U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

81–964CC 2002

RECORDING INDUSTRY MARKETING

PRACTICES: A CHECK-UP

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND 

THE INTERNET

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 

COMMERCE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

OCTOBER 9, 2002

Serial No. 107–132

Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE 

W.J. ‘‘BILLY’’ TAUZIN, Louisiana, Chairman 

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

FRED UPTON, Michigan 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio 

JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania 

CHRISTOPHER COX, California 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky 

GREG GANSKE, Iowa 

CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia 

BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico 

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona 

CHARLES ‘‘CHIP’’ PICKERING, Mississippi 

VITO FOSSELLA, New York 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

TOM DAVIS, Virginia 

ED BRYANT, Tennessee 

ROBERT L. EHRLICH, Jr., Maryland 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 

GEORGE RADANOVICH, California 

CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

MARY BONO, California 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

ERNIE FLETCHER, Kentucky 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan 

HENRY A. WAXMAN, California 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

RALPH M. HALL, Texas 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York 

FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

BART GORDON, Tennessee 

PETER DEUTSCH, Florida 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

BART STUPAK, Michigan 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

TOM SAWYER, Ohio 

ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

KAREN MCCARTHY, Missouri 

TED STRICKLAND, Ohio 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin 

BILL LUTHER, Minnesota 

LOIS CAPPS, California 

MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania 

CHRISTOPHER JOHN, Louisiana 

JANE HARMAN, California 

DAVID V. MARVENTANO, Staff Director 

JAMES D. BARNETTE, General Counsel 

REID P.F. STUNTZ, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND THE INTERNET

FRED UPTON, Michigan, Chairman 

MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida 

JOE BARTON, Texas 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

Vice Chairman 

PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio 

CHRISTOPHER COX, California 

NATHAN DEAL, Georgia 

BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming 

JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois 

HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico 

CHARLES ‘‘CHIP’’ PICKERING, Mississippi 

VITO FOSSELLA, New York 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

TOM DAVIS, Virginia 

CHARLES F. BASS, New Hampshire 

LEE TERRY, Nebraska 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

W.J. ‘‘BILLY’’ TAUZIN, Louisiana 

(Ex Officio) 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

BART GORDON, Tennessee 

BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois 

ANNA G. ESHOO, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

KAREN MCCARTHY, Missouri 

BILL LUTHER, Minnesota 

BART STUPAK, Michigan 

DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado 

JANE HARMAN, California 

RICK BOUCHER, Virginia 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

TOM SAWYER, Ohio 

JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan, 

(Ex Officio) 

(II) 

2

C O N T E N T S 

Page

Testimony of: 

Marmaduke, John, President and CEO, Hastings Entertainment, Inc., 

on behalf of National Association of Recording Merchandisers ................ 24

Peeler, C. Lee, Deputy Director, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal 

Trade Commission ........................................................................................ 8 

Rich, Michael, Children’s Hospital Boston/Harvard Medical School, on 

behalf of American Academy of Pediatrics ................................................. 13

Rosen, Hilary, Chairman and CEO, Recording Industry Association of 

America .......................................................................................................... 17

Severson, Gary, Senior Vice President and General Merchandise Manager, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc ........................................................................... 29

Simmons, Russell, Chairman, Hip Hop Summit Action Network ................ 22

Material submitted for the record by: 

EMI Recorded Music, letter dated October 29, 2002, to Hon. W.J. ‘‘Billy’’

Tauzin ............................................................................................................ 54

Evans, LaVerne, Senior Vice Presidend and General Counsel, Legal and 

Business Affairs, BMG, prepared statement of .......................................... 52

Sony Music Entertainment Inc., letter dated October 31, 2002, to Hon. 

W.J. ‘‘Billy’’ Tauzin ....................................................................................... 53

Universal Music Group, letter dated October 31, 2002, to Hon. Billy 

Tauzin ............................................................................................................ 56

Warner Music Group, letter dated October 31, 2002, to Hon. Billy Tauzin 55

(III) 

(1)

RECORDING INDUSTRY MARKETING 

PRACTICES: A CHECK-UP 

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2002

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON TELECOMMUNICATIONS

AND THE INTERNET, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:14 a.m., in room 

2123, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Fred Upton (chairman) 

presiding. 

Members present: Representatives Upton, Shimkus, Tauzin (ex 

officio), Gordon, and Harman. 

Also present: Representative Towns. 

Staff present: Linda Bloss-Baum, majority counsel; Will 

Nordwind, majority counsel; Hollyn Kidd, legislative clerk; Jon 

Tripp, deputy communications director; and Brendan Kelsay, minority professional staff member. 

Mr. UPTON. Good morning, everyone. 

I am going to start off by asking unanimous consent that other 

members of the full committee may participate in this subcommittee hearing and would note that we are probably a little 

shorter on members than is certainly the norm. The reason, we 

were supposed to have votes yesterday, and they postponed those 

votes until today. So many members, as we all traveled home to 

our districts and States over the weekend—a number of folks now 

know they don’t have to be back until 6:30 tonight instead of 6:30 

yesterday. But since we had already noticed the hearing and we 

had people, logistics that we needed to follow through, we decided 

to go ahead with the hearing this morning. 

Today’s hearing is entitled Recording Industry Marketing Practices: A Check-Up. As I round the corner toward 50—my New 

Year’s resolution was to move that to 40, I would note—I would 

recognize that, when it comes to your health, it pays to have annual checkups. And while such annual doctors’ visits can be uncomfortable, they help chart your progress toward whatever health 

goals your doctor has set, whether it is to be losing weight, drinking less coffee, exercising more, whatever. It has been a little over 

a year since our last visit with the recording industry, so we 

thought it would be a good time to have an annual checkup. 

As the parent of two young kids, an 11-year-old and a 14-yearold, I believe that there is no replacement for parental supervision 

when it comes from protecting kids from inappropriate content. 

However, parents do need the proper tools to make decisions about 

2

what might or might not be appropriate for their kids; and that is 

the very essence of what Mr. Markey, Mr. Shimkus, and I have 

been doing through our dot.kids bill, creating new domain for the 

Internet which would provide parents with a place where they can 

send their kids and know that they will be safe, much like the children’s section of the library. 

I would note that that legislation passed in the House overwhelmingly earlier this year, and we are waiting for Senate action 

in the next, hopefully, couple days. 

But looking back at the medical charts from our last hearing, I 

recall closely examining the tools which the recording industry provides parents to help them protect their kids from inappropriate 

material; and one deficiency which I noted was the lack of any specific descriptive information on the parental advisory label, unlike 

the parental advisory labels of the motion picture and video games, 

which provide more specific information to parents on why something is rated the way that it is. 

At the last year’s hearing I asked the RIAA whether it planned 

on improving its label by making similar information available to 

parents, and the answer that I think all of us received was no. Like 

a good doctor, I prescribed precisely that course of action that I 

thought ought to be appropriate to the RIAA. 

Since that time, one of the RIAA’s biggest member companies, 

BMG, has begun including more specific information in its parental 

advisory label; and I look at this CD here with exactly that label. 

It talks about strong language, violent content, sexual content; and 

I applaud them for their corporate responsibility and leadership in 

that regard. 

Today, I, along with Chairman Tauzin and Congressman 

Shimkus and other members of this subcommittee, are calling on 

the RIAA and its other major member companies—Warner, Universal, EMI, Sony—to hopefully get on the same song sheet as 

BMG. 

So I look forward to talking about this issue today, and I thank 

the RIAA in advance for testifying and hopefully for assisting the 

subcommittee in its efforts to learn whether or not these other companies are going to get in tune with BMG, and if not, why not? In 

fact, we hopefully will have a letter that we will be sharing with 

you that you might want to send to the other members’ CEOs to 

respond to the inquiry that we will put into the record. 

Finally, I want to thank the FTC for its continued diligence in 

providing this committee with its follow-up reports. They are very 

helpful diagnostic tools used in our checkups. The most recent report suggests that the recording industry practices reveal a mixed 

picture; and while that is a better diagnosis than the previous year, 

I would note that the recording industry is not yet out of the 

woods. 

As for myself, I believe that the First Amendment does make it 

inappropriate to legislate in these matters. However, just because 

you have the right to do something doesn’t make it the right thing 

to do. Therefore, we expect and would hope that the recording industry continue working with Congress and this subcommittee to 

do the right thing for all of America’s parents and their kids. 

3

Now, I would yield to my friend from Tennessee, Mr. Gordon, for 

an opening statement. 

Mr. GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just to note, I have recently passed that 50 corner that you had mentioned, and I survived; and I think you will live to tell about it. Also. 

Let me add my welcome to everyone here today. I think Chairman Upton has done a good job in outlining the scope of our hearing today. Unfortunately, our resident expert in lyrics, Ed Markey, 

couldn’t be here, and so let me add just a quick bit of real-world 

thoughts to this issue. 

Let me first say that my grandfather used to tell me that the 

most important road in the county was the one in front of your 

house. I have an 18-year-old baby girl at home, so I am viewing 

the world a little differently than I used to. I guess her two favorite 

things, one is the walk we take every morning looking for dogs in 

the neighborhood and the other thing is dancing to her music 

video. She loves to dance to that video. Now, she is not talking yet, 

but I think she is—or she is starting to talk a little bit, and I think 

she understands a lot more. So in our walks every morning I have 

explained to her the evils of dating, and I think I am breaking 

through on that one, I hope. 

Mr. UPTON. Now, did you say 18 months or 18 years? 

Mr. GORDON. She is 18 months. 

You have got to get started on that one. And repetition doesn’t 

seem to bother her, but I am just about to gag on the hokey-pokey, 

and it is time for us to go get another video. And when we go get 

that video, I am really interested in knowing what tools am I going 

to have in trying to find out what would be a good video for her. 

I want to be sure that, you know, we get the bunny hop and not 

Bunny—or the best of Bunny’s lap dances. So what tools am I 

going to have, and does the panel think those tools are going to be 

adequate? And, if not, what would you suggest would be adequate 

in helping me? 

So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. UPTON. Thank you, Mr. Gordon. 

Mr. Shimkus. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling this hearing 

and for your and Chairman Tauzin’s work on following up on what 

is a very important area of our committee’s jurisdiction. This is a 

very important hearing, and I would like to thank all the witnesses 

for coming this morning to share your expertise on this industry. 

We have an excellent, well-rounded panel. 

I would like to especially thank Hilary Rosen for being here. I 

understand you took the Red Eye. This can’t be your favorite topic, 

but—even after a little night’s rest, but I am grateful. 

The origins of this hearing go back to September, 2000, when the 

FTC issued a report which found that three entertainment industries—movies, music, and video games—were engaged in widespread marketing of explicit content to children that was inconsistent with the warning messages on their own label. So that is 

the start of why we are here today, is the inconsistency of the label 

with what was actually in the content. Further, the FTC found that 

advertisement for such products frequently failed to contain rating 

information. 

4

The following year, the movie and video game industry got better 

marks for cleaning up their act, but the recording industry earned 

another unsatisfactory grade. While the music industry has taken 

a few positive steps since last year’s hearing, a lot more needs to 

be done. 

I also praise BMG for the implementation of a new rating system 

that is designed to give parents and consumers more information 

about the music they buy. I hope the rest of the record labels will 

do the same, because I believe more information for parents is essential. 

I would also like to take this opportunity to highlight the continued progress the video game industry has made. According to the 

FTC report, they have responded to our concerns proactively by 

adopting numerous voluntary standards that discourage the targeting of children for mature rated products and require the disclosure of rating information in most forms of advertising. 

In addition, the industry has in place an extensive system to enforce those standards and bring about continued improvement in 

industry practices, and I think most of us would like to see the industries do similar. Rather they do it than we do it through legislation. 

Although I sympathize that music is a much more complex entertainment product to deal with than video games, I think the video 

industry can be used as a role model for marketing practices. 

I would like to end by expressing a gentle reminder to the record 

labels today: Your representatives come to my office on a regular 

basis asking for assistance in fighting Internet piracy and on other 

matters important to your industry’s bottom line. And don’t get me 

wrong, I agree with your argument: Stealing is wrong. It is immoral. But so is marketing explicit content to our youth. Parents 

have a hard enough job in our environment today without being 

undermined by music labels pushing the sale of smut at the expense of our children’s moral health. 

We are bringing you all up here again because we are looking for 

improvement in your corporate citizenship. I don’t think I speak for 

only myself when I say if we don’t see some genuine effort to improve labeling and marketing practices, we will start questioning 

the sincerity of other efforts. 

A lot of us will say as grandparents, or I am a father of three 

small boys—9, 7, and one will be 3 next week—this is a different 

environment. We no longer live in the Ozzie and Harriett days. So 

all we are asking for is help. And if we can get help, we will be 

very grateful. If we don’t get help, then we will have to try to move 

on the legislative agenda. 

With that, I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back my time. 

Mr. UPTON. Thank you. 

I recognize the gentleman from New York, Mr. Towns. Welcome. 

Mr. TOWNS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for allowing 

me to participate in today’s hearing on an issue that is increasingly 

important to me and to a large number of my constituents. 

In addition to the other witnesses in attendance today—I am 

pleased to welcome all of the witnesses, but I would especially like 

to welcome Russell Simmons from New York to the committee 

hearing. 

5

I appreciate the work that members of the committee and the 

FTC have done on the market of entertainment content and products. Entertainment plays a vital role in our society and providing 

consumers the information they need through labeling to make an 

informed decision before purchasing a product that contains explicit content is crucial. Parents today have a tougher job keeping 

up with their children in a world where kids seem to grow up more 

quickly than ever. I am heartened by the industry’s efforts at selfregulation to assist parents by labeling content that could be considered offensive. 

Due to the downturn in CD sales over the past few years, I truly 

believe we should be questioning the illegal music swapping services where teenagers download the vast majority of music today. I 

am also deeply troubled at the attitude of some who are saying 

that self-regulation is not working. I believe it is up to the consumers and parents to decide what is appropriate and inappropriate for different age groups. 

The fact of the matter is that music reveals many truths about 

the social and political realities facing our Nation and our world 

today, particularly the African American community; and it is simply wrong for anyone to suggest that music and the messages contained are not suitable for America’s teens because, in some cases, 

it contains explicit lyrics. 

Make no mistake about it, the debate is fueled largely by those 

who are uncomfortable with the way African Americans express 

their culture through music. When artists use explicit language, 

there is a label that clearly informs consumers of that fact. But, 

again, explicit language does not alone make a recording inappropriate for teens. I do believe it is important to consider the social 

value and messages contained within these recordings. Some of the 

most popular songs in the civil rights movement and the Vietnam 

war actually commented on our society. I mean, we have to think 

about that that is where those songs came from, out of those experiences. 

If people are upset about the content flowing from the artists’

pen, then maybe what we really need to do is use our energies to 

change the society that the artists are living in and describing. Because they are describing their conditions, they are describing what 

they are going through, they are describing what they are experiencing and seeing every day of their life. 

I look forward to the testimony today from the witnesses. And on 

that note, Mr. Chairman, again I thank you for allowing me to participate, and I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. UPTON. Thank you. 

I would recognize the gentlelady from California, Ms. Harman. 

Ms. HARMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Sitting here, I was thinking that it is deja vu all over again. I 

am looking at my notes of July 20, 2001, when we were all sitting 

here facing a similar panel. Jack Valenti is not there, but I trust 

he will receive my best wishes. But, otherwise, we are having the 

same conversation. 

I did want to say to you and Mr. Gordon that you may be getting 

older, but I am not. And, you know, I can’t imagine being as old 

as 50. I just want you to know that. 

6

Looking at my notes from last year, I still feel the same way I 

did last year. A lot of the content out there is violent and degrading, and I don’t want to listen to it, and I don’t want my four children to listen to it. However, I continue to feel that it is parents 

who need to make judgments about their children’s level of maturity, not us, and not any Federal agency. 

I want to commend BMG which has acted in the last year to set 

a very good example for the industry. That is useful, because that 

gives parents better tools to make judgments about our own children. 

One other thing that has changed since last year is that my 

youngest daughter, whom I described last year and I described our 

arguments about whether she should go to Eminem concerts, has 

been to another Eminem concert and survived it. She has also 

graduated high school, and she is now a—from my observation— quite a responsible freshman in a good college. So, kids do grow up 

and parents, even very busy and distracted parents like me, try our 

hardest to help them grow up and help to supervise what it is that 

they hear and do. 

I just think, as you said yourself, Mr. Chairman, that the First 

Amendment is a cornerstone of our democracy. It requires us to 

permit free speech, but it also requires us to be vigilant and responsible as we help our children understand what speech they 

should hear and what speech they should not hear. 

I would just close by observing that I am sure that most of our 

witnesses are parents. I know that Hilary Rosen is a parent of two 

children, and I am absolutely certain that when her children are 

old enough—I don’t think they are yet—to listen to recorded music, 

that she will exercise her responsibilities as a parent, just as we 

do. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. UPTON. Thank you very much. 

[Additional statement submitted for the record follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. W.J. ‘‘BILLY’’ TAUZIN, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON

ENERGY AND COMMERCE

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important hearing today. I want to commend you and the Subcommittee for its ongoing leadership on this important issue 

regarding how explicit content is labeled and marketed to our nation’s youth. 

Fourteen months ago in this very room, we brought together representatives of 

the motion picture, video games and recording industry to discuss a recent FTC Report about the marketing of violent material to minors. At that memorable hearing, 

we discovered that two of the industries had made significant progress on rating 

and labeling systems to provide consumers with information about the content of 

the entertainment they bought. However, that hearing alerted us that the recording 

industry had a ways to go in order to catch up to their industry counterparts’ rating 

systems. Members of the Committee asked serious poignant questions of the industry about how it labels and markets its material and some of us urged the industry 

to seek input from parents and third parties. Today—a little over a year later . . . it 

is time for a check up. 

At that hearing last July, I urged the recording industry to simply give parents 

a little more information about how violent or how explicit the content of the music 

is. I asked them to listen to the voices of American parents and give their rating 

and labeling system a second look. Some parents in America fear that some of this 

music is killing their values systems and their kids’ innocence and they would like 

to know more about the content of their entertainment before they go out and buy 

it. As Members of Congress we have the privilege to help influence many policies 

that affect our constituents’ lives. But one thing we can not do is directly control 

the music that America’s kids listen to. But we can help, and want to help, parents 

7

be the best parents they can be... and we hope that is a goal that we share with 

the recording industry. 

The FTC has done an extraordinary job of reporting to Congress about the ongoing progress these industries have made. I want to thank you and I commend you, 

Mr. Peeler for the Commission’s ongoing work in this area. Your report suggests 

that, while the recording industry has made some progress in disclosing its explicit 

warning labels in advertising, that advertising still appears on television shows and 

in print magazines that are popular with teens. If these marketing practices are to 

continue—and I understand the business reality to do so—then it becomes even 

more necessary to provide as much information, in the clearest possible fashion, for 

consumers who must make the choice about buying it. In my non-medical opinion—

it appears as though the recording industry still has a ways to go to catch up to 

other industries on the objective growth charts. 

