From: mattb@ctron.com (Matt Brown)
Newsgroups: rec.music.gdead
Subject: Re: Tipper Update!
Date: 24 Jul 92 15:08:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: balrog.4581
Reply-To: mattb@olympus.ctron.com (Matt Brown)
Organization: Cabletron Systems INc.

There are few things worse than a newsfeed that delivers the responses before
the originals (I know, I know, at least I get News, etc.)

In this particular case, I've seen numerous replies quoting and refuting
individual sentences in Jordan's article, and thought "Man, this guy could
ghostwrite for Goebbels, or maybe even Newt Gingrich."

Now, after getting to read the complete article, I feel much differently about
what he has said.  I don't agree with him in many cases, but I also see that
the tone and the words chosen are more conversational than legalistic.  Now,
you can argue that they are imprecise, such as equating a right with a 
priveledge.  And in a legal argument, or coming from a politician, this would
indeed be constitutional fighting-words.  But I don't think Jordan was trying
to slip us a fast one; just was a little lax.  Some replies I saw went beyond
pointing out the difference (IMO).

To extend the discussion, I feel that some uses of free speech can be labeled
abuse of free speech; the question is -- how should society or an individual
react?  Not by banning or repressing that abuse, but by using free speech to
counter and expose it.  This is where the PC crowd becomes as big a problem
as the artists and rappers: They seek to prevent or chill expression, so that
the person who says "Kill xxxxxx's" or "xxxxxx on Jesus" is attacked, instead
of the words or the message.  It is fine to move society toward disapproval
of ethnic slurs in discourse.  It is repression to hound an individual for
expressing an idea, by implying that this exercise of free speech "proves"
that he or she is a racist, chauvinist, or whateverist.

The irony is that we allow Supreme Court judges to be appointed who say:
"I have no legal opinion on that issue, and I have not examined that case."
Yet we crucify a fool like Jimmy the Greek for making a comment that repeats
a (granted -- damaging and reprehensible) racial stereotype.  Look, the guy
said something stupid verbally, and he may personally be an asshole.  But
he is no David Duke, who has said such things -- not off the cuff, or foot
in mouth -- but in printed and distributed material as well.  Yet he almost
ends up running for president!

Personally, I disagree with a number of things Jordan said, or what he seems,
unwittingly or not, to be implying (actions = speech under law). It`s important
that people who disagree with spoken or published speech (be it Duke or Ice T
or Danny-boy) should take it to task, and encourage others not to support or
purchase the product, if they wish.  But they must not try to repress it.

As for Tipster, there are valid analogies between the entertainment industries,
and our society has generally accepted (or ignored) the use of warning labels.
But their use must be legitimate, and they must not be used to supress, merely
to inform.  If a toy is intended for kids 5-9, and judged safe for such but
not for under 5 (or too boring for over 9), that is useful information, but
it does not stop the parents of a 4 year old from buying it.  A record label 
that states the artist's intended audience could be designed to be helpful,
not chilling.  But this was, unfortunately, not the tone of the Tipper
campaign. 

Others have complained because Al Gore supported her. Oh, what a
shit, to support his wife!  Better to stand up in Congress and call her a
stupid bimbo, right? Maybe he disagrees, but is willing not to interfere with
her right to express and promote an opinion?  Maybe he thinks that women can
make such choices?  Maybe that's too much for PC pinheads to grasp?  
But nooooooooooooo! (at this point, the late John Belushi would fly off his
chair, and flailing arms and legs, disappear under the table.  I shall do 
the same, having far overextended my daily alloted bandwidth.)

ODC: If you don't think this discussion is relevant to the Dead, then kiss
your favorite venue good-bye.  Oh, and could you please wear this warning
label -- Deadheads are a dangerous influence on youth under 18 -- just apply  
it between your nose and your chin, like this.
 
Matt
The moral (if any) is "do not unwittingly become that which you condemn."
dizzy with possibillities.
Newsgroups: rec.music.gdead