't think we should obsess over it, but when you find out about it, I think any moral person would reconsider their position.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well no, of course I woulnd't go to that restaurant because it directly effects me. Gross and I rather not their sick. :P
If we find out? It is widely known Nike had child labor in the past. Yet it is probably still one of the biggest shoe companies.
The worlds biggest problem (in my opinion) is the over population. It is literally killing our planet and every living creature and plant in it and everybody knows this. Does that mean we should boycott everybody who has kids?
Comment has been collapsed.
And you don't think that financially supporting a pedophile is gross? Well, I didn't know about that, but I don't buy Nike shoes anyway.
Your comparisons make 0 sense. How is child labor related to over population at all?
Comment has been collapsed.
Of course financially supporting a pedophile is gross. (I don't know why you made that up because my initial post I said it is horrible what he/they did, if it is true.)
Of course buying products made by child labor is bad.
Of course having kids is selfish because you are literally killing the world just because you think "kids are cute and they give meaning to your life"
Of course listening to music of a person who financially supported criminals is bad.
All of my points weren't comparisons, that is why it makes 0 sense to you. They are just examples of bad things in the world (that is how they are related) to demonstrate my point which I mentioned in my initial post.
"If you start worrying about ALL the bad people do then you won't have time to live yourself." There are really too many bad people and bad things in the world.... And where do you draw the line of what is good, bad or acceptable?. You are using a computer right now which you don't need to survive, which uses electricity, which helps global warming. Are you good because it gets warmer? Are you bad because because you indirectly kill things? Or is it acceptable because it "isn't a big deal?".
Also, it is simply not my job to punish the bad people of this world. And I am glad, because there really isn't enough time for that. That's why we have a legal system and judges.
Comment has been collapsed.
I said that because you implied you would still listen to the songs, but you would no longer go to the restaurant. I was looking for consistency.
Having kids might be selfish, depending on the circumstances, but it's not a crime. It's not a horrible thing to do. If everyone stops having kids then the human race dies. I draw the line where my moral compass draws the line. Depends on the electricity, clean energy doesn't help global warming.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nah, I wouldn't buy that crappy music to begin with.
Having kids might not be a crime. But us all having too many kids is most definitely a VERY horrible thing to do.
But who are we as a people to decide what should be banned or not? Then why do we have a legal system? Can't you just decide for yourself you don't want to buy the CD? Why should it be banned? It is just them "pretending to be the good guy". These stories have been around for many years, but it didn't bother them while they were still making fat cash of it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Horrible in a different sense. It's not horrible in the same sense as molesting kids, but I would agree that it's horrible in the sense that you don't care much about the world.
What does the legal system have to do with it? If an artist goes to jail there's no legal requirement for their art to be banned, we have to make that decision as a society. Why do you get to decide if you don't want to buy a CD but a store doesn't get to decide if they don't want to sell it? If you're so desperate to get the CD, you can always do it illegally by pirating it. And it's not like every store in the world will do it. This isn't a government-required ban we're talking about, it's companies banning things, which is not censorship at all. If you're a private company, then it's your right to decide what you want to associate yourself with.
It's different. We never looked into the Michael Jackson accusations under the eye of the #MeToo movement, and the documentary brings up new stories.
Comment has been collapsed.
The legal system decides what kind of punishment is appropriate for a certain crime so to me it has a lot to do with it. If every single criminal would not be able to ever work and make money anymore they will just live of welfare or will do criminal things again to make money again. Neither of those options are good.
Of course stores and radio stations are allowed to not play or sell it's music. I never said they weren't. The topic isn't about that. It is about if they SHOULD ban it. And I think they shouldn't. In my opinion people should be able to decide for their selves what they choose to buy or not.
So now lets make a comparison. If you do believe it should be banned, Do you also believe the Quran should be banned from bookstores because the Prophet Muḥammad had sexual relations with a 9 year old girl? Should a church be closed if a catholic priest used to molest young boys there? Or should we all be able to decide for ourselves what our beliefs are and what we want to do and buy? Personally I rather decide for myself, I like to have that freedom.
I have not seen the documentary because I am really not into that kind of "entertainment" so I wouldn't know.
Comment has been collapsed.
They are private companies, so they should also be able to decide for themselves. Again, I'm not saying there should be a law requiring every company to abide. But if a company doesn't want to sell things from a pedophile, they shouldn't have to, just to please some people that want the freedom to choose. Like I said, you want to listen to a song that is banned on Spotify? There are plenty of other ways for you to listen to that song.
This reminds me of the recent case where Steam banned a rape game from their store. Should they be able to do that? Yes. A company shouldn't have to offer its customers the choice of buying a rape game if they don't want to. You want to play that game? Go do it elsewhere. Start your own game store and buy the game from the developers.