I remain concerned about one particular issue that was raised last year, and appears to be equally as prevalent today. The labeling system on CDs will not work 

if consumers are not able to see it. I have here two identical CDs purchased from 

the same bin, right next to one another, at the same music retail outlet. One has 

the explicit warning label completely blocked by the pricing sticker while the other 

has about 2⁄3 of the label covered up. According to the FTC Report, the RIAA itself 

found no instances where price stickers obscured the label, but clearly this is a problem with the current system. I look forward to hearing more about the placement 

of price stickers and warning labels from Mr. Marmaduke, with the National Association of Recording Merchandisers and the other witnesses this morning. 

We have done our best to turn up the volume for the recording industry on this 

important issue. Some have heard us. BMG has announced its new detailed system 

of parental warnings that includes specific information about why the content is explicit. I am proud to join Chairman Upton, Mr. Shimkus and what I hope will be 

many other Members of the Subcommittee today in calling on the other major 

record labels to add their voice to the choir and provide similar information to consumers on their parental advisory systems. 

Once again, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this important hearing, and I 

look forward to hearing from our witnesses and asking them some questions.

Mr. UPTON. Well, we are fortunate to have the panel that we 

have today. They are a led by Mr. C. Lee Peeler—happy birthday, 

sir, today, as we talk about birthdays—Deputy Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection for the FTC. We have Dr. Michael 

Rich from Children’s Hospital Boston/Harvard Medical School, on 

behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics; Ms. Hilary Rosen, 

Chairman and CEO of the Recording Industry Association of America; Mr. Russell Simmons, Chairman of the Hip Hop Summit Action Network from New York; Mr. John Marmaduke, President and 

CEO, Hastings Entertainment, on behalf of the National Association of Recording Merchandisers; and Mr. Gary Severson, Senior 

VP and General Merchandise Manager for Wal-Mart here in Washington. 

We appreciated receiving most of your testimonies in advance. 

Last night, we were able to review those. We would like to limit 

your remarks initially to 5 minutes, if we can, and then we will do 

questions and answers. 

I know Chairman Tauzin is in a very important hearing upstairs, 

and he intends to be down at some point this morning as well. 

Mr. Peeler, we will begin with you. Thank you. 

8

STATEMENTS OF C. LEE PEELER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, BUREAU 

OF CONSUMER PROTECTION, FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION; MICHAEL RICH, CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL BOSTON/HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL, ON BEHALF OF AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS; HILARY ROSEN, CHAIRMAN AND CEO, 

RECORDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; RUSSELL SIMMONS, CHAIRMAN, HIP HOP SUMMIT ACTION NETWORK; JOHN MARMADUKE, PRESIDENT AND CEO, HASTINGS 

ENTERTAINMENT, INC., ON BEHALF OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF RECORDING MERCHANDISERS; AND GARY 

SEVERSON, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MERCHANDISE MANAGER, WAL-MART STORES, INC. 

Mr. PEELER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the findings of the Commission’s recent reports on 

the marketing of violent entertainment products to children by the 

motion picture, music recording, and electronic game industries. 

Each of these industries has put in place a self-regulatory system 

that rates or labels products and can help parents seeking to limit 

their children’s exposure to violent entertainment materials. 

My written testimony today represents the views of the Commission, while my responses to questions represent my own views; and 

I would ask that my written testimony be included in full in the 

record. 

In September 2000, in response to requests by the President and 

the Congress, the Commission issued a report on the marketing 

practices of the entertainment industry for violent, R-rated movies, 

mature-rated games, and explicit-content labeled music recordings. 

That report found that the movie, video game, and music industry 

had engaged in widespread marketing of violent movies, video 

games, and music to children. 

Since September 2000, the Commission has issued three followup reports. The reports examine the degree of compliance with industry guidelines for the disclosures of rating information and advertising and the labeling of these products. The reports also review the placement of advertising for rated or explicit content-labeled products. The reports document instances where some industry members have engaged in marketing practices that the Commission believes may undermine existing self-regulatory systems as 

well as instances where individual members have done more than 

their industry self-regulatory codes require. 

To follow up on the Chairman’s analogy, we view our job here 

very much as providing the Congress with factual information 

about what is taking place. I guess we would serve the roll of a radiologist: We will give you the information, and you can make your 

decisions on it. 

The Commission’s most recent report was issued in June of this 

year. With respect to movies and games, the report found progress 

in a number of areas, including substantial compliance with voluntary self-regulatory standards requiring the disclosure of rating, 

the labeling information and advertising and on product packaging. 

The Commission also found encouraging the widespread compliance by the movie and game industries with existing self-regulatory guidelines, limiting advertising placements for violent RVerDate 0ct 31 2002 15:17 Dec 06, 2002 Jkt 082882 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 W:\DISC\81964 81964
9

rated and M-rated entertainment products in media with a large 

percentage of teens in the audience. 

With regard to music, the Commission did find some progress in 

placing the parental advisory label in advertising and on labeling 

and was told by industry representatives that steps were being 

taken to further improve compliance even as our report was being 

prepared. 

With respect to explicit content, music advertising placements, 

however, the report found no change in industry practices since the 

September, 2000, report. The report notes that the music industry 

views its parental advisory labeling system as not being an agebased system but rather as an indication to parents that there is 

explicit content on a certain album. Thus, the industry’s self-regulatory code does not include restrictions on ad placement. 

In addition, the music industry’s labeling program does not require advertisers to indicate why the recording contains a parental 

advisory. Nonetheless, as Chairman Upton just indicated, in June 

of this year one industry member, BMG Entertainment, announced 

that it would begin to specify on labels and in advertising whether 

violent content, sexual content, or strong language led to the decision to apply the parental advisory label, and that they would include that same information in advertising. It is not known whether other industry members will adopt that step. 

In sum, the Commission reports have documented progress by 

the entertainment industry in complying with and improving their 

own self-regulatory policies, more in the movie and games industries and less in the music industry. Because of First Amendment 

and other issues, the Commission continues to support private sector initiatives by industry and individual companies to address 

these issues. To encourage continued voluntary compliance and to 

document any changes in self-regulatory efforts, the Commission 

will continue to monitor the entertainment industries’ marketing 

and practices throughout the next year and will issue a follow-up 

report to Congress. 

That concludes my prepared remarks, and I would be pleased to 

answer any questions you have. 

[The prepared statement of C. Lee Peeler follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LEE PEELER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF CONSUMER

PROTECTION, FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

I. INTRODUCTION

Mr. Chairman, I am Lee Peeler, Deputy Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the Federal Trade Commission. I thank you for this opportunity to discuss 

the Commission’s recent Reports on the marketing of violent entertainment products 

to children by the motion picture, music recording, and electronic game industries.1

Each of these industries has in place a self-regulatory system that rates or labels 

products and that can help parents seeking to limit their children’s exposure to violent materials. 

The Commission has issued four Reports on the marketing practices of these three 

industries. In particular, the Reports have examined voluntary guidelines and industry codes that govern the placement of advertising for violent Restricted (R)-

rated movies, Mature (M)-rated games, and Explicit-Content Labeled recordings in 

media popular with teens and require the disclosure of rating and labeling information in advertising and on product packaging. The Reports document instances 

where some industry members have engaged in marketing practices that undermined the self-regulatory systems that the industries themselves put into place, as 

10

well as instances where other individual members did more than their industry required. 

The Commission’s most recent Report, issued in June of this year, found progress 

in a number of areas. The Commission found substantial compliance by movies and 

games marketers, and, to a far lesser extent, by marketers of music, with voluntary, 

self-regulatory standards requiring the disclosure of rating and labeling information 

in advertising and product packaging. The Commission also found encouraging 

widespread compliance by the movie and game industries with existing guidelines 

limiting ad placements for violent R-and M-rated entertainment products in media 

with a large percentage of teens in the audience. 

Nonetheless, there are continued areas of concern. Existing voluntary guidelines 

for the movie and game industries still permit ad placements in media which are 

very popular with large numbers of teens. All three industries continue to place ads 

for rated or labeled products on television programs that are, according to Nielsen 

rankings, among the most popular shows watched by teens. And with respect to retail sales of violent entertainment products, although the motion picture industry 

has done the best job, all products remain easily available for purchase by young 

teens. 

Finally, despite a few initiatives during the period covered by the Commission’s last Report, special issues remain in the music industry, particularly in its ad placement practices. Although the self-regulatory codes of the movie and game industries 

place limits on the marketing of rated products to young people, the guidelines of 

the music industry do not. In the music industry’s view, unlike the rating systems 

of movies and games, its ‘‘Parental Advisory’’ Labeling Program is not age-based and 

is not intended to indicate whether labeled music may be inappropriate for any specific consumer age. 

II. BACKGROUND

The Federal Trade Commission is the federal government’s principal consumer 

protection agency. Congress has directed the Commission, under the FTC Act, to 

take action against ‘‘unfair or deceptive acts or practices’’ in almost all sectors of 

the economy and to promote vigorous competition in the marketplace.2 With the exception of certain industries and activities, the FTC Act provides the Commission 

with broad investigative and enforcement authority over entities engaged in, or 

whose business affects, commerce.3 The FTC Act also authorizes the Commission to 

conduct studies and collect information, and, in the public interest, to publish Reports on the information it obtains.4

Revelations that the teen-aged shooters at the 1999 Columbine High School shooting had been infatuated with extremely violent movies, music and video games led 

to Congressional and Presidential requests that the Commission investigate and report back on the practices of the movie, electronic game, and recording industries 

with respect to the marketing of violent entertainment to children. 

III. THE COMMISSION’S STUDIES

A. Scope of the Studies 

In response to these requests, the Commission has, to date, issued four Reports 

on the self-regulatory and marketing practices concerning violent entertainment by 

the movie, music and video game industries.5 In the course of preparing these Reports, the Commission staff requested information from the principal industry trade 

associations, as well as from major motion picture studios, music recording companies, and electronic game companies.6 In addition, the Commission staff contacted 

interested government agencies, medical associations, academics, and parent and 

consumer advocacy groups.7 The Commission collected information from consumers 

through surveys and polls and also designed and conducted its own surveys. In addition, the Commission conducted two mystery-shopper surveys of retail stores and 

movie theaters in an attempt to see if unaccompanied children could purchase or 

gain access to products labeled as inappropriate or warranting parental guidance. 

Lastly, the Commission staff reviewed Internet sites to study how they are used to 

market and provide direct access to rated or labeled products. 

B. Findings of the Commission’s First Report 

In September 2000, the Federal Trade Commission issued its first Report entitled, 

Marketing Violent Entertainment to Children: A Review of Self-Regulation and Industry Practices in the Motion Picture, Music Recording & Electronic Game Industries.8 That Report found that the three entertainment industries had engaged in 

widespread marketing of violent movies, music, and electronic games to children 

that was inconsistent with the cautionary messages of their own parental advisories 

11

and that undermined parents’ attempts to make informed decisions about their children’s exposure to violent content. In addition, the Commission found that advertisements for such products frequently failed to contain rating information. Finally, 

the Commission reported on the results of an undercover ‘‘mystery’’ shop by unaccompanied teens, aged 13-16, of retailers and movie theaters. The young shoppers 

were able to buy M-rated electronic games and parental advisory-labeled music recordings 85% of the time and purchase tickets for an R-rated movie almost half 

(46%) of the time.9

C. Findings of the Commission’s Follow-Up Reports in 2001

In response to Congressional requests, the FTC released two follow-up Reports in 

2001. Both Reports examined the entertainment industry’s practices with regard to 

marketing violent entertainment products to children. The April 2001 Report 10 concentrated primarily on advertising practices by the three industries on television, 

in print media and on the Internet. For the December 2001 Report, 11 the Commission staff contacted several companies within each of the three industries and requested marketing documents concerning violent movies, music and electronic 

games. In addition, the Commission conducted a second mystery shopper survey, 

like the one from the September 2000 Report. Finally, the Commission staff continued to monitor television, print and Internet advertising for placement and disclosure of rating and labeling information. 

These Reports noted progress by the movie and video game industries in providing clear and conspicuous disclosure of rating information in advertising as well 

as new efforts by both industries to limit advertising for R-rated movies and Mrated games in popular teen media venues. The music industry demonstrated mixed 

progress. On the plus side, members of the music industry had begun to comply 

with new industry guidelines encouraging the use of the Parental Advisory Label 

in advertising. But as for ad placement practices, the music industry continued to 

place advertisements for explicit-content recordings labeled with parental advisories 

in popular teen media.12

The results of the Commission’s second undercover shopper survey were included 

in the December 2001 Report. Although electronic game retailers showed modest improvement from the results in the Commission’s earlier undercover survey, there 

was no change in sales practices in the movie theater and music retailer industries. 

D. Findings of the Commission’s June 2002 Report 

In June of this year,13 the Commission issued its latest Report which looked at 

industry advertising placements and disclosure of rating and labeling information 

in television and print media. In addition, the Commission reviewed product packaging to check whether rating information was being disclosed clearly and conspicuously. This Report documented further progress by the movie and games industries 

in ad placement practices for R-rated movies and M-rated games, and showed continued improvement by all three industries in disclosing rating and labeling information in advertising and product packaging.14

Movies: In the case of movies, the most recent Report noted significant progress 

in complying with industry’s commitment, issued in response to the Commission’s 

first Report in September 2000, to not ‘‘inappropriately, specifically target children’’

in films rated R for violence.15 The June 2002 Report found virtually no ads for violent R-rated movies in popular teen magazines. In addition, the movie studios widely complied with industry policies set by several studios not to advertise R-rated 

movies in venues with a thirty-five percent or more youth audience share. However, 

even while complying with these policies, studios frequently advertised R-rated movies in television shows that are very popular with teens.16 Finally, the Report 

showed further progress by studios in disclosing a movie’s rating and rating reasons 

in advertising, although some studios’ rating disclosures were still difficult to read. 

Games: The Commission found widespread compliance with video game industry 

self-regulatory standards limiting the advertising of M-rated games in media where 

children constitute a certain percentage of the audience (35% for television and 45% 

for print media). Nonetheless, the Commission did find that some industry members 

did place advertisements for M-rated games on television shows popular with teens, 

and in youth-oriented game-enthusiast magazines. As the Commission noted in its 

December 2001 Report, the industry’s anti-targeting standards diminish—but do not 

eliminate—placements in programs mainly popular with teens. In addition, the electronic game industry continued to prominently place rating information in most 

forms of game advertising. Although some areas still could be improved (e.g., adding 

content descriptors in television advertising), there is much in the game industry’s 

rating disclosure requirements that merits duplication by others. 

12

Music: With regard to music, the Commission did find some progress in placing 

the Parental Advisory Label in industry advertising. The Commission’s review of explicit-content music ad placements, however, showed virtually no change in industry 

practices since the September 2000 Report. Advertisements continued to be placed 

on television shows and in print magazines popular with teens. The industry views 

its Parental Advisory Labeling System as not being an age-based system, but rather 

an indication to parents that there is explicit content on a certain album. Thus, the 

industry’s self-regulatory code does not include restrictions on ad placement. 

In addition, the music industry’s labeling program does not require that advertisers indicate why the recording contains a parental advisory. Nonetheless, in June 

of this year, one industry member, BMG Entertainment, announced that it will 

begin to specify on the label whether violent content, sexual content or strong language led to the decision to apply the Parental Advisory Label, and include that 

same information in its advertising.17 It is not known whether other industry members will also adopt this positive step. In the Commission staff’s ongoing monitoring 

of advertising, they have not yet seen ads by BMG artists that include this new 

label. 

IV. CONCLUSION

The Commission’s follow-up Reports have documented progress by the movie and 

electronic game industries in complying with and improving their own self-regulatory policies restricting ad placements and requiring rating information in advertising. 

Because of First Amendment and other issues, the Commission continues to support private sector initiatives by industry and individual companies to implement 

these suggestions. To encourage continued voluntary compliance and to document 

any changes in self-regulatory efforts, the Commission will monitor the entertainment industry’s marketing practices through the next year, and will then issue a 

follow-up report. 

This concludes my prepared remarks. I would be pleased to answer any questions 

you may have. 

Endnotes 

1The views expressed in this written statement represent the views of the Commission. My 

oral statement and responses to questions you may have are my own and are not necessarily 

those of the Commission or any individual Commissioner. 2 15 U.S.C. § 45(a). 3The Commission also has responsibility under 46 additional statutes governing specific industries and practices. These include, for example, the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601 

et seq., which mandates disclosures of credit terms, and the Fair Credit Billing Act, 15 U.S.C. 

§§ 1666 et seq., which provides for the correction of billing errors on credit accounts. The Commission also enforces over 30 rules governing specific industries and practices, e.g., the Used 

Car Rule, 16 C.F.R. Part 455, which requires used car dealers to disclose warranty terms via 

a window sticker; the Franchise Rule, 16 C.F.R. Part 436, which requires the provision of information to prospective franchisees; the Telemarketing Sales Rule, 16 C.F.R. Part 310, which defines and prohibits deceptive telemarketing practices and other abusive telemarketing practices; 

and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule, 16 C.F.R. Part 312. 

The Commission does not, however, have criminal law enforcement authority. Further, under 

the FTCA, certain entities, such as banks, savings and loan associations, and common carriers, 

as well as the business of insurance, are wholly or partially exempt from Commission jurisdiction. See Section 5(a)(2) and (6)a of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a)(2) and 46(a). See also The 

McCarran-Ferguson Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1012(b). 4 15 U.S.C. §§ 46(b) and (f). Section 46(f) of the FTC Act provides that ‘‘the Commission shall 

also have the power . . . to make public from time to time such portions of the information obtained by it hereunder as are in the public interest; and to make annual and special reports 

to Congress...’’ 5The Department of Justice provided the FTC with substantial funding and technical assistance to enable the FTC to collect and analyze public and non-public information about the industries’ advertising and marketing policies and procedures, and to prepare the Commission’s written Reports. The analysis and conclusions contained in these Reports are those of the FTC. 6The Commission received information from numerous individual companies, as well as the 

Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the National Association of Theatre Owners 

(NATO), the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the National Association of Recording Merchandisers (NARM), the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB), the Video 

Software Dealers Association (VSDA), the Interactive Digital Software Association (IDSA), the 

Interactive Entertainment Merchants Association (IEMA), and the American Amusement Machine Association (AAMA). 7 In addition to industry sources, the Commission received information from a wide range of 

consumer, medical, and advocacy organizations. The American Academy of Pediatrics, American 

Psychological Association, Center on Media Education, Center on Media and Public Affairs, Children Now, Commercial Alert, The Lion & Lamb Project, Mediascope, National Institute on 

Media and the Family, National PTA, and Parents’ Music Resource Center were among the organizations that provided information to the Commission. 

13

8The Commission’s September 2000 Report is available online at: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2000/ 

09/youthviol.htm. 9See Appendix F (Mystery Shopper Survey and Parent-Child Survey) of the Commission’s September 2000 Report. 10The Commission’s April 2001 Report is available online at: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2001/04/ 

youthviol.htm. 11The Commission’s December 2001 Report is available online at: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2001/ 

12/violence.htm. 12Music industry members continued to place ads on shows that are highly popular with 

teens, such as Total Request Live on MTV and 106th & Park on BET. 13The Commission’s June 2002 Report is available online at: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/06/ 

mvec0602rev.htm. 14 Commissioner Swindle, in his concurring statement to the Commission’s June 2002 Report, 

noted that ‘‘the music industry continues to target young people explicitly in its advertising and, 

for the most part, refuses to provide content-based information that could help consumers. The 

motion picture and electronic game industries have acted far more responsibly in improving 

their self-regulatory programs, yet continue to allow advertising of R-rated movies and M-rated 

games in venues that attract large numbers of teens.’’ 15Motion Picture Association of America, Initiatives of MPAA Member Companies, Sept. 26, 

2000. 16Movie industry members continue to place ads on shows that are highly popular with teens, 

such as Grounded For Life on Fox, Gilmore Girls on WB, WWF Smackdown on UPN, and MTV’s The Real World. 17See BMG News Release, BMG Announces Steps to Build On Industry’s Parental Advisory 

Program, June 3, 2002, available at http://www.bmg.com/news/archive—general/general— frameset.html (visited September 17, 2002). 

The revised sticker appears as follows:

Mr. UPTON. Thank you, Mr. Peeler. 

Dr. Rich. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL RICH 

Mr. RICH. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the 

committee. Good morning again. Thank you for the opportunity to 

testify before you today. 

My name is Dr. Michael Rich, and I am testifying on behalf of 

the American Academy of Pediatrics and its 57,000 members across 

the U.S. . 

As a pediatrician who specializes in adolescent medicine, I am 

keenly aware of how crucial music is to a teen’s identity and how 

it helps them to find important social and interpersonal behaviors. 

In fact, one study showed that 24 percent of high school students 

ranked popular music as one of their top three sources for guidance 

on social interactions. 

We often use music to define our beliefs and convictions. We are 

attracted to music that will confirm and support these beliefs and 

convictions. Music can truly affirm and confirm struggles, joys, sorrows, fears, and fantasies. 

During the past four decades, rock music lyrics have become increasingly explicit, particularly with reference to drugs, sex, violence, and sexual violence. Heavy metal and rap lyrics have elicited 

the greatest concern for experts as they compound the environment 


g:\graphics\81964.001
14

in which some adolescents increasingly are confronted with 

risktaking, substance abuse, pregnancy, homicide, and suicide. 

To date, no scientific studies have proved a cause-and-effect 

relaionship between violent or sexually explicit lyrics and adverse 

behavioral effects. Causality is exceedingly difficult to prove, as we 

have all witnessed in the debate about whether tobacco smoking 

causes lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke. However, all of us 

must pay attention to the strong associations that have been observed between music content and health outcomes. There is some 

music that communicates potentially harmful health messages, especially when it reaches a vulnerable and impressionable audience. 

The words and images evoked by popular music are powerful influences on how teachers—excuse me—are powerful influences on 

how teenagers are socialized. Youth who feel rejected and alienated 

are especially responsive to lyrics that glorify hostility and violence. 

Numerous studies indicate that a teenager’s preference for heavy 

metal music may be a significant marker for alienation, substance 

abuse, psychiatric disorders, and suicide risk, among others. 

The world can be a threatening and scary place, especially for 

young people who feel powerless, disenfranchised, disrespected due 

to economics, race, or beliefs. Artists should have the right to reflect that reality and to address any issue in any way that they 

choose. However, we must recognize that the content that we 

choose to listen to inevitably affects us, and we must choose accordingly. 

Changes in young people’s attitudes and behavior toward each 

other hurt all young people, regardless of their race, gender, religious, or ethnic backgrounds. It is in the child’s best interest to listen to lyrics or to watch videos that are not violent, sexist, drugoriented or antisocial. 

Music lyrics should be made easily available to parents so that 

they can read them before deciding whether to purchase the recording. To date, this has not occurred. Many recordings are broadcast 

in sanitized radio versions which are difficult if not impossible to 

buy retail. The current system of parental advisory labels provides 

inadequate information for parents to make appropriate choices for 

their children. To disclose the content of their product is not a violation of their rights but truth in advertising. 

From the perspective of a doctor who cares for and cares about 

children, this is simply about having the information necessary for 

parents to make a compassionate and safe choice for their children. 

The Academy has a number of recommendations to consider if we 

are to help families use the media in a positive way. Time limits 

me to the following: 

The music industry should develop and apply a system of specific 

content labeling of music regarding violence, sex, drugs, or offensive lyrics. We, too, applaud BMG for their leadership in this direction. 

Music lyrics should be made easily available to parents so that 

they can read them before deciding whether to purchase the recording. 

Research should be developed concerning the impact music lyrics 

have on the behavior of teenagers and children. 

15

Parents should take an active role in monitoring music that their 

children are exposed to and which they can purchase, as well as 

the videos they watch. In order to do so, they need the information 

to make that decision; and pediatricians should encourage parents 

to do this. 

Parents should also be reminded that if we as consumers do not 

buy or use entertainment media that are harmful to our children, 

these media would no longer be produced. Media are not the only 

cause of violence, sexism, racism, or health-risk behaviors, but they 

are a powerful influence on our young people over which we have 

some control. If we can make our lives and our future safer by paying attention to these issues and intervening where necessary, then 

we owe it to our children, ourselves, and our society to do so. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Michael Rich follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL RICH, AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS, 

COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC EDUCATION

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee. I want to thank you 

for the opportunity to testify before you today as a pediatrician, as a child health 

researcher, as a filmmaker, and as a parent. My name is Michael Rich, and I am 

testifying on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and its 57,000 pediatrician members. I am a member of the Academy’s Committee on Public Education. I practice pediatrics and adolescent medicine at Children’s Hospital Boston, 

and teach at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health. In my 

research, I study the effects of various entertainment media on the physical and 

mental health of children and adolescents. I actually began my professional career 

as a filmmaker. I love audiovisual media and continue to work in video and radio 

production, developing pro-child and health-positive media as tools for child health 

research, education, and advocacy. Finally, and most importantly, I am the father 

of a 16-year-old daughter and a 14-year-old son. 

IMPACT OF MEDIA ON HEALTH AND BEHAVIOR OF CHILDREN

Starting from when we are very young, we get the majority of our information 

from media, which includes television, movies, music, magazines, the Internet, video 

games, books, videos and all forms of advertising. While media offers us, including 

children, many opportunities to learn and to be entertained, how people interpret 

media images and media messages also can be a contributing factor to a variety of 

public health concerns. Among children and adolescents, research shows that key 

areas of concern are:

• Aggressive behavior and violence; desensitization to violence, both public and personal 

• Substance abuse and use 

• Nutrition, obesity and dieting 

• Sexuality, body image and self-concept 

• Advertising, marketing and consumerism 

As a result of this research, the AAP and its members have been working on 

many fronts to help parents and children glean the best from unending media exposure. The AAP launched its Media Matters campaign (www.aap.org/advocacy/

mediamatters.htm) five years ago to help pediatricians, other health professionals, 

parents and children become more knowledgeable about the impact that media messages can have on children’s health behaviors. Public education brochures on the 

media have been developed and distributed, including one that explains how the 

various ratings systems work. In addition, the Academy established a Media Resource Team (www.aap.org/mrt) in 1994 to work with the entertainment industry 

in providing the latest and most accurate information relating to the health and 

well being of infants, children, adolescents and young adults. 

Parents alone cannot stem the tidal wave of images their children are exposed to 

throughout a given day. They need help, particularly from the entertainment industry and retailers. 

16

Impact of Music Lyrics and Music Videos 

Pediatricians’ concern about the impact of music lyrics and music videos on children and youth compelled the American Academy of Pediatrics to issue a policy 

statement on the subject 13 years ago, with revised, updated versions developed and 

published multiple times since then. Policy statements communicate the official position of the Academy concerning health care issues, and help guide pediatricians 

in their assessment and treatment of patients. 

As a pediatrician who specializes in adolescent medicine, I am keenly aware of 

how crucial music is to a teen’s identity and how it helps them define important 

social and interpersonal behaviors. In fact, one study showed that 24% of high 

school students ranked popular music as one of their top 3 sources for guidance on 

social interaction. We often use music to define our beliefs and convictions. We are 

attracted to music that will confirm and support these beliefs and convictions. Music 

can truly affirm and confirm a teenager’s struggles, joys, sorrows, fears, and fantasies. 

During the past four decades, rock music lyrics have become increasingly explicit—particularly with reference to drugs, sex, violence and sexual violence. Heavy 

metal and rap lyrics have elicited the greatest concern, as they compound the environment in which some adolescents increasingly are confronted with risk-taking, 

substance use, pregnancy, HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, homicide and suicide. 

Despite stories in the popular press relating suicides, ritualistic killings and 

school shootings to popular music influence, to date, no scientific studies have 

proved a cause-and-effect relationship between violent or sexually explicit lyrics and 

adverse behavioral effects. Causality is exceedingly difficult to prove, as we have all 

witnessed in the debate about whether tobacco smoking causes lung cancer, heart 

disease, and stroke. However all of us, pediatricians, parents, and responsible members of society, must pay attention to the associations that have been observed between music content and health outcomes. There is some music that communicates 

potentially harmful health messages, especially when it reaches a vulnerable and 

impressionable audience. Teenagers become absorbed in songs they believe help better define them during this rocky transition into adulthood. The words and images 

evoked by popular music are powerful influences on how they are socialized. Youth 

who feel rejected and alienated are especially responsive to lyrics that glorify hostility and violence. Numerous studies indicate that a preference for heavy metal 

music may be a significant marker for alienation, substance abuse, psychiatric disorders, suicide risk, sex-role stereotyping, or risk-taking behaviors during adolescence. With the advent of MTV and VH-1, not only do we have to listen to violent 

lyrics, but we also get to see violent narratives graphically portrayed. Research 

studies indicate that music videos may have a significant behavioral impact by increasing violent attitudes and behaviors in viewers, desensitizing male college students to violence against women, disproportionately reinforcing racial and gender 

stereotypes, and by making teenagers more likely to accept and engage in unsafe 

sex. 

The world can be a threatening and scary place, especially for young people who 

feel powerless, disenfranchised, or disrespected due to economics, race, or beliefs. 

Artists should have the right to reflect that reality and address any issue in any 

way that they choose. However, we must recognize that the content that we choose 

to listen to inevitably affects us and we must choose accordingly. Changes in young 

people’s attitudes and behaviors toward each other hurt all young people, regardless 

of their race, gender, religious or ethnic backgrounds. Parents and pediatricians believe that it is important to know the contents of the food we feed our children’s 

bodies. To protect their physical and mental health, we should be equally aware of 

what, to paraphrase Jefferson Airplane, we feed their heads. 

AAP Recommendations 

Although there is no one solution, awareness of and sensitivity to the potential 

impact of music lyrics and videos by consumers, the entertainment and music industry is one important piece of the puzzle. It is in children’s and teenagers’ best interest to listen to lyrics or to watch videos that are not violent, sexist, drug-oriented, 

or antisocial. As a result, the Academy has, in our November 2001 policy statement 

on media violence, suggested that ‘‘music lyrics should be made easily available to 

parents so that they can read before deciding whether to purchase the recording.’’

To date, this has not occurred. Many recordings are broadcasted in sanitized radio 

versions, which are difficult, if not impossible, to buy retail. The current system of 

parental advisory labels applied by the producers themselves provides inadequate 

information for parents to make appropriate choices for their children. To disclose 

the content of their product is not a violation of rights, but truth in advertising. 

17

The Academy strongly opposes censorship. We advocate for more child-positive 

media. As a society, we have to acknowledge the responsibility that parents, the 

music industry and others have in helping to foster the nation’s children. The entertainment industry should extend personal concern for the well being of children to 

their business of creating and selling music, movies, television programming and 

video games. 

Although the evidence is incomplete, based on our knowledge of child and adolescent development, the AAP believes that the public, including the recording industry 

and parents, should be aware of pediatricians’ concerns about the possible negative 

impact of music lyrics and videos. The Academy recommends that:

• The music industry should develop and apply a system of specific content 

labeling of music regarding violence, sex, drugs, or offensive lyrics. We 

label the food we eat—why not label the music? Let the consumer, including 

parents and youth, know what the music contains and let the educated consumer make the decision. For those concerned about the ‘‘forbidden fruit’’ syndrome, one study has examined the impact of parental advisory labels, and it 

found that teens were not more likely to be attracted simply because of the labeling. • Music lyrics should be made easily available to parents so that they can 

read before deciding whether to purchase the recording. • Broadcasters and the music industry should be encouraged to demonstrate sensitivity and self-restraint in decisions regarding what is 

produced, marketed and broadcast. • Performers should be encouraged to serve as positive role models for 

children and teenagers. • Research should be developed concerning the impact music lyrics have 

on the behavior of adolescents and preadolescents. • Parents should take an active role in monitoring music that their children are exposed to and which they can purchase, as well as the videos 

they watch. Ultimately, it is the parent’s responsibility to monitor what their 

children listen to and view. Pediatricians should encourage parents to do so. • Pediatricians should counsel parents to become educated about the 

media. In order to help this process, the Academy has launched Media Matters, 

a national media education campaign targeted to physicians, parents and youth. 

The primary goal of the Media Matters campaign is to help parents and children understand and protect themselves against the sometimes negative effects 

of images and messages in the media, including music lyrics and videos. 

Media education includes developing critical thinking and viewing skills, and offering creative alternatives to media consumption. The Academy is particularly concerned about entertainment media images and messages, and the resulting impact 

on the health of vulnerable young people, in areas including violence, safety, sexuality, use of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drugs, nutrition, and self-concept and identity. 

For example, if a music video shows violence against women to any degree, a 

viewer, including young girls, could be led to believe such action is acceptable. If 

they were educated about the media, the premise in the video would be questioned 

and hopefully rejected. 

Parents should also be reminded that if we, as consumers, do not buy or use entertainment media that are harmful to children, these media would no longer be 

produced. Media are not the only cause of violence, sexism, racism, or health risk 

behaviors, but they are a powerful influence on these behaviors over which we have 

some control. 

There must be a collective solution to this social problem. Parents, pediatricians, 

the music industry and others have critical roles in discussing and addressing the 

increasing amount of violence in society, particularly when it comes to children and 

adolescents. If we can make our lives and our future safer by paying attention to 

these issues and intervening where necessary, then we owe it to our children, ourselves, and our society to do so. 

Thank you for your time today, and I am willing to answer any questions you may 

have.

Mr. UPTON. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Rosen. 

STATEMENT OF HILARY ROSEN 

Ms. ROSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Gordon. 

Thank you for having me here today. 

18

And, Mr. Shimkus, while I actually didn’t take the Red Eye last 

night, I am equally sleep deprived, having been up with a sick 

child all night. So if I am a little slow, I apologize. 

The RIAA is a trade association of record companies. Obviously, 

the recording industry’s marketing practices have been the focus of 

a significant amount of attention from this Congress and from the 

FTC over the last several years, and there has been significant 

change in these practices over the last several years, although I 

think it is worth noting that in the very first FTC study a public 

opinion poll showed that there was over 75 percent approval for the 

existing program before we made all of these changes. 

My written testimony has a description of all of our successful 

implementation of our guidelines which have been revised and put 

in place over the last 18 months. I will highlight a couple of them 

in short. 

Since much of the reason that music marketing is different from 

other media is the existence of edited versions of the same product 

which is sold with explicit versions, we have significantly increased 

awareness of edited versions of these recordings. We have put a 

new sticker on the package and have added new information about 

edited versions in all advertising. In addition, our periodic reviews 

have shown excellent compliance with our advertising guidelines, 

print, and TV publications. And, finally, we have continued our efforts with organizations who focus on opportunities for young people as well as troubled youth. 

Today, I am pleased to report a new partnership we recently developed with the National Mental Health Association, a partnership whose goal is to find creative and supportive ways to encourage young people who need help to seek such assistance. The National Mental Health Association views what Dr. Rich said as an 

opportunity. If young people are attracted to alienating music, that 

is a signal for adults to go in and help them intervene; and our 

project with NMHA will help find ways to encourage young people 

to do that. 

So, as you can see by my testimony, I am proud of our record 

to date. 

Since Mr. Towns raised it, I would like to raise something but 

make it clear to this committee that I raise it not to avoid any responsibility on our part. We have responsibility. I think we take it, 

and we embrace it. But this committee should know about some 

significant statistics that have literally changed the environment 

for kids in their getting music. 

A significant percentage of 12- to 18-year-olds, almost 70 percent 

in many cases, for those kids our marketing practices are largely 

inconsequential. That is because they don’t go to stores or legitimate on-line music sites to get or learn about music. They are logging on to a peer-to-peer network and trade music with millions of 

others. 

Our most recent and, frankly, depressing poll shows that the 12- 

to 18-year-old kids are the most likely ones to go to these sites 

when they are looking for music and the least likely to go to a legitimate place to buy it by a margin of 67 to 19 percent. The operation of these networks certainly fall into this committee’s natural 

jurisdiction. I would like to share a couple of examples. 

19

When you go to a legitimate on-line site, because of our new 

guidelines you will see—and I think I gave this handout out, if people will just look at this handout—you will see that what we have 

here of a stickered record is shown stickered on the Amazon.com 

site. If you go to one of the on-line subscription services, the sticker 

on explicit lyrics is plainly obvious. The on-line subscription services often have parental controls that allow parents to exclude explicit content, all of these as the focus of our industry over the last 

couple years. 

Now go to Kazza, where 70 percent of 12- to 18-year-olds go for 

their music. Key in the same JZ, and you get page after page after 

page of tracks and albums available for download without a single 

advisory. And probably somewhat, as parents, most disturbing of 

all is for those artists who are particularly popular with young 

teens and artists like Britney Spears, you key in Britney Spears 

and you can see an overwhelming amount of porn focused in with 

all of the rest of the tracks that are available. 

The peer-to-peer networks are not per se illegal. It is their activity that is illegal; and, frankly, they are supported by advertising 

from many legitimate significant companies. 

You know, I encourage the FTC to spend time investigating this 

and encourage this committee to ask the FTC to do this and investigate these systems as much as they have the legitimate music industry. Because, in sum, while I am proud of our record, we have 

an obligation to do it. We care about parents and our consumers. 

The reality is, in today’s marketplace our efforts are so diluted in 

this target-age group that—because of this rampant peer-to-peer 

use that it is just interrelated to the issues we are talking about 

today. 

Thank you, and I would be happy to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Hilary Rosen follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HILARY ROSEN, CHAIRMAN AND CEO, RECORDING

INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA

INTRODUCTION

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Markey, and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the 

opportunity to appear before you today. 