And I wouldn't mind if libraries no longer wanted to have the Quran on their shelves at all, just the same as I wouldn't mind if the catholic church closed their businesses. It actually amazes me that they still have customers after so many scandals. Again, I'm not saying the government should do it, I'm saying these private companies should be able to decide for themselves. You can always start your own church if you want.
But let's just agree to disagree, this discussion clearly isn't going anywhere.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeh, of course they have the right ban their products. And I get where you are coming from. If I am totally honest. If the situation was a little different. I don't know if there is actual proof now. But if the person in question actually did do something disgusting like that, and he would still be alive. I wouldn't sell his product either :P. So I am a bit hypocrite :D
But to me it seems what they are doing now a bit like a media hype. The same with valve btw. They only banned that game because it got a lot of negative attention of the media. It is not like they actually care. They just don't want the bad reputation.
I actually did start my own church.
It is the "Church Of The Holy Penis Snake".
Would you like to join? I promise he exists!
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think removing his music from the radio is really about Micheal Jackson and his actions. Pulling his work now (emphasis on now) is about the industry trying to wash the blood and other stains out of their money. Allegations have been made many times in the past, there may be more details now, but the probability that Micheal Jackson was molesting kids has been known for a long time and yet the industry didn't care because he was making them rich. Now that his music isn't worth as much to them they're suddenly concerned about doing the right thing. I call bullshit. These people are as shallow as a piss puddle.
Comment has been collapsed.
Is that true though? He still has millions of fans around the world that will defend him no matter what, and they're a huge source of money. If anything, the industry will lose profit by removing his music. His fans are boycotting HBO and Oprah like hell.
Comment has been collapsed.
I highly doubt that HBO and Oprah will notice a drop in viewership, any loses would likely be eclipsed by those that have tuned in to see the drama unfold. I'm sure there will be those that stand something to lose from this, but for most of the industry the impact will be negligible. There are after all other newer artists who are far more profitable to them at the moment.
Comment has been collapsed.
I dunno, do this myself with my music collection but when it comes to denying people their living it becomes alot sketchier. Sure if they're convicted good oh lets not play any Gary Glitter but something like the Lostprophets (if you don't know, don't google it) fuck that guy but the rest of the band? For the most part people are more than willing to distance themselves in such circumstances but if one of the innocent bandmates started throwing around lawsuits claiming loss of income what exactly can one say? 'This makes me queasy, please go away' wouldn't really seem to cut it.
MJ is different. More power to anyone that wants to bring a civil suit against his estate but in terms of criminality we're never going to get that watertight judgement one way or another. Given the guy is dead and gone you do wonder why we can't just put his music in a box and consign it to history. His family have their money, there's no one going to be living on the streets if it just goes away. Civilisation will cope. We can just move on, it's curiously depressing that we don't.
Comment has been collapsed.
Regarding Lostprophets: I agree with you that the other band members are affected without doing anything bad, but since I had read about this, I couldn't listen to their old stuff anymore.
Comment has been collapsed.
When others start to ban sertain stuff or censor it.
Is it not a type pacifying?
Point is, they only ones interested in pacify the populus are those in power.
Comment has been collapsed.
no way!
I often hear metal bands that can't perform in some countries for religious or other weird reasons.. really, who cares?
if I like them I'm gonna see them and luckily my country permits to everybody to perform live, to ban music is literally stupid, not counting the fact that this of course genres.. what happened in USSR 30 years ago with "Western" music and so on..
I don't know even who r kelly is but who cares? If I like them I pay for them and such, if I don't like them I don't listen to the radio and I don't buy their cds and I ignore them totally, I don't really care if they make money or whatever else.. if they are some kind of thief or criminal or whatever, they need to be persecuted and punished, jailed, whatever else..
And of course I would never interfere with anyone's tastes, I would never suggest a Christian radio to put on black metal or whatever.. it's just that we need to separate artists and music, promote whoever we want, music should be free and this is one of the things I envy the most to the USA which in general have and give more freedom than our European states..
and that's why i've got Saoirse tattooed all over my right forearm.. =P
Comment has been collapsed.
Metal is a great talking point. I can despise Varg Vikernes for the piece of trash that he is, but I'll still listen to Burzum every once in awhile.
Comment has been collapsed.
same here. there are lots of artists that I could definitely -hate- for what concerns their beliefs, their lives and so on.. but on one hand, I don't really care that much about knowing the biography of every single musician and on the other hand, if I like their music I won't definitely stop listening to them just because of this.
I loved the first Burzum, and I proudly own albums such as Belus and Fallen, I really love them and I've been into metal since the early '90s, I saw lots of black metal concerts and I own lots of black metal albums.. I'm aware that some of these guys are criminals, supremacists, neo-nazis or whatever else, but as you said there are many Burzum records extremely good in quality and I have no problems at all in listening to them.