I am Hilary Rosen, Chairman and CEO of the Recording Industry Association of 

America, an association that represents over 600 record companies. 

I welcome this opportunity to provide you with the details of our industry’s efforts 

since this Subcommittee’s review last July. 

There are two points that I would like to raise at the outset: (1) the unwavering 

commitment of our industry to the success of the Parental Advisory Program; and 

(2) my concern that the recording industry’s ‘‘marketing practices’’ have not been 

evaluated by the FTC in a manner that fairly takes into account the specific nature 

of music and mass advertising that includes to more than one demographic group 

at the same time. 

THE RECORDING INDUSTRY TAKES ITS RESPONSIBILITY SERIOUSLY

First, I would like to underscore that the recording industry takes it responsibility 

to parents and consumers very seriously. The Parental Advisory has been in existence for seventeen years. We created this program, have guided its development, 

and are proud of its impact. Moreover, we value the respect and trust that we have 

developed with parents over the years. 

I have met personally with each of the major record companies to review the implementation of our guidelines and we have been meeting with our retail partners 

as well. There is a commitment at every level in the recording industry to the continued success of the Parental Advisory Program. 

20

WE PRODUCE AND MARKET A DIVERSE RANGE OF SOUNDS

The recording industry releases over 36,000 albums each year. The vast majority 

of these titles contain no explicit content. In fact, I would like to note that despite 

the emphasis at these hearings on recordings with explicit content, they comprise 

a relatively small proportion of our industry’s output. In an average retail store with 

110,000 titles, about 500 will carry the Parental Advisory logo. That’s less than onehalf of one percent of that store’s total inventory. Moreover, the overwhelming majority—if not all—of the titles that are explicit are also available in an edited 

version. Unlike any other entertainment industry, music lovers have a choice. If a 

movie is rated ‘‘R’’, a consumer does not have the choice to see a ‘‘PG’’ version in 

the theatre or to purchase it in the store. When considering advertising of an album, 

the availability of an edited version should be taken into account. The industry is 

not advertising an explicit album, it is advertising an album available in two 

versions. 

Let me now turn to the significant steps we have taken over the last year to ensure the continued success of the Parental Advisory Program. 

THE INDUSTRY CONTINUES TO STRENGTHEN ITS GUIDELINES

An important aspect of our commitment to the Program is making sure that it 

evolves to meet the changing needs of retailers and parents without compromising 

the twin principles that guide it: (1) alerting parents to explicit content; and (2) protecting the First Amendment rights of artists to free expression. 

We recently implemented changes to the guidelines that accomplish this goal. The 

RIAA has published revised guidelines that became effective on April 1, 2002. The 

guidelines include three new provisions:

• The implementation of an ‘‘Edited Version’’ Label on packaging: If an edited version of an album designated with the Parental Advisory Label is released, 

it should include an ‘‘Edited Version’’ Label plainly displayed either on the front 

of the album (on the cellophane wrapper or on the album cover itself), or on 

the top spine of the CD. The Edited Version Label is a notice to consumers that 

an album has been modified from the original, and does not include all of the 

same content contained in the Labeled version. • Adoption of an ‘‘Edited Version Also Available’’ Label in advertising: If an ‘‘edited’’ version of a recording is available for sale, consumer print advertising 

may contain language indicating that fact. This will be accomplished with the 

wording ‘‘Edited Version Also Available’’ placed near the specific album or 

sound recording that has been designated with the Label. • The extension of the existing guidelines for print advertising to radio 

and television promotions: In cases where the decision has been made to 

place a Parental Advisory Label on a recording, all consumer print, radio, and 

television advertising (collectively ‘‘consumer advertising’’) for that recording 

shall communicate the presence of explicit content. 

THE RECORDING INDUSTRY IS ADHERING TO ITS GUIDELINES

In February 2001, the FTC issued a report on the industry’s implementation of 

its guidelines and gave us a failing grade. I came before this Committee and indicated that we deserved that failing grade. I also stated that future reviews would 

demonstrate progress. We have kept our word and have made significant progress.

• All of the major record companies have issued internal policy guidelines 

and have appointed a senior level employee to ensure full compliance with 

the Parental Advisory Program, including the new provisions. • According to the Commission’s February 2001 study: only 8% of print ads in reviewed magazines displayed the PAL. According to our review of the October 

and November issues of the same magazines reviewed by the FTC that number 

is now nearly 100 percent. In fact, there was only one add that did not carry 

the Logo, and the album in that add is available in an edited version. • 100 percent of the PAL’s were clearly legible. • Additionally, parental controls have been included on many online subscription 

services with an ‘‘exclude explicit content’’ option check box: ‘‘Check here if you 

would like to exclude tracks from albums that contain a parental advisory logo. 

A description of the parental advisory program can be found at http://

www.parentalguide.org’’

WE HAVE CONTINUED OUR EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH EFFORTS

Parents overwhelmingly recognize and support the Parental Advisory Program. 

All of the recent surveys on this issue have confirmed that fact. We have not, howVerDate 0ct 31 2002 15:17 Dec 06, 2002 Jkt 082882 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 W:\DISC\81964 81964
21

ever, rested on our laurels. We continue our efforts to raise public awareness about 

the Parental Advisory Program.

• The RIAA designed and distributes an informational brochure in English and 

Spanish for parents and caregivers describing: 

• The evolution of the Parental Advisory label, 

• How determinations for its application are made, 

• And the meaning of the label with suggestions for links to community-service 

based organizations. 

• The RIAA and its members have worked to ensure ‘‘Edited Version Also Available’’ has been quickly integrated into the consumer lexicon. 

• The RIAA have worked on creative methods of distributing the PAL PSA, 

including in video magazines. 

• The RIAA continues to partner with the National Association of Recording Merchandisers (NARM) on many fronts, including updating all parental 

advisory label displays in retail stores. 

• Additionally, we have established a partnership with the Association for 

Independent Music (AFIM) to further advance our educational outreach efforts. 

I am proud of the significant strides we have made in the last year. We are committed to continuing to work hard to ensure the Parental Advisory Program remains 

successful and a priority for our industry. 

INFORMATIONAL RATING SYSTEMS SHOULD REFLECT THE NATURE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE

INDUSTRIES

Our labeling system is often compared to the ratings systems in place for the television, motion picture and videogame industries. While our industries work together 

to bring information about our systems to parents through the 

www.parentalguide.org website, our systems are very different. And for good reason. 

Each system is designed and has evolved to reflect the media to which it applies. 

We think that it would be unwise and improper to assume that a record label 

knows what kind of music and lyrical content is ‘‘suitable’’ for whom. Like books 

or poetry, different listeners will take away different meaning from musical recordings and their lyrics, making a ‘‘one-size-fits-all’’ determination particularly unsuitable. Record labels should not be in the business of making assumptions about the 

values or maturity levels of their customers. The purpose of the advisory label is 

to provide a clear ‘‘heads-up’’ to all consumers that a sound recording contains explicit content. Books have no label or rating, even those that contain explicit content 

and are marketed directly to children. Why? Because words are particularly subject 

to interpretation and imagination, and most feel that labeling books is a bad idea. 

Lyrics likewise are susceptible to varying interpretations. Words can have different 

meanings depending on who is hearing them. We offer alternatives and trust that 

consumers will the choice that is best for them. 

Moreover, advertising an album in a publication where a significant percentage 

of those who see it are over 17 years of age should not be regarded as intentionally 

‘‘targeting children.’’ Advertising an album available in two versions to a mixed audience is far different than targeting kids with explicit material. Yet it is described 

in such a manner for purposes of government review. 

CONCLUSION—NO REGULATION IS NECESSARY

In summary, the recording industry has in place a system that works—one that 

reflects the nature of the art form; is being strengthened and promoted; and is overwhelming supported by America’s parents. 

To its credit the Federal Trade Commission has recognized that the First Amendment precludes government intervention in this area and that ‘‘vigilant self-regulation is the best approach to ensuring that parents are provided with adequate information to guide their children’s exposure to entertainment media with violent content.’’

We have proven over the last year that self-regulation is the way to progress. In 

the last year, we have seen at the state level that efforts to regulate content are 

fraught with danger. Some states have even imposed criminal penalties for failing 

to adhere to voluntary standards. Rather than improving parent’s access to information, such statutes create a disincentive to adopting voluntary standards. By essentially punishing those who adopt voluntary guidelines, the legislation would have 

the unintentional result of discouraging participation in the successful Parental Advisory Program. Fortunately, these statutes have been challenged in the Courts and 

ruled unconstitutional. 

22

Without regulation we have strengthened our guidelines and have seen tremendous improvement in the areas explored by the FTC. Without regulation, one of our 

members has expanded on our voluntary program and now provides content 

descriptors. This experiment by BMG will give us some insight into whether content 

descriptors will work with music and whether consumers will find it helpful or confusing. 

What is clear from the debate on the state and national level is that at bottom 

there are some people who simply don’t like some types of music. That is fine. You 

have the option of listening to and purchasing what you do like. What we don’t have 

the option of doing is silencing some voices based on personal prejudices. Taking 

away angry music will not take away angry feelings. Society and life is more complicated than that. We are willing to do our part by providing parents and consumers generally with information and choices in the music. They must also accept 

their role in the process. 

In the end, I am proud that the RIAA’s Parental Advisory Program and the balance we have struck in respecting the free expression of artists while providing information and choice to consumers. 

Thank you.

Mr. UPTON. Thank you. 

Mr. Simmons, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF RUSSELL SIMMONS 

Mr. SIMMONS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Am I on? 

Mr. UPTON. You should know more about microphones than anyone else here. 

Mr. SIMMONS. No, sir. I am not an artist. I usually shy away 

from microphones, but for this occasion I am thrilled to use one. 

Thank you. 

The first thing, I am going to read my testimony, but I wanted 

to make a statement. I was—because I haven’t been paying attention to some of the things that have been going on here in Washington. But I was surprised to hear that there was a connection between enforcing legislature against stealing and the willingness of 

this panel to work for—to protect our rights for our music and this 

panel’s looking into our practices in regards to protecting youth 

from music that they found to be upsetting. So I think they should 

be separate, and I think that that is the kind of legislation that you 

have a right to explore, protecting us from stealing. But I think 

that we are here now discussing something we don’t have any 

rights. 

But I want to read my testimony. I just wanted to make that 

statement, if you don’t mind, and I want to read the testimony. 

I am here today to speak on behalf of the Hip Hop Summit Action Network. It is the largest national coalition of hip hop artists, 

recording industry executives, civil rights and business leaders. I 

am also joined by Network President Dr. Benjamin Chaves Muhammad, who is the former Executive Director and CEO of the 

NAACP. 

We represent the interests of the hip hop community, and we are 

very concerned and committed to protecting the First Amendment 

rights of hip hop artists and the rights of the freedom of cultural 

expression. The hearing today on Recording Industry Marketing 

Practices: A Check-Up is an opportunity for us to inform you that 

the theme of Hip Hop Summit Action Network is taking back responsibility. We work closely with the industry on issues related to 

marketing and promotions, and in fact we have strongly supported 

the extensive dissemination and display of Recording Industry AsVerDate 0ct 31 2002 15:17 Dec 06, 2002 Jkt 082882 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 W:\DISC\81964 81964
23

sociations of America’s parental advisory label. This has proven to 

be an effective tool that alerts parents to explicit content and helps 

parents to make decisions about music for their children. 

During the past 2 years, we have made tremendous progress, I 

think, in increasing public awareness on the positive value and cultural impact of the hip hop on our society. We have sponsored successful summits in New York, Los Angeles, Kansas City, Washington, Miami. Next week, we will be in Dallas. We continue to 

bring young people together for many good social causes; and the 

effects are obvious in many places, if you guys are paying attention. 

But hip hop has evolved into a global phenomenon, cultural phenomenon, has transcended race, ethnicity, class, and language. We 

believe in telling the truth. Hip hop music lyrics bear witness to 

truth of the social, economic, and political condition in our communities. I believe they must continue to tell the truth about the 

street, if that is what we know, and must continue to tell the truth 

about God, if that is what we found. 

Part of telling the truth is making sure that you know and talk 

more about and speak more about the truth than to appease those 

who are in power. Speaking truth to power is important, is essential. 

The Congress of the United States should not censor free speech 

nor cultural expression. It is unconstitutional for government intrusion or dictation concerning rating of music or limiting marketing 

that has the effect of denying free speech. What is offensive is any 

attempt by the government to deny the expression of words, lyrics, 

or music that emerge out of a culture that has become part of the 

soul of America. Congress should not attempt to legislate preferences in music, art, and culture. 

Last year, the FTC report on explicit content and marketing disproportionately focused on black hip hop artists. Once again, we 

are concerned that our culture is being targeted and profiled by 

people who don’t understand our reality. We therefore appeal for 

more understanding and hope that the Congress would do the right 

thing and not censor hip hop. 

I am happy to answer any questions that you have regarding this 

culture and this music. Thank you for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Russell Simmons follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RUSSELL SIMMONS, ON BEHALF OF THE HIP HOP SUMMIT

ACTION NETWORK

My name is Russell Simmons and I am submitting this statement on behalf of 

the Hip Hop Summit Action Network and its Executive Director, Minister Benjamin 

Muhammad. I am Chairman of the Hip Hop Summit Action Network and I have 

worked in the music and entertainment industry for more than twenty-five years. 

Minister Benjamin is the former Executive Director and CEO of the NAACP and 

has over thirty-five years of experience in civil and human rights. 

The Hip Hop Summit Action Network is the broadest national coalition of Hip 

Hop artists, entertainment industry executives, civil rights and community leaders. 

Established this year, the mission of the Hip Hop Summit Action Network is to support Hip Hop and freedom, justice, equality and empowerment for all based on the 

principles of freedom of speech, music and art creativity, and the universality of humanity. 

The Hip Hop community has decided to take a leadership position toward the evolution of our artistic destiny and responsibility. We convened an historic summit 

last year in New York and we are planning others in Los Angeles and Miami in 

24

August to explore questions related to violence in our own communities, racial 

profiling, police brutality, representation of women, and the profanity of poverty, 

and how we can work from within our industry to expand and elevate the artistic 

presentation of our culture and experience. 

Although we know that the harsh underlying social realities that some of our 

music exposes have not changed much in our communities, we are committed to 

speaking the truth. We believe that we must continue to tell the truth about the 

street if that is what we know and we must continue to tell the truth about God 

if that is who we have found. Part of telling the truth is making sure that you know, 

and talk more about what you know than to speak or do music to appease those 

who are in power. Hip Hop represents truth telling, speaking the truth to ourselves 

and speaking the truth to power out of the context and condition of our community. 

The Congress of the United States should not censor free speech nor artistic expression. It is unconstitutional for government intrusion or dictation concerning 

‘‘labeling of music’’ or ‘‘rating of music’’ that has the effect of denying free speech. 

What is offensive is any attempt by the government to deny the expression of words 

and lyrics that emerge out of a culture that has become the soul of America. In fact 

Hip Hop has now grown to become a global cultural and artistic phenomena. 

Congress should not attempt to legislate preferences in music, art and culture. 

My final point is that this is often largely about race. And it makes some of us 

very concerned that few will publicly admit that this effort to censure Hip Hop has 

deep seated racial overtones. Hip Hop emerged out of the African American experience. Eminem is a successful white Hip Hop artist who, power to him, has excelled 

and profited from the genre of black music. He stands on the shoulders of other 

originators of Hip Hop. The Federal Trade Commission’s report on explicit content 

disproportionately focused on black Hip Hop artists. These reports are flawed scientifically as well as morally and culturally and should not, therefore, be used as 

a basis for constructing a system of ‘‘ratings’’ in regard to music and other forms 

of entertainment. 

Simply put, we conclude by appealing to this Committee to refrain from censoring, 

labeling, or rating our music and culture in the absence of understanding and appreciation of our artistic work which represents the genius of our culture and talent 

of our youth, in fact all youth of today—black, white, Latino, Asian and all others. 

Thank you.

Mr. UPTON. Thank you, Mr. Simmons. 

Mr. Marmaduke. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN MARMADUKE 

Mr. MARMADUKE. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is 

John Marmaduke. I am the President and CEO of Hastings Entertainment, and I am a past Chairman of the Board of Directors of 

the National Association of Recording Merchandisers, and I currently serve on NARMS’ Retailer’s Advisory Council as well as the 

Board of Directors of the Video Software Dealers Association. I appreciate this invitation to update you on our retail marketing practices. 

Hastings is a publicly held company headquartered in Amarillo, 

Texas. We have 144 stores; and we sell not only music, but video, 

computer software, books, magazines, newspapers, and video 

games. We have over 30 years of retail experience in a variety of 

markets, from towns as small as 15,000 people to large urban centers in the 21 Western States. For 3 years we have also had our 

Web site, GoHastings.com. 

Hastings’ corporate mission is to satisfy our guests’ desires for 

personal entertainment and information; and that mission is reflected in every store we open, regardless of the size of the community. We hear directly from our customers. In fact, the first thing 

I do every morning is scroll e-mails from our store associates, and 

also I get about 100 ‘‘Postcards to the President’’ every morning 

that customers fill out that are at every cash and exit vestibule in 

25

our stores. So we are pretty well connected; and, like a lot of retailers, that is the way we want to be. That is who we serve. 

In terms of music selection, our company’s policy is today, and 

always has been, is to stock titles that carry parental advisory because they do meet a demand from our customers. However, we do 

require them to be 18 years old to purchase it. I think we were 

probably the first retail chain to do that, and we had quite a bit 

of publicity at the time. But we also have the same policy with 

video games and movies that we sell. 

We stand behind these programs. We know they work well, because in those hundred postcards that I read every morning I don’t 

think I have had a complaint on the ‘‘18 to purchase’’ in over 3 or 

4 years, and I can assure you that I hear complaints on about everything that customers don’t like with some frequency. 

Not every retailer’s policy is just exactly like ours. Some don’t 

stock these titles at all, like Wal-Mart. Some may restrict the sales; 

some may not. Each retailer’s decision about what to stock, how to 

merchandise, how to advertise, and what to sell is driven by their 

desire to meet their target customers needs. It is just that simple. 

Even though each retailer may take a different tack when it 

comes to marketing music to customers, our common goal is to 

keep improving the program as a whole. Over the years, through 

NARM, we have provided the record companies with feedback from 

our customers; and we have offered suggestions on a variety of 

things like, for example, standardizing the placement of the logo, 

adding merchandising materials or instituting guidelines to applying the labels so it doesn’t cover that logo. 

In turn, we welcome information and dialog provided by the FTC 

and you elected officials. This ongoing review has resulted in many 

improvements, and Hastings has also improved the way we have 

handled the parental advisory information in our advertising and 

also on our Web site. Last fall, we made brochures printed courtesy 

of the RIAA that describe this program and made it available to 

our customers. 

Since the subcommittee’s hearings on this subject a little more 

than 1 year ago, NARM has been working with the Federal Trade 

Commission and other entertainment retailing organizations on a 

more comprehensive consumer education campaign about the various ratings programs. We think the more information the parents 

have about these programs, the better they will work. 

I want to assure you, Mr. Chairman and the members of the subcommittee, we music retailers take these challenges seriously. I 

know I speak for fellow retailers when I say that our stores are a 

part of the communities they are located in; and our stores, especially being in smaller communities, we are very sensitive to those 

communities’ desires and needs. We know we must be responsible 

to their concerns and—because we want to stay in business. 

Can we do more? I am certain we can, and we are happy to keep 

meeting with you and with the RIAA to keep improving this program. 

Thank you again for giving me this opportunity to testify today. 

[The prepared statement of John Marmaduke follows:]

26

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN MARMADUKE, PRESIDENT AND CEO, HASTINGS

ENTERTAINMENT

Good morning Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. My name is 

John Marmaduke and I am President and CEO of Hastings Entertainment. I am 

a past Chairman of the Board of Directors of the National Association of Recording 

Merchandisers, and I currently serve on NARM’s Retailer’s Advisory Council as well 

as on the Board of Directors of the Video Software Dealers Association. I appreciate 

the invitation to appear before you today to update you on retail marketing practices for music that carries the Parental Advisory. 

Hastings is a publicly held company headquartered in Amarillo, Texas. Our 144 

stores carry music, video, computer software, books, magazines and videogames representing nearly 3 million square feet of retail space. Between our warehouse, offices, and stores, we have 7000 employees. We have over 30 years of retail experience in a variety of markets, ranging from small towns to large urban areas 

throughout 21 states of the Western U.S. For three years we have also operated 

GoHastings.com, our e-commerce initiative. 

Hastings’ corporate mission is to satisfy our guest’s desire for personal entertainment and information. That mission is reflected in every store we open, regardless 

of the size of the community. We hear directly from our customers whenever they 

think we’re not doing something right. So our success, like that of every retailer, 

depends on our ability to meet the needs of our customers every day. 

In terms of the music selection, my company’s policy is to stock titles that carry 

the Parental Advisory because they do meet a demand from our customers. 

However, we require purchasers to be at least 18 years old. Hastings was one of 

the very first retailers to have such a policy and we were considered quite brave 

when we launched it. We now have similar programs in place for movies and for 

video games. I get approximately 100 ‘‘Postcards to the President’’ every day. I have 

not received a complaint from a customer or a parent on inappropriate music in the 

hands of their under-18 year old children in years. We stand behind these programs; 

we think they work well; and we know our customers appreciate them. 

Not every retailer’s policy or program is exactly like ours. Some don’t stock titles 

with the Parental Advisory; some offer edited versions, while others may not restrict 

the sale of these titles to minors. Each retailer’s decision about what to stock, how 

to merchandise, how to advertise, and who to sell to is driven by the desire to meet 

the needs of their target customer. These different approaches in the marketplace 

offer parents a choice when it comes to deciding what’s best for their family. 

Even though each retailer may take a different tack when it comes to marketing 

music to its customers, our common goal is to keep improving the program as a 

whole. Over the years, through NARM, we’ve provided the record companies with 

feedback from our customers. We’ve offered suggestions on a variety of things like, 

for example, standardizing the placement of the logo, or adding merchandising materials, or instituting guidelines for applying the label. In turn, we have welcomed 

the information and dialogue provided by the FTC and by elected officials. This ongoing review has resulted in many improvements. Hastings has improved the way 

we handle Parental Advisory information in our advertising and on our website. All 

of our ads contain the Parental Advisory logo, and our website contains a link to 

ParentalGuide.org, the industry site that contains information on all the media rating programs. When NARM made point-of-purchase materials that describe the Parental Advisory available a few years back, we began ordering those and replenish 

them as necessary. Last year, when brochures on the program were made available 

through NARM, we offered those to Hastings’ guests. 

Since the Subcommittee’s hearing on this subject a little more than one year ago, 

NARM’s retailers have undertaken a fairly comprehensive review of the Parental 

Advisory program that covered such aspects as the guidelines for applying the label, 

the quality of information conveyed by the label, promotional support of the program, and edited versions. 

There were a number of recommendations that were communicated to RIAA, including the need for more information about why titles carry the PAL, adding guidelines for radio, adding a label for edited versions and perhaps guidelines for editing 

PAL titles. RIAA did adopt many of the recommendations, including the addition 

of labeling edited versions of PAL titles, and both organizations worked together to 

encourage greater support for the PAL program from independent labels. (A detailed 

report on the review, the conclusions, and NARM’s activities in response to the review is attached.) 

NARM has continued to provide retailers with copies of the FTC reports, with updates to the RIAA guidelines, and with samples of copy that we can use to help educate our customers about the program both in the store and online. NARM has reVerDate 0ct 31 2002 15:17 Dec 06, 2002 Jkt 082882 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 W:\DISC\81964 81964
27

cently begun working with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and other entertainment retailing organizations on a more comprehensive consumer education campaign about the various ratings programs. We welcome that initiative and think the 

more information parents have about these programs the better they will work. 

I want to assure you, Mr. Chairman, and the members of the Subcommittee that 

music retailers take these challenges very seriously. I know I speak for my fellow 

retailers when I say that our stores are part of the communities where they are located. We know we must be responsive to community concerns if we want to stay 

in business. Can we do more? I’m sure we can, and we’re happy to keep meeting 

with you and with the RIAA to keep improving this program. 

Thank you again for giving me the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to 

answering any questions that you may have. 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF RECORDING MERCHANDISERS

April 19, 2002

Mr. Dick Kelly 

Ms. Mary Engel 

Federal Trade Commission 

600 Pennsylvania Ave NW 

Washington, DC 20580

DEAR MR. KELLY AND MS. ENGEL, Thank you for the opportunity to update you 

regarding the efforts of NARM and our member companies to support the Parental 

Advisory program for music. Since our last update there have been a number of activities and communications about which we would like to make you aware. Our activities have reflected two primary goals: 1) a review of the guidelines for the Parental Advisory for the purpose of identifying areas which could be improved; 2) enhancing the educational efforts of both NARM and our members so that the public 

has a better understanding of the Parental Advisory program and how it works. We 

believe that the activities as outlined in this report reflect real progress in both 

areas as well as the ongoing commitment of NARM and its member retailers to the 

success of the Parental Advisory program. 

PARENTAL ADVISORY GUIDELINES

A joint NARM/RIAA Task Force was formed in 2001 for the purpose of evaluating 

the Parental Advisory program and making recommendations for improving the program. NARM began this process by soliciting feedback from our member retailers 

and wholesalers regarding various aspects of the program, including the guidelines 

for applying the Parental Advisory Label, the consistency with which the label is 

applied, the quality of the information conveyed by the label; the placement of the 

label, promotional support for the label, and edited versions of labeled releases. 

NARM concluded that there were a number of ways in which the program could and 

should be improved:

1. More information needed to be communicated to consumers about titles which 

carry the Parental Advisory Label. 

2. More independent labels needed to be encouraged to support the program. 

3. Advertising guidelines needed to be revised to include radio as well as TV ads. 

4. Better labeling of music videos with music from CD’s carrying the Parental Advisory Label. 

5. Edited versions of titles that carry the Parental Advisory Label needed to be 

clearly marked with a standardized label. Artwork built on the existing Parental Advisory was the preference. Guidelines for editing PAL titles would be 

helpful. 

6. A coordinated set of guidelines for placement of the PAL logo and placement of 

retail price stickers might be necessary to insure that price stickers never obstruct the visibility of the PAL logo. 

These recommendations were communicated to RIAA through a series of communications and meetings over the fall and winter. RIAA responded by revising their 

guidelines in February, 2002. The revised guidelines call for 1) an expansion of the 

advertising guidelines to include all media: print, radio, TV, and internet; 2) the 

adoption of standardized labeling for edited versions of PAL titles along with recommendations for advertising the availability of edited versions. Retailers would 

still like more information about why titles receive the PAL designation or a link 

to song lyrics . Many would prefer a more consistent approach to editing PAL titles. 

(Currently some edited CD’s may delete whole songs, or bleep certain words, or include a revised version with new lyrics.) Because the labeling of edited versions is 

new, there will be an ongoing evaluation of the placement of the ‘‘edited version’’

28

label to ensure that the current recommended placement (top spine) works. 

Retailers concurred with labels that the top spine placement was the most logical 

place to start the identification process, but have some concerns about the lack of 

permanence of the label once the sticker is removed. 

In addition, both organizations promised to encourage greater support for the PAL 

program from independent labels. NARM used the opportunity of a joint convention 

with the Association for Independent Music (AFIM) in March to reinforce the message. Retailers were invited to notify RIAA regarding music videos that should be 

carrying the Parental Advisory Logo. 

Discussions regarding the coordination of PAL placement guidelines and guidelines for retail price stickers are ongoing. The current guidelines for PAL placement 

from RIAA instruct labels to place the logo in the lower left corner of the front face 

whenever possible. NARM guidelines ask retailers to avoid placing price or other 

stickers over the Parental Advisory Label. Despite the two guidelines, the consensus 

of both groups was that keeping the labels separate while not covering up the title 

of the work or imposing rules on artists that could not be followed 100% of the time 

posed a challenge. NARM was asked to review the placement of advisory information on movies and games to determine how the placement issue is handled for 

those products. We’ve learned that the MPAA rating for both VHS and DVD is on 

the back face of the product. While the icon for video game ratings appears on both 

the front and back face, the important content descriptor information appears on the 

back face. With that information as background, it would appear to make sense to 

move the placement of the PAL logo to the back face of music products so that the 

consumer can begin looking for rating logos in a consistent place. If retailers kept 

their pricing labels on the front face, any possibility of accidental covering of the 

PAL would be eliminated. This possibility is actively being discussed. 

EDUCATIONAL EFFORTS

Retail Education 

A number of activities have been initiated with the goal of educating consumers 

about the Parental Advisory program. NARM’s efforts have also included a component which focuses on educating retailers about the importance of the Parental Advisory Label program, how it works, and how to support it. As was promised last 

year, NARM created a section on our website devoted to the Parental Advisory 

Label program. Posted on the site are a philosophical statement from NARM about 

the value of the program and its importance to the public along with the current 

guidelines for the PAL program. We also include a sample descriptive statement 

about PAL for retailers to use in their stores or on their websites, links to the RIAA 

page on the Parental Advisory, links to parentalguide.org, (the site hosted by the 

entertainment companies covering music, games, and movies), and a copy of the reports from the FTC on Marketing Violent Entertainment to Children. These published materials are supplemented by updates in our electronic newsletter, and 

verbal presentations at meetings of the NARM Board of Directors and the Retailers 

Advisory Council. 

Consumer Education 

Educational efforts to consumers this past year included the ongoing NARM/RIAA 

merchandising program of posters and counter cards depicting the PAL logo with 

an explanatory paragraph. This year the pieces were revised to include the URL to 

the parentalguide.org site. Nearly 8000 pieces of material were shipped to retail and 

wholesale locations prior to the important holiday selling season. These materials 

were supplemented with the addition of a new brochure describing the PAL program 

in more detail. Nearly 100,000 of these brochures were made available to the public 

through 4, 447 stores beginning last September. We are in currently in discussions 

with RIAA about the possibility of a reprint and ongoing distribution of the brochure. In addition to the specific programs run by NARM, we know that a number 

of our member companies created their own in-store materials regarding PAL and 

other rating/advisory programs. Several companies either conducted in house training programs for store personnel or reissued policy statements on the program in 

the fall to help insure consistent dissemination of information and execution of policies. 

Advertising 

Another important component to many retailers efforts regarding the PAL program was a review of existing advertising programs and policies. The very helpful 

feedback that NARM received last summer regarding specific approaches to the incorporation of the PAL logo in print, radio, TV, and internet advertising was passed 

on to retailers and wholesalers in September, 2001. Many retailers have reported 

29

that they have revised their internal guidelines in response to this feedback and 

these changes should be readily apparent in these media. One area in which many 

retailers continue to disagree with both the FTC and the RIAA relates to the need 

for the PAL to appear on every screen throughout a sales transaction online. While 

some retailers have adopted this approach, others believe that showing the PAL logo 

at the initial depiction of the album graphic, and again at the point of sale provide 

sufficient warning to consumers about the lyric content of the title. 

Sales Policies 

No retailers have reported a change of policy regarding the sale of music carrying 

the Parental Advisory Label to individuals under age 17. Those companies that decline to stock titles with the PAL continue to believe that approach best serves their 

clientele. Those that had restrictive sales policies prior to the FTC report continue 

them, and those that do not believe such policies work for their customers have not 

adopted them. Most retailers continue to express concern about the appropriateness 

of the FTC recommendation for restricting sales of PAL titles to those under 17 

when the RIAA guidelines do not provide for an age based program. The only significant change in this area is that more companies are stocking edited versions of 

titles with the Parental Advisory Label now that such titles are identified with their 

own label. 

The Parental Advisory Label program is now 17 years old. Like any teenager, it’s 

learned a lot, but has room for improvement. We continue to believe that most parents appreciate the industry’s efforts to inform them that certain titles may not be 

appropriate for some of the children in their families. We also believe that they appreciate having a choice in the marketplace regarding how different retailers stock, 

merchandise, and sell Parental Advisory Label products. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to recap our efforts in this area for the FTC. 

We welcome any comments or information that you’d like to share with us. 

Sincerely, 

PAMELA HOROVITZ

cc: Alan Malasky 

John Mitchell 

David Schlang

Mr. UPTON. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Severson. 

STATEMENT OF GARY SEVERSON 

Mr. SEVERSON. Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, I 

am Gary Severson, Senior Vice President and General Merchandise 

Manager for Wal-Mart stores. I have a written statement that I 

would like to have introduced into the record. 

My predecessor, Doug McMillon, testified before your subcommittee last July on the—last year on the issue of the entertainment industry’s efforts to curb children’s exposure to violent content. I understand the hearing today is a follow-up to the July 

hearing and the purpose is to review the recordings industry’s marketing practices. 

Before addressing the marketing issue, I will briefly describe 

Wal-Mart’s approach to our customers and entertainment ratings. 

At Wal-Mart, we have worked hard to create and protect our relationship with our customers. They are and always have been the 

guiding force behind our decisions. We have created stores that 

offer every day low prices, quality merchandise, and fast and 

friendly service. Our associates have also been involved with the 

individuals and families in our communities. Last year alone, we 

supported our communities with $190 million in charitable giving. 

Ninety-seven percent of that money was donated at the local level 

through our stores. We aspire to be an important part of our customers’ communities and to provide products and services that 

raise the standard of living for American families. 

30

Consistent with that aspiration, Wal-Mart attempts to sell entertainment product in a way that allows our customers to make informed decisions and to exclude from our shelves merchandise that 

a majority of our customers would find objectionable due to its sexually explicit or extremely violent nature. The challenge we face is 

in our ability to, one, help the customers understand what they are 

buying and, two, to determine which products they find objectionable either before and in some cases after we have made it available for purchase. At times, this is harder than it sounds due to 

the subjective nature of some of these decisions. 

Any success we achieve in these efforts is accomplished, in large 

part, by following rating systems established by the entertainment 

industries. We have rating systems that we follow in the sale of 

movies, video games, and computer software. 

As I indicated in my written testimony, we use rating systems 

to enforce our policy on selling age-restricted products to customers 

under age of 17. Our customers must be 17 or older to purchase 

R-rated movies and M-rated video games and computer software. 

We use register prompts to verify the age of a customer. 

Unfortunately, in the case of music, the recording industry has 

not provided us a ratings system to follow. The music label has determined on a title-by-title basis whether to attach a parental advisory sticker or not. We refer to this as stickered music; and, today, 

we do not carry parental advisory stickered music in our stores. 

The music labels make edited versions of some stickered music 

available to us. We do carry most edited versions of music on selected product. This product is labeled ‘‘edited version.’’ Our buyers 

for music determine which music to carry based on their best judgment. As we testified last year, from our perspective, an unbiased, 

standardized rating system would help our customers determine 

whether specific music is appropriate for their needs and taste. 

If the recording industry adopted a rating system, we would educate our customers about the rating system, train our associates 

about our company policy on the sale of rated music, and would 

most likely restrict the sale based on the rating. We would enforce 

the restriction through a register prompt as we do with R-rated 

movies and M-rated games. 

The marketing of music is generally a partnership between the 

recording industry and the retailer. The recording industry will 

fund the marketing and provide the content in coordination with 

us. As for Wal-Mart, our marketing of music is much more limited 

than that of other retailers. Our main approach is to market the 

music in the store and drive customer traffic to the entertainment 

area where we do display the music. Occasionally, we will do television and print advertising of title-specific music. We control the 

content of the advertising and try to ensure the ad is appropriate 

and appealing to our customers. 

While we use our best judgment at Wal-Mart on which items we 

carry and while we work hard to restrict the sale of certain products to those under the age of 17, it is simply not possible to eliminate every image, word, or topic that an individual might find objectionable. In addition, we are the first to admit our systems and 

our associates, good as they are, are not infallible. However, it is 

our sincere hope that our policies make it possible for our cusVerDate 0ct 31 2002 15:17 Dec 06, 2002 Jkt 082882 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 W:\DISC\81964 81964
31

tomers to make informed decisions and for them to feel we are handling entertainment product in an appropriate matter. 

At this time, I am pleased to answer any of your questions. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Gary Severson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GARY SEVERSON, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL

MERCHANDISE MANAGER, WAL-MART STORES, INC. 

INTRODUCTION

Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee, I am Gary Severson Senior Vice 

President and General Merchandise Manager, for Wal-Mart Stores. 

My predecessor, Doug McMillon, testified before your subcommittee in July last 

year on the issue of the entertainment industry’s efforts to curb children’s exposure 

to violent content. I understand the hearing today is a follow-up to the July hearing 

and the purpose is to review the recording industry’s marketing practices. 

Before addressing the marketing issue, I’ll briefly describe Wal-Mart’s approach 

to our customers and entertainment ratings. 

At Wal-Mart, we have worked hard to create and protect our relationship with 

our customers. They are and always have been the guiding force behind our decisions. We have created stores that offer every day low prices, quality merchandise, 

and fast and friendly service. Our associates have also been involved with the individuals and families in our communities. Last year alone, we supported our communities with $190 million in charitable giving. Ninety-seven percent of that money 

was donated at the local level through our stores. We aspire to be an important part 

of our customers’ communities and to provide products and services that raise the 

standard of living for the working families of America. 

Consistent with that aspiration, Wal-Mart attempts to sell entertainment product 

in a way that allows our customers to make informed decisions and to exclude from 

our shelves merchandise that a majority of our customers would find objectionable 

due to its sexually explicit or extremely violent nature. The challenge we face is in 

our ability to 1) help the customers understand what they are buying and 2) determine which products they find objectionable either before, and in some cases after, 

we have made it available for purchase. At times, this is harder than it sounds due 

to the subjective nature of some of these decisions. 