This doesn't make me a racist, a satanist (well, this was the imaginary in the '90s..) or someone who likes Vikernes' views, I don't agree with him on anything I think, but we would make a huge error to ban his music due to what he did before jail, and what he keeps on promoting. I'm against censorship 99% of the times, especially if we talk just about music..
as I have always been saying: if I had to worry about the single biography of every single musician I listen to, I would rather stop listening music at all.. 99% is an acceptable percentage to me
Comment has been collapsed.
Michael Jackson did nothing wrong. There is no proof. Imagine watching that documentary and just being like "yeah I trust these people." Years of investigation has proven the claims false. Do you really have that little free thinking skill?
Comment has been collapsed.
Those people could have still lied yet that doesn't mean nothing ever happened, unless you been there, and we weren't.
(And therefor i am not gonna remotely guess or say if he is guilty or not).
It's odd though what i said earlier that the guy from Home Alone (someone that been close with MJ and never accused him so we can assume that's true, but had an alarm button if someone came near his bedroom, and there are just such weird things that make people go say where there is smoke..
Comment has been collapsed.
He also held his baby out a window, had dozens nose surgeries, changed skincolors,had to cover himself up outdoors and what not.
I think it's more proof he was deranged/mentally impaired more than proof of being an abuser.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is all a point of view. MJ wanted to cure the World, and though his obsession seems too wild and strange to most people, I believe he was good... too good that some people saw it as weakness and wanted to exploit it for money by spreading lies about him. As OP said - we didn't know him and weren't there, so we can only try to guess, but I'd like to believe MJ was good.
Regardless, his music is art, had its own style and beats that a lot of artists copied (including Justin Timberlake), and the songs had good lyrics and vibe - true music, that didn't go full trend (maybe the melody/beats did, but not all of it). Today's Pop is really text with 3 words on repeat that is 3-4 minutes on every song (not literally in every case, but in some cases 100% accurate).
Comment has been collapsed.
Did I miss anything? Was MJ convicted of any crime or is it just some media hyping on the dead with their "mockumentary" again?
Comment has been collapsed.
I am 100% against banning any art, whether it be drawings/paintings/sculpture/music/movies/books/etc. . Anyone who thinks it's good to ban art of any kind can go fuck off. I don't care if you find it offensive or against your ideals, art should never be censored or banned.
I now await blacklists from the pro-censorship crowd (pictured below).
Comment has been collapsed.
+1
This is art:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_W0K_EkDoHk
Comment has been collapsed.
But you do realize that this is not what the thread is about but rather if radio stations and media outlets should choose not to promote these artists out of their own volition (or public pressure), right?
Comment has been collapsed.
@Sundance85
The thread might have turned to that, but it is not explicitly and only about that in its original creation of the poll / posing the question "Should their music be banned?". You do realise that in language there are always 3 things that something is "about" right? What the speaker/writer meant, what the listener/reader percieved and what the thing is "actually" about... whether 2 or all 3 coincide differs on many things, and one of them is a country's culture. So, I realize a lot of things and I am not 1-layered and don't realize the same thing as you. Nor should somebody only realize what you have realized. =) Just expressing thoughts, as a lot of people ask if such questions to people expressing opinions.
I also think you posed your question to @jiggakills, but my point stands.
Anyhow, I understand that some people wouldn't want to play MJ's music due to recent events, to be "on the safe side" and the owners should always have a choice like we have a choice of listening to the music we like. But in my opinion, if a person is so... weak, that he wants to take his life, playing music or not won't really matter...
Just because I want to share it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3h4WX2XzFc
Comment has been collapsed.
But in my opinion, if a person is so... weak, that he wants to take his life, playing music or not won't really matter...
I don't really think triggering suicide is the main concern here. I'm pretty sure those media outlets decided not to broadcast these artists out of respect for the alleged victims. (and public pressure)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I think you are right about that. Kinda what I wanted to express when I said "be on the safe side" but couldn't find the exact words to express it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It says right in the title "should __ music be banned?"
Being banned means creating a rule/law to forcibly prohibit something, which is the complete opposite of letting people choose what to do of their own free will.
Comment has been collapsed.
I will never, ever, support a ban of art, be, books, movies, music or videogames.
If I don't like something, I won't buy it. But I will never support a witchhunt.
If we start that way, it will never end. Give me 10people you strongly admire,10 things you love, I'll give you a 100 people that want to ban them.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know about other countries but recently a (local) radio station, spotify, stores, places like MC Donalds are banning f.e Michael Jackson, and well the same thing goes about R. Kelly, What do you think?
[Edit] This is not just about Michael Jackson (or to attack him or his music) it's also about R. Kelly that are both just current, but in a way also about any artist be it singer, actor (Roseanne Barr, Kevin Hart, Liam Neeson also got hit by their comments) or whatever celebrity, it seems the "banning" or "banishing" became a new thing to do.
Also where does it end, with Michael Jackson alot of his music is influenced by or used in other songs, and what about rap music that got funded by drugs money f.e or rockstars that behaved badly?
Comment has been collapsed.