Any success we achieve in these efforts is accomplished, in large part, by following 

rating systems established by the entertainment industries. 

MOVIES

In the case of movies, we use the MPAA, Motion Picture Association of America, 

voluntary ratings (G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17) as we make decisions about which 

movies to carry. For example, we do not carry NC-17 rated content. We do carry 

G, PG, PG-13 and most R rated content. Our buyers for movies determine which 

movies to carry based on their best judgment. They use their knowledge of our customers and the customer response to the movie in theaters to make a decision on 

a specific title. We then utilize a register prompt at our cash registers to verify the 

age of the customer buying the R rated movie. In accordance with our policy only 

those customers who are age 17 and above are permitted to purchase R rated movies. 

We believe that because MPAA ratings have been in consistent use since 1968, 

there now exists a widespread customer understanding of the ratings. As a result, 

we have few customer questions about the ratings themselves. Our customers seem 

to clearly understand what they are purchasing. 

VIDEO GAMES AND COMPUTER SOFTWARE

In the case of video games (for example, Sony Playstation or Nintendo games) and 

computer software, we use the ESRB, Entertainment Software Rating Board, ratings (EC, E, T, M, and AO) as we make decisions about which products to carry. 

We do not carry software rated adults only (as rated by the ESRB). As a rule, we 

do not carry Parental Advisory stickered product. We do carry EC, E, T, and select 

M titles. Our buyers for video games and computer software determine which M 

rated products to carry based on his or her best judgment. They use their knowledge 

of our customers to make decisions on specific titles. We then utilize a register 

prompt at our cash registers to verify the age of the customer buying the M rated 

32

product. In accordance with our policy only customers who are age 17 and above 

are permitted to purchase M rated titles. 

Since the ESRB has only been in existence since 1994, we have taken several 

steps to educate our customers on how to interpret the ratings including in store 

signing; print advertising; and associate training. As a specific example, Wal-Mart 

stores display in store signing which explains the ESRB ratings. For video games 

and software, in store signing is placed in either the glass case or section where the 

item is stocked and explains the ESRB ratings to customers. 

MUSIC

In the case of music, the recording industry has not provided us a rating system 

to follow. The music labels determine on a title-by-title basis whether to attach a 

parental advisory sticker or not. We refer to this as stickered music. Today, we do 

not carry parental advisory stickered music. 

The music labels make edited versions of some stickered music available. We do 

carry most edited versions of music on selected product. This product is labeled 

‘‘edited version.’’ Our buyers for music determine which music to carry based on 

their best judgment. As we testified last year, from our perspective, an unbiased, 

standardized ratings system would help our customers determine whether specific 

music is appropriate for their needs and tastes. 

If the recording industry adopted a rating system, we would educate our customers about the rating system; train our associates about our company policy on 

the sale of rated music, and would most likely age restrict the sale based on the 

rating. We would enforce the restriction through a register prompt as we do with 

R rated movies and M rated video games. 

MARKETING OF MUSIC

Marketing of music is generally a partnership between the recording industry and 

the retailer. The recording industry will fund the marketing and provide the content 

in coordination with the retailer. As for Wal-Mart, our marketing of music is much 

more limited than that of other retailers. Our main approach is to market music 

in a store and drive customer traffic to the entertainment area where we display 

the music. We display the music to encourage sales. Occasionally we will do television and print advertising of title specific music. We control the content of the advertising and try to insure the ad is appropriate and appealing to our customers. 

CONCLUSION

While we use our best judgment at Wal-Mart on which items we carry, and while 

we work hard to restrict the sale of certain products to those under the age of 17, 

it is simply not possible to eliminate every image, word or topic that an individual 

might find objectionable. In addition, we’re the first to admit our systems and our 

associates, good as they are, are not infallible. 

However, it is our sincere hope that our policies make it possible for our customers to make informed decisions and for them to feel we are handling entertainment product in an appropriate manner. 

At this time I am pleased to answer any of your questions. 

APPENDIX

MPAA (Motion Picture Association) Ratings. 

G (General Audience)—All ages admitted. 

PG (Parental Guidance Suggested)—Some material may not be suitable for children. 

PG-13 (Parents Strongly Cautioned)—Some material may be inappropriate for 

children under 13. 

R (Restricted)—Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian. 

NC-17—No One 17 and Under Admitted. 

ESRB (Entertainment Standards Ratings Board) Ratings. 

EC (Early Childhood) content suitable for persons ages 3 and older. 

E (Everyone)—Content suitable for persons ages 6 and older. 

T (Teen)—Content suitable for persons ages 13 and older. 

M (Mature)—Content suitable for persons ages 17 and older. 

AO (Adults Only)—Content suitable only for adults.

Mr. UPTON. Well, thank you all. 

33

At this point, we will go to the questions from the members; and 

we will limit the time for us to 5 minutes. We may have a second 

round, depending on where things stand. 

Again, I know that Chairman Tauzin is intending to come downstairs. 

I go back to my statement, as a dad of an 11-year-old and an almost a 15-year-old, I know that when I go to purchase music at any 

store, I would say that very few parents actually take the time to 

read the lyrics before they buy the CD packet. 

First of all, the lyrics are inside the wrapper, which takes a little 

while to get off, I would note. And sometimes they are in the long 

box so they make sure you don’t put it in your coat jacket. For 

those that try to shoplift those things out, it is obviously more difficult. But it is also nearly impossible then to read the lyrics. 

As a dad, I think it is much better to simply look to see if in fact 

there is a warning sticker on the outside, particularly if your kids 

are going to be with you or that is the music that they would like 

to hear. 

Now, Mr. Peeler, you said in your opening statement that movies 

and games have made substantial improvement from—over the last 

couple of years, but the music industry has made some progress 

but not a lot. Now, I don’t know if you were aware of BMG’s new 

announced policy, and I would be interested to know what you 

think about their—if all studios have or recording industries have 

followed their lead, if that would substantially change your report 

card. My guess is that it would. Is that correct? 

Mr. PEELER. Well, in our report, we are looking at what the industry self-regulatory program is and whether members have complied with it. We cited the BMG initiative in our report as a positive development. We look forward to seeing it rolled out in the 

marketplace. 

From talking to parents, we think that a lot of parents are like 

you; that they would like more information about the basis for the 

parental advisory on the album. 

Mr. UPTON. As a dad, I would say that what BMG has done is 

perfect. I don’t think they need to go beyond that, and I think that 

it works well. 

Mr. Simmons, I don’t know if you have seen precisely what BMG 

has done. But what are your thoughts? It is actually on the screen 

behind you. 

Mr. SIMMONS. Okay. You know, I have seen it, and I think it is 

good if——

Mr. UPTON. I mean, we are not talking censorship. 

Mr. SIMMONS. No, I got it. I think that it is good and is acceptable to me. I don’t believe it should be standardized. And let me 

say that, you know, it is very difficult to measure words. If I were 

to say—for instance, if I were to say God, everyone in this room 

would have a different image. Some might even be offended. So it 

is very—you know, in words and in books and in poetry, which is 

what rap music and even song is written in that kind of form, it 

is poetry. And it conjures up—you know, it is about the imagination. And, you know, what you hear—and the whole rating system 

for me—for instance, what most people on this panel might refer 

to as a gangsta rapper, artists like DMX, I find him quite inspiraVerDate 0ct 31 2002 15:17 Dec 06, 2002 Jkt 082882 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 W:\DISC\81964 81964
34

tional, and I think the artists and the people who understand his 

music feel that way about him. 

I believe that there is such a cultural divide that the people 

whose job it has been to make these decisions and the people—even 

the industry—and the people who are listening on this panel don’t 

speak the language of the young people. People are so offended 

sometimes by profanity, what they refer to as profanity, the language, that content and real—the meaning of these songs is left 

un—I mean, completely not understood. Misunderstood. 

So I think if BMG wants to do that, since they have a small 

amount of relevant hip hop music, I mean, that is fine. I don’t 

think at Vivindi where we have—Def Jam records, where we have 

most of the hip hop music, it is a good idea. 

I think that we—parents—it says parental advisory, we have 

gone a long way to change since the last time we spoke. I mean, 

we have made sure that every radio commercial, television commercial, or any kind of a promotion is very clear or—sticker music, 

what the stickered music is. And I think that that is a good stand. 

We have all agreed to do that. And I think that is a lot, really. Because still there is, you know, such a—there is such different 

meanings depending on who is listening to most of this poetry. And 

the audience is getting a diverse group of ideas and they are important ideas. They are voices for people who would be voiceless. 

The last time I was here, Senator Thompson made a point because he had a cultural—he had a certain opinion. He said, Saving 

Private Ryan was a strong movie. It taught young people about 

war. And he thought that every young person—that was his opinion, and he made it clear that that was only his opinion—that 

every young person should see that movie so they would understand war. 

Well, I think it is important that every young person hear Snoop 

Dog, because I think it is a war that is going on down the block 

in some cases. I think it is important that kids in Beverly Hills 

hear—since mostly rappers’ voice is for voiceless people, not only 

in the ghettos now, the urban environment, it is the trailer parks 

that have become very popular and a group of people who haven’t 

had a voice in a long time. 

And now you have the trailer parks and the projects collaborating and having a dialog, and you have the kids in Beverly Hills 

riding around listening to them. And they are getting to understand the plight of those people who are in the poor—or I mean in 

these conditions. And that is the profanity, is the condition that 

they are living in, not in some of the words that people find offensive. And that is my opinion. So I know that that is not something 

you share, but language is a lot less important, again, than the 

content. 

And I think that when young girls who are listening to the 

songs—I know that there are some very sexist songs out there. I 

know one thing in the projects, no one wants to be the daddy of 

the baby’s momma. Madonna had a song, ‘‘Papa Don’t Preach,’’ before Hip-Hop, ‘‘I’m having my baby.’’ Nobody in Hip-Hop or in the 

project is bragging about having a baby today, because what is 

being said in the back rooms now is clear to them, and there is an 

opinion about it. 

35

About drugs, they talk about drugs, and I know people think that 

they influence people, but mostly it is against drugs, and mostly it 

is the effect of drugs that they talk about. But you may not hear 

the same thing that most of the Hip-Hop audience hears. I think 

it is important that there is truth, have an opportunity to come 

out, and I think that we shouldn’t worry about the reflections that 

come, because the music is like a reflection of our realities. Breaking the mirror is not going to help the problems. When they said 

‘‘F’’ the police, everybody got in an uproar. It called attention to 

what was in Compton at that time, a terrible situation. 

I think it is very, very important that these kids have a chance 

to express themselves, and I think that we have a very strong rating system. And I think that—I commend BMG on taking the initiative. I don’t think it should be something that everybody has to 

accept. 

Mr. UPTON. My time has expired, but we will come back. 

Mr. Gordon. 

Mr. GORDON. Mr. Peeler, you stated that in this checklist or this 

criterion that you are using for a report card, that the three 

groups—the motion picture industry and the video games and the 

recording industry—it all made progress, but that the recording industry has made less progress. 

What are some of the areas that would be applicable that these 

other groups are doing in terms of reducing the marketing to minors that, in your opinion, that the recording industry could do? 

And, Ms. Rosen, if you would listen to that, and I would like your 

opinion as to whether you think those are valid, and if so, what are 

you doing to meet that? 

So, Mr. Peeler, we will start with you. 

Mr. PEELER. Again, our tracking of the appearance of the advisory label and advertising has shown considerable progress over 

the last 2 years, but our most recent numbers show only about half 

of the ads contained—accurately reflected the parental advisory 

label. I think that the industry’s current efforts to monitor that and 

increase that are a very good sign. We would like to see those numbers higher. 

I think the two big areas where the Commission has expressed 

concern are, first, the area that the Chairman was just raising, 

that we think it would be a better system if there was information 

about the reason for putting the parental advisory label on the recordings. The second big area has been that the current system 

does not include any restrictions on marketing of the product directly to children. We believe that the movie and game industry 

systems, which do include restrictions on direct marketing of rated 

products to children, is a better model. 

Mr. GORDON. Okay. So what are they doing? More specifically, 

how are they, the motion picture industry, how are they limiting 

this marketing to minors? 

Mr. PEELER. Well, they have come up with voluntary industry 

self-regulatory guidelines which limit where they will place their 

ads in an attempt to reduce advertising, or programming or in publications that are very popular with teens. We have in our report 

suggested that they could do a couple of things better in that area, 

36

but they certainly have a program, and our review indicated that 

their members are complying with it. 

Mr. GORDON. Ms. Rosen, is this an adequate analogy? You know, 

is there—the motion picture industry, are they smarter, or are they 

more socially conscious than the recording industry, or is it just different? 

Ms. ROSEN. It is not analogous at all, and I think there are two 

issues. Let us deal with the age-based marketing restrictions that 

Mr. Peeler referred to. 

We are the only industry that has edited versions of music. So 

we have a choice. When you have edited versions of music on the 

radio and edited versions of videos on MTV—and the only place 

this ever comes up is on MTV and BTV. Frankly, the record companies don’t advertise as significantly as other industries do. We do 

more marketing, street marketing, things like that, than we do advertising. 

But if you market—if you are advertising an edited version, you 

are recognizing inherently that there is a differentiation between 

music and other content products, because the edited versions will 

still have the same music, same artist, similar sentiments, but the 

explicitness will be edited out. 

And so what’s better? We have this constant discussion with the 

FTC. Not advertising the edited version means that people don’t 

know that there is an edited version available. We came to the conclusion that advertising the edited version was more informative 

and more productive for both parents and young people than not 

advertising at all, and the only thing that people would understand 

is that there is an explicit version. 

So it is a very different industry. It is not analogous to the situation in—— Mr. GORDON. Well, you have edited versions of movies. 

Ms. ROSEN. No, they don’t. 

Mr. GORDON. When you go into—— Ms. ROSEN. In airports, in airplanes, but——

Mr. GORDON. I mean, when you—if you go in to rent one, you 

will see sometimes that they say, this is an edited version. 

Ms. ROSEN. I actually have never seen that. 

Mr. GORDON. Haven’t you? 

Ms. ROSEN. I have actually seen director’s cuts, which is the opposite, where they put in all the stuff they have taken out. Television, they edit out the same way they do with music broadcast, 

of course. So, you know, is the notion that there is an edited 

version—but they are not selling them commercially. I think that 

is what we are talking about. Broadcast is fine. That is not an 

issue. MTV edits their videos. Radio edits their songs, so there is 

no sort of, you know, innocent exposure in music. 

If you want the explicit version, you have to actually secure it. 

Mr. SIMMONS. This may not be helpful but it is a point I made 

earlier, if you don’t mind if I interject here. I want to add, you 

know, when you edit a song or a movie, you don’t take out the content. You just take out a word, you know, a language. I mean, we 

are all—the whole discussion, when—what is—you know, in all—

every book that you can think of, any good book, the Sutras, Yoga 

Sutras, or the Bible, or the Koran or the Tora, nobody ever talks 

37

about language. It is what you intend to do. It is—you know, first 

rule—nonviolence. You know, that is one of the first rules, spiritual 

rules, I mean, for any—you know, wherever it is that you practice, 

you know, your higher self. 

Why do we think when we take a word out and the whole idea 

is still communicated, the whole thing is—I mean, we don’t have 

a—the judgment that we are making—— Mr. GORDON. Well, the response might be this, my response 

might be this: There is a different responsibility in terms of—— Mr. SIMMONS. This is cultural. The whole discussion is cultural. 

Mr. GORDON. I think there is a different—throughout cultures, 

there is a different responsibility to minors versus adults, and I 

think—I mean, Spike Lee, you know, has been successful in conveying a message, and somehow he lives within the motion picture 

industry’s effort not to censor. But to rate in an effort to give parents tools, I don’t think anybody is talking about taking out words. 

The question is: Are you going to give notice of the words beforehand? So we should not think this is editing anywhere. 

Ms. ROSEN. Let me respond, if you would, Congressman, to the 

content distributor, because Mr. Peeler raised two issues. One is 

that we don’t prevent advertising in vehicles where young people 

go. I have already said we made the decision that it is better to 

advertise that there is an edited version available, because that is 

what puts pressure on retailers and others to go out and pursue 

the edited version. 

On the content descriptors, we are in a very different world than 

motion pictures. The motion picture guidelines basically say, if you 

have these words and it is showing these naked body parts or this 

level of blood and violence connected with these words, then it gets 

this rating. Words don’t provide that. Words are simply interpretative. They are subjective. That is why content descriptors are not 

appropriate for music. 

BMG is undergoing an experiment. Everybody is looking at 

BMG’s experiment, but it is worth noting that as fantastic as 

BMG’s announcement is, people should know that the only album 

that has actually come out from BMG so far has all of the content 

descriptors that our logo already has. There is one record. It is 

clips, I think. You know, it says it is strong language, sexual and 

violent content. Guess what? That is what every single retail store, 

that is what every single advertisement, that is what every single 

Web site already says the logo means. The parental advisory is a 

notice to consumers that recordings identified by this logo will contain strong language or depictions of violence, sex or substance 

abuse. There is no mystery—I find this a bit of a red herring—

there is no mystery about what this means. We constantly advertise it. 

Mr. GORDON. You might—my time is up, but just for your information, Albertson’s now is selling edited versions of movies. 

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Towns. 

Mr. TOWNS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me begin by just asking you, Mr. Severson and also Mr. 

Marmaduke, you are saying to the committee that the age-based 

system is in the best interest of consumers. Who would enforce 

such a system? Because it seems that those large companies and 

38

those who own a number of stores having, you know, greater resources to enforce such a system, while small music stores like 

ones that are around in my district who are struggling to stay relevant due to the illegal downloads, might not have the luxury nor 

the resources to enforce such a system. 

Mr. SEVERSON. I think that we are calling for more age-based to 

help the parents to be better educated to determine for their minor 

children what a better system would be. The enforcement of that 

can be systematic, but also it requires on human beings at the 

cashier level to be able to understand policies and then enforce 

those policies. So we are calling on a human element to make sure 

that while you can have a system to help support that, that even 

in small companies where you might not have those systems, you 

still have to rely on the cashier to enforce policies that an individual retailer might set to determine age appropriateness. 

Mr. MARMADUKE. Well, Congressman, I would say that the contrary would be the case in my experience. And that is that the 

small retailer generally is the proprietor who is in charge of his 

store, and he knows his customer base better than any chain will 

ever know their customer, and so enforcement would be actually 

easier for a small and local retailer if they elected to do so. 

Mr. TOWNS. I was sort of looking at it a different way. I was 

thinking that a store like Wal-Mart that sells everything else, you 

know, that they could have a different attitude about it. You know, 

I was thinking—you know, because you sell all kinds of goods, so 

therefore, you know, you could take a hard line and whatever on 

anything, because that is not really, you know—it just happens to 

be a minor product that you are involved in. 

Mr. SEVERSON. I am not sure I understand the question. 

Mr. TOWNS. I am saying to you that Wal-Mart could take a position that a small store could not take, you know, in many instances, because the fact that this is basically what they are selling. You are selling a lot of different products. So, therefore, you 

could draw the line and say, no, we are not going to do this, we 

are not going to sell this or whatever, because of the fact that that 

is just a minor item with you in terms of what you are selling. 

Mr. SEVERSON. Well, we are not suggesting that every retailer 

has to do a certain thing; that every retailer sets their own policies 

in accordance with what they believe their customers want and 

need. And we would be setting the policy that we believe our customers would expect us to do, while the individual company could 

set their own policy and enforce it as they wish. 

Mr. TOWNS. The age-based system, what would—let me put it 

this way. What type of content would Wal-Mart not sell? 

Mr. SEVERSON. That is a very subjective question to ask, and 

there is no simple answer where I can give that, but we try and 

represent the interests of the majority of our customers. Okay? And 

if we believe that the majority of our customers would expect to 

find this product on our shelves, then that is what we want to represent. 

Now, if there are certain products that might have an explicit nature to it that our customer might expect, we would also hope to 

be able to restrict that sale to minors, so that parents can make 

39

that choice and determine whether it is appropriate for their children or not. 

As far as what we—I mean, we have stated policies that we will 

not carry X-rated movies, we will not carry explicit magazines, we 

will not carry adult-only video games. Those are ratings that exist 

that we have determined that we are not going to be involved in. 

Everything after that becomes subjective to a point where you determine and you try and make the best choice you can, based on 

what you believe your customer wants and expects. 

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Simmons. 

Mr. SIMMONS. I was going to ask what kind of music wouldn’t 

you sell. You mentioned four different kinds of visual products, but 

you didn’t mention what kind of music. And that is an important 

question, since we are here addressing the music issue today. What 

kind of poetry would you limit? So that is really the question I 

think he was asking. 

Mr. SEVERSON. Well, our current policy states that we will not 

carry parental-advisory-sticker music, and that is our current policy on that. That could certainly change if there were to be a 

change in the rating system that would become age-appropriate. 

That would be consistent with the other entertainment products 

that we do carry that we do have a very consistent policy on. 

Mr. SIMMONS. Would you, for instance, not carry music that describes nudity, or do you already carry tons of product that describes nudity and describes—you probably do, I guess? 

Mr. SEVERSON. Yeah. I don’t pretend to understand every single 

lyric that is on every single album in every single one of our stores, 

but we rely on the industry’s policy currently of parental-advisorystickered music as our policy to determine what we carry. Thank 

you. 

Mr. TOWNS. You know, I think that what we are really saying 

here is that, you know, different words have different meanings 

based on your life experience, and I think that, you know, that is 

something you just can’t lose sight of. And, of course, these young 

people, in many instances this is what they are doing; they are expressing themselves out of their own little life experience. And, of 

course, we cannot lose sight of that, and that is something that I 

think that has to be discussed even more, because what is offensive 

in one sense might not be offensive in another. And that is also a 

key issue that I think we need to spend some time talking about, 

because the background, here again, makes a difference in terms 

of the person’s definition of, you know—and it could be different 

from yours, it could be different from mine. 

But the point is this: I think that this is something that we 

should not ignore and cannot ignore. And of course a lot of times, 

you know, once you stop and you listen to it, then you find out that 

maybe it is not really that, it is something else. 

So, you know, Mr. Chairman, I think it is good that you are having this hearing. I think that this is something that we need to 

have a tremendous amount of dialog around, because this is a very 

serious issue. And I think that the interpretation, you know, many 

times is just so different, you know, based on the person’s background. 

I yield back. 

40

Mr. UPTON. Ms. Harman. 

Ms. HARMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I first want to say that the participation of Mr. Simmons on this 

panel is very helpful to me. I think his testimony was important. 

His comment about speaking truth to power is extremely important. We should never forget that we don’t have all the answers up 

here, and we do need to hear from artists and others about how 

they view all sorts of situations. 

And I want to say to our colleague, Mr. Towns, that many of the 

points he has made this morning I feel are valid, and while I may 

make choices for my kids that he might disagree with, I think that 

is also protected under our Constitution. And I think that it is very 

important that we do have a First Amendment and that we can 

hear different voices and that one person’s definition of truth may 

not be another person’s definition of truth, and I think that is 

healthy in a democracy. 

At any rate, I wanted to follow up on a comment that Ms. Rosen 

made at the end of her testimony. She didn’t expand on it, but I 

think her point was that a number of these peer-to-peer networks 

don’t have any guidance for consumers. They also pose other problems, but I don’t think this is a hearing on digital rights management. I have strong views on that, but I will save them for another 

forum. But I am interested in these peer-to-peer networks as they 

affect the subject we are talking about today, which is advice to 

parents. 

And so I thought I would ask Mr. Peeler for his views on this 

and whether he has looked at this and what he thinks ought to be 

done about this. And then I would like Ms. Rosen to comment on 

whatever he might say. 

Mr. PEELER. Well, we certainly think that it is an important 

music distribution channel, and we certainly intend to include it in 

this ongoing review that we are doing right now. It is an issue that 

is different from the issue that we have looked at in the past, that 

focuses on what types of active marketing is done for the music. 

Kids have to learn about the music from some source, and what we 

have been looking at is what advertising and what marketing leads 

kids there. 

Ms. HARMAN. And just let me follow up for 1 second. Her claim 

was that a lot of legitimate companies are involved in some of this 

advertising on these P-to-P networks. Have you found that to be 

the case? 

Mr. PEELER. I don’t believe we have looked at it yet. As I said, 

that is one of the issues that we are looking at in this current review. 

Ms. HARMAN. Okay. Thank you. 

Ms. Rosen. 

Ms. ROSEN. The United States Air Force, Orbitz, Comcast, significant companies are advertising on these networks. I think it 

is—you know, it is not just another distribution network. I think 

we are finding that in targeted audiences, it is a primary axis. And 

the issue is if a kid hears a song on a radio, which is still where 

the majority of people hear new music, and then says, oh, I like 

an artist, what our statistics are showing us is they don’t go anywhere else. 

41

So they are getting it from the radio, and they are going to a 

peer-to-peer network, and they are getting that song or other songs 

by similar artists. There are share files where you go into the drive 

of the person who you have pulled down the song that you like and 

say, ‘‘Show me what else you have.’’ So it is not that they are learning about it from reading the New York Times on Sunday, which 

I noticed was a big criticism in the FTC report. It is that they are 

learning about it through these networks and through the sales 

point, is normally where you would have that sticker go all the way 

through. That is where we have been careful that sticker goes all 

the way through. 

If I could just beg your indulgence, Congresswoman, on one 

point. I think that the committee would really benefit from thinking about the testimony of these two really thoughtful, successful 

retailers, because both of them are good retailers and successful 

companies and have been in the business a long time. 

Hastings Records, run by Mr. Marmaduke, uses a sticker as a 

sales restriction tool. They have other information in the sticker for 

their constituents to say, you know what, if you are under 18, you 

cannot buy it. Wal-Mart is saying, oh, no, no, no; we need more information to use this as a sales restriction tool. But Hastings is 

being pretty successful doing it. 

And so I think it is important to recognize when people are so— are cynical and accuse us of just ignoring what would be the right 

thing to do for profit, Wal-Mart, which is 25—and Kmart, which is 

25 to 30 percent of all music physical sales, is telling us you would 

sell more music if you gave us a rating system. 

The fact that the industry isn’t doing it, you know—and this gets 

to Mr. Shimkus’s point. The fact that we are not doing what everybody says they want us to do maybe actually is based on some level 

of principle and rationale, on the substantive artist’s view, as Mr. 

Simmons has said. 

Retailers are telling us we would sell more, although other retailers are telling us they think the tool is just fine. This is not a 

black-and-white issue. 

Ms. HARMAN. My time is up, Mr. Chairman, but I would just 

comment that I don’t think it is black and white either. I think 

that most of the issues we address in this committee involve 

shades of gray, and making a better decision is a hard thing to figure out often. And often regulation is not the answer, as I think 

it is not the answer here. But I—if I were cynical, I wouldn’t be 

in this line of work. I am not cynical, and I think that we are looking at some very smart people who are testifying before us and who 

are searching for answers, not just for our kids and not just for 

other people’s kids, but for their own kids. 

So I see a bunch of responsible parents out there, and I think 

that as we search for answers together, we need to be very, very 

careful that we don’t define truth in our own way and ignore truth 

as others define it. Thank you. 

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Simmons, did you want to just respond to that? 

Mr. SIMMONS. The one thing I want to make a point—and I 

heard the gentleman say about, you know, the will of Congress to 

act on legislation that will protect this industry and that there was 

some connection. And the point—I took offense to it, but the thing 

42

to realize is that in a few years if we don’t start to protect ourselves, if the Congress doesn’t move to protect us, we won’t have 

an industry. It will be out of business, I mean, in a few years. 

The dramatic drop in record sales is—if we don’t address it now, 

there will be no way for any of us to be in business, and I think 

that, you know, that is—we know that it is illegal to steal people’s 

copyrights and take advantage of people’s music or trade it, and we 

really need to address it. It is a separate issue, but it is certainly 

one I would like to bring up, because it really is the end of our industry as we know it. 

I think my company is one of the last really profitable ones. Everybody has taken a tremendous downturn, more than the economy, much, much, more than the economy, and we have what has 

traditionally been a recession-proof business; not only music, but it 

is small—this kind of entertainment. But we are almost out of 

business, and we really need to move to protect this industry, and 

I hope it is not tied to whether or not we can censor the music. 

So I just want to make that comment. Thank you. 

Mr. UPTON. Again, I just want to reiterate that I don’t think any 

member wants to censor music. That is the furthest thing from any 

of our minds, and I just want to give you that—— Mr. SIMMONS. I am sorry. I didn’t mean to—but we do have to 

address that issue. That has got to be one of the most important 

things if we are going to have a record industry. If Time Warner 

Music and Vivendi Music and these companies are going to be in 

business at all, we have to address this issue immediately. 

Mr. UPTON. Ms. Rosen, you said that there was no mystery surrounding the numerous reasons why it wouldn’t go to the more expansive label which we are looking at, which is behind you. If that 

is the case, why not just go ahead with that type of label? I have 

to admit I really not have seen your brochures in different places 

where I shop for music in terms of what the ‘‘parental advisory, explicit content’’ means in terms of the full description. And if there 

is no mystery behind it, why not go along with what BMG has 

done? 

Ms. ROSEN. Actually, that—BMG has four different versions of 

their sticker, and this is only one of them that says—that has everything in there. And one just says language, and one just says 

sexual content, and one just says violence. I don’t think it is very 

hard to figure out that maybe you would put this sticker on every 

one, regardless of my personal view of whether or not it is pejorative. I think the issue is how you parse those particular content 

descriptors. And we have made a significant progress in public 

awareness. Our surveys, and the FTC’s also, show well over 90 percent awareness of the parental advisory logo and its meaning. So 

I don’t believe that there is this lack of understanding about explicit content. 

Mr. UPTON. Do you know if any of the member companies are 

looking to follow what BMG has done? Do they see that as an experiment, short term, long term? What is the reaction from the 

other——

Ms. ROSEN. I don’t know of any other companies that are looking 

to adopt it. I think people are just watching to see what happens 

in the marketplace. 

43

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Marmaduke, Mr. Severson, do you want to comment on what BMG has done specifically? Do you think that has 

been positive? Dr. Rich? 

Mr. MARMADUKE. Well, since I don’t have to sit there and parse 

them out, I would say that it is probably viewed as positive by us. 

But I would say that the current system seems to work very well 

for us. We see no customer irritation at all. Our customers seem 

to be very satisfied with the parental advisory. If we come up with 

more information, certainly we would not see that as a negative 

but, you know, it doesn’t seem—the system right now to us, from 

our customer’s viewpoint, doesn’t seem to be broken. So we would 

just as soon stay where we are. 

Mr. SEVERSON. And from our point of view, obviously it has had 

no effect for us, because we do not carry the parental-advisorystickered music, but we do see it as a step in the right direction 

and would encourage it to continue. 

Mr. UPTON. Dr. Rich. 

Mr. RICH. I think that as Mr. Simmons said, this is all about 

truth, and I think truth needs to go both directions. I think that 

the artist should have the right and, in fact, the obligation to speak 

the truth to all of us, so we know what is going on in the streets. 

You know, I take care of the kids in that street, and I am always 

learning more of the language as it evolves, because it is a dynamic 

entity. And so I want to emphasize it from our perspective. This 

is not about what is offensive or hard to relate to or from another 

person’s world. It is about simply what is understood by the research in hand to be potentially dangerous to their health and their 

long-term health. 

And I think that while there is information out there, that there 

are edited versions—go into a store and try to buy one—with the 

exception of Wal-Mart, it is exceedingly difficult. And I have been 

laughed out of a number of stores, like don’t be ridiculous, we 

would never carry such a thing. So I think that that is key. 

I agree with the sentiment that if it is no big deal to the BMG 

information, that it would be good to have it there. I think that as 

much as people understand something to have a simple binary system of on or off, parental advisory is less informative to parents 

than one that tells them exactly what they are buying here. And 

I think, to add to that, one of the key features that is problematic 

for me as a parent and as a pediatrician is that this is not an objective or unbiased placement of the sticker. This is decided by the 

producer of the music who stands to make or lose money, depending on whether Wal-Mart puts it on their shelves or not. 

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Marmaduke, would you agree with the comment 

with regard to the availability of edited——

Mr. MARMADUKE. Well, he doesn’t shop at our stores because we 

have always had edited and unedited. 

Mr. UPTON. Remember, he is in the East. You are in the West. 

Mr. MARMADUKE. So I think every retailer has their own unique 

way of dealing with this issue, but we have customers that desire 

both, and we have both for them. 

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Gordon, do you have other questions? 

Mr. GORDON. I am sort of in Mr. Upton’s situation, Ms. Rosen. 

I am really not as familiar with the current system that you have 

44

in terms of the advisory label. Could you tell me what you do and 

how you arrive at those decisions? 

Ms. ROSEN. There is a broad series of guidelines that accompany 

the logo that are available to sound recording producers and actually are available on our Web site for the public to see and critique, 

which they never do. And it essentially gives guidance to a record 

company about what they ought to look at to make a determination 

on whether or not to put the sticker on it. So it is along the lines 

of if there are explicit violent lyrics that could be associated mentally with violent images, if there is language or profanity, things 

like that. 

Mr. GORDON. And does the record company or the artist make 

that decision? 

Ms. ROSEN. Usually it is a joint decision, but the record company 

has responsibility for the decision. 

Mr. GORDON. So then I guess we are over this thing about censoring, then, Mr. Simmons, because apparently you are already 

making those decisions, and that is—but it is not considered censoring, so I don’t think that is really an issue before us today. 

Mr. SIMMONS. I am sorry. My point is that if we put strong language, sexual and violent content, parental advisory, explicit content on that sticker, it would not affect our sales at all. Maybe we 

would sell more. And the reason we would sell more, as this gentleman said, it would be easier for him to determine. 

So it is not—it is difficult to answer the questions in the way 

that you guys are asking us. Again, these are words. 

Mr. GORDON. Right. But apparently the word—— Mr. SIMMONS. Describing on NBC at 6 o’clock news with the language that you guys are comfortable with is okay. Describing a violent act, describing in words a violent act at 8 o’clock prime time 

on Fox is okay. It is acceptable to you. But the point I am making 

is——

Mr. GORDON. So are you opposed to what the industry is doing 

now? 

Mr. SIMMONS. I am not opposed to it. I am telling you that it is 

not—once you put ‘‘parental advisory, explicit content’’ on there, 

again, it is not going to affect my business. I am just recommending to you that we don’t go any further. You know, the FTC— or FCC has made choices about a women’s lib poem, and they sued 

the radio or threatened to close the radio down if they played it 

anymore. I am just afraid of any more involvement. I am concerned 

about the level of involvement in pushing from this panel and 

other—you know, because I believe—— Mr. GORDON. If I could—if I could just reclaim my time. I have 

a limited amount of time. 

So, Ms. Rosen, as I understand it, then, the industry is already, 

if you want to—I won’t say editing, but someone other than the artist is already making some decisions now about an advisory opinion, not changing the words or anything, but about advisory opinion. 

Ms. ROSEN. Right. And I think your question was why can’t we 

go farther than that. 

Mr. GORDON. Not necessarily. 

Ms. ROSEN. And parse out. 

45

Mr. GORDON. I am not saying why can’t you go further. I am just 

trying to establish that there is already something being done 

along that line. 

Ms. ROSEN. Yes. And I think what you have heard Mr. Simmons 

say is really the—you know, welcome to my life. This is the balance 

that the industry tries to achieve between our responsibility to the 

community and to parents and extremely strong feelings in the creative community about this issue. And so the sticker itself and 

what it implies is specific enough to be useful to retailers and useful to parents. After all, more than 75 percent of them already approve of it. But it is general enough to not be specifically pejorative 

and interpretive about the lyrics. 

And when you get to the level that BMG—of the BMG proposal, 

some people are concerned it is too specific to say that a song about 

rape is—is that sex, is that violence, is that strong language? What 

is that? And ought the artist not be able to say, you know, that it 

is explicit, it is mature content, you make your own decision. 

And so that is I think the raging analysis that constantly goes 

on, and it comes, as has been said, from a place of principle. What 

Dr. Rich just said is exactly wrong. Everybody tells us we would 

make more money if we acceded to this. You guys would like us 

better. It would be politically the right thing to do. It would be financially the right thing to do. And yet we can’t go there, because 

it comes from a place of—— Mr. GORDON. The question before us then is not whether or not 

there should be some arbitrary decision made as to whether or not 

a label should be on a product. So apparently we are all—at least 

we are not arguing that. The question is just what level of specificity, and so that we have established apparently that artists and 

the industry can accept some type of a labeling process. Is that correct? 

Ms. ROSEN. Absolutely. And I think we have not just accepted it, 

I think we have embraced it and promoted it very effectively. 

Mr. SIMMONS. I think if that—if you don’t mind my interjecting. 

We have made dramatic changes in the way that we promote our 

labels and in the way that we market and include the labels in the 

way we market our product. And we have gone to such lengths to 

let people know that there is, you know, some content that you 

may find offensive. 

To go further is part of—is going down a path that I feel is—that 

it is already a bit disturbing, because how do we then define what 

is offensive? That is already a subjective issue that we agree that 

anything is—because we can put a parental advisory sticker on 

anything and sell more. Anything we smack a parental advisory on 

sells more. Every time you attack rap music or young people’s 

music, whether it is jazz, blues, rock and roll, or any new art form, 

Shakespeare and plays, whatever you attack, whatever the censors 

are, people are uncomfortable with the young culture attack, it 

sells more. 

I remember I was so thankful when my brother ‘‘Run’’ from Run 

DMC, all he ever sang about was God, school, and surviving in the 

ghetto. He is now Reverend Run. The whole world attacked him. 

His album sales went up. He was on the cover of every newspaper 

as he came into town. And now people, of course, love Reverend 

46

Run and Run DMC and they love the old songs. The old songs are 

now American classics, and he listens to them closely. And the 

album is about God, again, school, and higher aspirations, higher 

American aspirations. That is what Run DMC sang about, and they 

were gangster rappers in 1983. 

Matter of fact, when I met Ben Chavis, who is now the head of 

the Hip-Hop Summit Network, he used Reverend Run and Run 

DMC to register voters. The board of directors almost fired him. 

That was their rigid attitude about young people and their voice. 

Mr. GORDON. So are you following the RIAA’s system of putting 

the rating—— Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, sir. In fact, we at our summit—— Mr. GORDON. That doesn’t stifle you? 

Mr. SIMMONS. [continuing] we added to the way—we gave a long 

list of additional ways to promote that system, and we have been 

the ones who are promoting it to the rest of the industry through 

our vehicles to accept this new, even greater promotion of these labels. So we absolutely want to support them. We just don’t want 

to go down the wrong path. 

Mr. GORDON. Sure. So I guess what we have established then is 

that it is not censorship, and we ought not be crying censorship to 

talk about—— Mr. SIMMONS. Well, there have been some instances where industries have attacked artists in—— Mr. GORDON. But you are using a system of rating—— Mr. SIMMONS. That’s correct. 

Mr. GORDON. Okay. Thank you. 

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Towns, do you have additional questions? 

Mr. TOWNS. Just one quick question, Mr. Chairman. To Mr. Peeler, this billboard, how did you develop this? 

Mr. PEELER. I am sorry; the billboard? 

Mr. TOWNS. Yes. How did you develop it? 

Mr. PEELER. This billboard here? 

Mr. TOWNS. Yeah, yeah. Right. What I have——

Mr. PEELER. That is—— Mr. TOWNS. Actually I am talking about the July 15th, 2000— the billboard where you have the archives chart? Do you see this? 

Basically, you know—pass it to him. 

I got that from someplace. 

Mr. PEELER. This is, I believe, a private publication of the Billboard 200. It is a listing of top-selling albums. 

We used that information and other information in connection 

with our December 2001 report to determine which corporations to 

send requests to ask about specific marketing practices. 

Mr. TOWNS. Let me make sure I understand that. 

Mr. PEELER. This is a published list of top-selling albums that 

is published by the industry by Billboard.com. 

Mr. TOWNS. Published by——

Mr. PEELER. It is published by an industry source, Billboard.com. 

Mr. TOWNS. You had nothing to do with what? 

Mr. PEELER. We had nothing to do with that particular list. We 

used this list, which is published by an industry trade source, to 

develop the list of music recordings that we were going to ask 

about the marketing practices of. 

47

Mr. TOWNS. And—— Mr. PEELER. This is a list of top-selling albums that we got off 

the Internet the same way anybody else would. 

Mr. TOWNS. And the 25—you know, the reason I am asking this 

question is that, you know, looking at that list, the top 25, you 

know, 22 of them were urban, you know, and that just sort of hit 

me—struck me funny, you know, that out of the top 25, 22 of them 

were. And that didn’t strike you funny? 

Mr. PEELER. Well, again, this is a list of what consumers are 

buying in the marketplace. 

Mr. TOWNS. In a random kind of way, you are saying? 

Mr. PEELER. It is not in a random way. It is the industry’s tracking of what consumers are purchasing in the marketplace. These 

are the music recordings that consumers are buying the most of. 

These are the most popular music recordings, and it shows what 

their rank is this week and what their rank was last week. This 

is very much like what is published every—Monday morning, about 

which movies everybody goes to over the weekend. 

Mr. TOWNS. I am trying to figure out how you get to this, because 22 of those 25 are black, and that is the reason why I am 

asking that question. So how do you arrive at—that doesn’t seem 

to be a—— Mr. PEELER. The industry tracks sales, and the industry reports 

the sales. 

Mr. TOWNS. That is the way you do it? That is the way you 

have—— Mr. PEELER. That is the way the industry does it. 

Mr. SIMMONS. But you also have some poor white rappers in 

there. So that would be about it. It is a cultural issue, and I believe 

that—it is very—we have to be very careful. Again, these are voices 

of people who are not so visible, you know, and the reason that I 

am so adamant about protecting them is because they are talking 

about conditions in our society that are swept—you know, people 

are very offended by the Jerry Springer show, and Maury Povich 

and these shows; and, of course, sometimes you realize there is 

some ignorance and some poverty in this, and you see it. 

You see white people. God, you only see rappers mostly, poor people who have voices. So when you see the white people who have 

voices, it is amazing, because it has not been in style until now. 

So you say 22 of those 25 people are black, but then they are also 

those white rappers, you add to the 24, the 25 or something like 

that. So it is just—the fact is that these are reflections of the conditions of—in our society, and these reflections are not always pretty. 

They are honest, and it is all reality, and breaking the mirror will 

not change that. 

And that is the point I want to make, and I want to protect these 

artists. I think it is important that America hears them. We have 

made a lot of change. I think that some of the good that you see 

when you watch those shows now, that couldn’t happen a few years 

ago before rap. I remember when my brother got on MTV, there 

was no one black on MTV except Michael Jackson, and he had his 

hair straightened and nose broken. But Run DMC, their first 

record, they said they made a connection and the beginning of a 

connection between the projects and the trailers. They speak the 

48

same language now, you know, and I am hopeful that will have 

great ramifications, political ramifications in this country. There is 

a commonality in this poverty that they share amongst each other. 

And, again, the kids in Beverly Hills understand it, and I want to 

protect it because of its socially redeeming qualities. 

And, again, when you watch Maury Povich and they want to 

know who is the baby’s daddy, and there is the white guy and the 

black girl or vice versa, they never mention race, ever. There is so 

much that rap has done to bring people together. So that is what 

I am protecting, and that is why I am here, not for the number of 

records I sell. If I slap one more sticker on the record, I will just 

sell more records. 

Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Peeler, though, in closing, you picked 25—FTC 

picked 25, and of course of those 22, you know, you don’t know anything about this? I am trying to figure out how do you do that. Of 

course, out of the 200, you did pick the 25. Right? 

Mr. PEELER. There are two separate issues, as I understand it. 

Mr. TOWNS. Help me, then, because my understanding is that 

you selected the 25. 

Mr. PEELER. Again, as I understand it, there are two separate 

issues. One of the issues that you have raised with us before was 

the ads that we monitored and reported on. 

Mr. TOWNS. Right. 

Mr. PEELER. And those are ads that we monitored in our own review of the advertising. Seventy-five percent of the ads that we 

monitored—in other words, when we looked at publications, we 

picked ads out of the publications for explicit-rated music and 

made a decision whether or not about the parental advisory was 

properly displayed. Seventy-five percent of those ads were by urban 

artists. 

The other issue I think you are raising is how do we select, when 

we prepare our reports, what music marketing we look at? And we 

have used industry publications like this billboard chart to ask 

about the marketing practices for the top-selling most popular parental-labeled albums for the purpose of preparing reports back to 

Congress to say, here is how this is going. 

Now, obviously the issue that you have raised about what the 

mix is, is one that we need to be sensitive to, and we have been. 

You have raised it with us before, and we appreciate that. It is an 

issue that we want to be sensitive to. This should not be about HipHop music. This should be about the industry’s advisory program 

and whether consumers are getting the information they need. And 

we agree with you on that. 

Mr. TOWNS. Yield back. 

Mr. UPTON. Thank you. Recognize the Chairman of the full committee, Mr. Tauzin. 

Chairman TAUZIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I to welcome 

you all. Thank you for coming. Let me make a point. Ms. Rosen, 

I was absent. We were upstairs with the corporate responsibility 

hearings on Quest and Global Crossing, and I apologize for being 

a little late. And I missed your opening statement. But I understand you mentioned the problems of peer-to-peer and of content 

protection for musicians and those of you who are in the context 

business, either in creative works or in retail/wholesale. 

49

Let me make a couple points, and then I want to ask you some 

questions. One, this committee, of all the committees of Congress, 

is as solid I think in joining you in attempting to find solutions to 

those problems, not simply because we want to direct kids to the 

stores where they see these labels and where they are going to get 

the benefit of whatever labels are put on this music, but simply because we want to protect content. We understand that those of you 

in the creative world who make a career of this deserve to have 

your creativity protected, and those of you who are valuing these 

products deserve to have the value protected. 

And so I want to associate myself with those comments you 

made. I think we all have a joint interest in that. That is on the 

one hand. 

On the other hand, we also have a joint interest in not substituting ourselves for parents and asking you to become the parents of all the kids of America—that is not our job, or yours either—but simply helping parents in the business of raising their 

children in regard to some of these questions about exposure to violence and other things that may hurt them in their young age. 

In that regard, you wrote a letter to the FTC which basically said 

that we have found that parents who are aware of the parental advisory program are not only satisfied but find the program effective. 

First question. I am sending you a letter, by the way, with some 

very specific questions I would like you to respond to, but let me 

just take you through some of it right now. What was the methodology used for you to make that statement? Did you have focus 

groups? Did you go around the country inviting parents to look at 

these warning labels and comment on them? Did you show them 

alternatives? BMG has—one of your members has now, as you 

know, indicated that they are willing and are now putting a little 

more information up there so parents can know why explicit content advisory is on a label, a little bit more about what may be in 

the package. 

In your methodology, did you show parents this alternative? Did 

they have a chance to say, I would rather that; I would really appreciate it if the music industry would all adopt a warning label 

that included just a little more information for me to know what 

may be in it. I may, for example, not have any problem with my 

children hearing some sexual-related music, but I may have a problem with violence. Vice versa. I may have a problem with music 

that may tend to, you know, subject them to too much violent content, and I may be okay—parents have different ways of—views 

about raising their children. This kind of stuff looks like it might 

help them. Did you give them that choice—is what I am asking—

in your methodology? What was your methodology? Could you describe it to us? 

Ms. ROSEN. Actually, it was the FTC study, not ours, that found 

that parents approved of the system. 

Chairman TAUZIN. So you have not done any kind of focus groups 

or——

Ms. ROSEN. Well, we used to do it pretty regularly, but I think 

because they are always received with an appropriate level of cynicism by members, why bother? That is what I figured. But since 

50

the FTC study showed such good results for us, I figured that 

would probably be as credible as we need it to be. 

Chairman TAUZIN. The FTC, we know, didn’t give them this kind 

of a choice or this kind of a look. 

Do you think if parents had a choice between a program that had 

the parental advisory explicit content only and one that had a little 

more information about what may be in the package, that they 

would choose the first instead of the latter? 

Ms. ROSEN. Well, I don’t know the answer to that. Mr. 

Marmaduke from Hastings Records, he was here saying that they 

used the existing parental advisory to restrict sales, and that they 

get support from parents and consumers who are not clamoring for 

more information. We do a lot of promotion on our logo and what 

it means, and it already says all of those things. So I don’t think 

that is an issue. 

Chairman TAUZIN. But you are a parent, Ms. Rosen. I mean, we 

know a little bit about parents. If you had a choice between these 

two systems, wouldn’t you as parent love to have a little more information about why explicit content is on this package, because 

parents have different views about what they want to subject their 

children to? 

Ms. ROSEN. Well, I am not sure if you are focusing on this particular sticker, because that is what our sticker already says and 

means when it has language and sexual and violent content. If you 

are asking me as a parent if somebody could tell me it is sex versus 

violence, would I like that? Yeah, I would probably like that, but 

I don’t think that is the easy answer. It is too—— Chairman TAUZIN. It may not be the easiest answer, but it is 

something parents want. I want to go to Mr. Marmaduke. What 

good is a label if you put the price sticker on top of it? 

Mr. MARMADUKE. Well, we don’t, but—— Chairman TAUZIN. Somebody does. Who does that? I am looking 

at—I have got a couple of them—— Mr. UPTON. Best Buy, I think. 

Chairman TAUZIN. Yeah. Best Buy. The Best Buy price is right 

on top of the warning. 

Mr. MARMADUKE. We put all our stickers on the top right-hand 

corner, and I believe Wal-Mart does the same, Congressman. So 

there is no conflict there. 

Chairman TAUZIN. So this is just a problem with some marketers? 

Mr. MARMADUKE. Yes. 

Chairman TAUZIN. And——

Ms. ROSEN. And that would be a violation of the policy. 

Chairman TAUZIN. That would be a violation of your policy, 

right? Best Buy ought to be advised of violating your policy. Who 

does that? Do you do that, or does the FTC do that? 

Ms. ROSEN. We leave retailer issues to the Retailer Association. 

I am sure Best Buy is going to get a letter tomorrow. 

Mr. MARMADUKE. They have been sent a letter. 

Mr. UPTON. Yield just a second. We did send Best Buy a letter. 

They never responded back. 

Chairman TAUZIN. Well, somebody needs to send somebody a letter. There are a lot of letters here. 

51

Ms. ROSEN. We do sort of reprimand, if you will, record companies when we see them violating the policy. 

Chairman TAUZIN. Let me sum up, Mr. Chairman, again. You 

guys have got a lot of friends here. This panel and Members of 

Congress love music and arts as much as anybody in the country 

does. Our kids love it, and we love to listen to new forms and varieties of music just as much as anybody. That is not the issue. The 

issue is not whether or not we are all, you know, struggling in a 

crazy age to raise kids. That is true. We all are. The only question 

is, can you help a little bit? Can you help a little bit with more information on these labels? Can you help to make sure retailers 

don’t obscure? 

You are going to find big defenders over here for your creativity 

rights and for your rights to make a profit and to fight those who 

are trying to steal your music. 

One of my dear friends, Trace Adkins, was in town the other day, 

and he told me he was out in Los Angeles to do a little video for 

one of his songs, and one of the ladies who was singing and dancing in his video came up to him and said, you know, Trace, I never 

heard your music, but I got on the Internet the other day and 

streamed some of it down, and let me tell you, you are pretty good. 

He said he wanted—he didn’t, obviously, but he is a country western boy—he wanted to do a little number on her for that. 

The bottom line is we object to that as much as you do. And 

when you come to us, asking for us to give you help to make sure 

that your creativity rights and your value rights are protected, we 

are here; but we are also asking you to stretch it if you can. It is 

not our business to censor. 

It is not our business to write labeling laws. I don’t think that 

some people want to do that around here. I certainly don’t, but I 

sure want to encourage you to give parents as much of a helping 

hand as you can in some tough times. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Shimkus. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. Thank you. I will be brief. And I apologize for 

missing some of the question-and-answer period because of another 

commitment. But—and I think enough has probably been said, and 

I did listen to all of your opening statement. 

Ms. Rosen, let me just ask a question. You are familiar with my 

Dot Kids Dot U.S. bill, and if you are—and I think the Chairman 

mentioned it—we would like to see you-all’s more vocal support in 

that, in that it does try to address and help parents with another 

tool to protect their kids on the Internet. It also could address some 

of the piracy issues, training kids properly. And we know you 

haven’t taken a position on the legislation yet, and I was just wondering what comments you might have on it. 

Do you know what I am—— Ms. ROSEN. I am embarrassingly unprepared. Is this the one 

where you set up a separate domain name? 

Mr. SHIMKUS. What it does, instead of attempt to establish a sort 

of a red-light approach, which is constitutionally debatable, it establishes a green-light approach, a positive approach, voluntarily, 

for people to go and for marketers to go—— Ms. ROSEN. Right. 

52

Mr. SHIMKUS. [continuing] and we are very optimistic, moving 

aggressively through this committee and through the floor, and had 

a good hearing on the Senate side. 

Again, it may not address the whole parental involvement and 

content debate, but it could also address, you know, a firewall on 

some of this downloading of music. 

So I would just ask if you would and your organization would 

take a look at that and be helpful in that venue, if you may. 

Ms. ROSEN. Okay. It is a good idea. 

Mr. SHIMKUS. And I will yield back my time. 

Mr. UPTON. Well, thank you. 

This is the conclusion of the hearing. We appreciate your testimony. We look—all of us look forward to continuing to watch the 

progress and appreciate your attendance here today. 

I might just note that we may submit some questions in writing 

from either side. We will get those out as promptly as we can. 

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Chairman, I am so sorry to do this, but my 

friends in the motion picture industry have asked me to make it 

clear to Mr. Gordon and other members of the committee who may 

be interested that the use of edited videos has been objected to by 

the Directors Guild and the studios, and they are in litigation right 

now. 

Mr. UPTON. Thank you. Have a good day. 

[Whereupon, at 12:12 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Additional material submitted for the record follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LAVERNE EVANS, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL

COUNSEL, LEGAL AND BUSINESS AFFAIRS, BMG 

Chairman Upton, Ranking Member Markey, and Members of the Subcommittee: 

my name is LaVerne Evans, Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Legal and 

Business Affairs for BMG. Thank you for this opportunity to submit brief testimony 

for the record. I had hoped to appear in person before the Subcommittee, but regrettably, a prior commitment requires me to be out of the country on the day of the 

hearing. 

BMG, which employs approximately 1,700 persons in the U.S., is the global music 

division of Bertelsmann AG, one of the world’s leading media companies. BMG is 

a home for creativity to artists across the musical spectrum, including Alan Jackson, 

Christina Aguilera, Alabama, Toni Braxton, Dave Matthews Band, Foo Fighters, 

Five, Whitney Houston, Kenny G, Andy Lau, Alicia Keys, Sarah McLachlan, Misia, 

Wolfgang Petry, Eros Ramazzotti, Santana, TLC, and George Winston. These and 

other artists work with BMG and its 200 record labels based in 42 countries, including well known labels such as Arista Records, RCA Records, RCA Label GroupNashville, and Ariola. In addition, BMG owns one of the world’s largest music publishing companies. 

On June 3, 2002, BMG announced that it was expanding upon the Recording Industry Association of America’s (RIAA’s) Parental Advisory Program with its own 

additional descriptive labeling categories aimed at providing more information to 

parents and consumers. At that time, we also announced a new policy that will enforce labeling compliance and consistency company-wide, as well as the extension 

of the new advisories to advertising. BMG’s Arista Records, BMG U.S. Latin, RCA 

Records, RCA Label Group—Nashville, and J Records will use the expanded parental advisory labels (PALs) (a sample of which is appended to my testimony). 

Since announcing the expanded advisory, BMG has released a number of CDs and 

twelve-inch singles with our expanded PAL. For example, the following releases 

carry an expanded PAL:

• Clipse, ‘‘Lord Willin’’ (full-length CD released 8/20/02, with ‘‘Strong Language, 

Sexual + Violent Content’’ advisory); 

• Midwikid, ‘‘Something Wikid This Way Comes’’ (full-length CD released 10/1/02, 

with ‘‘Strong Language, Sexual + Violent Content’’ advisory); 

• Clipse, ‘‘Grindin’’ (twelve-inch single released 7/30/02, with ‘‘Strong Language’’ advisory); 

53

• Clipse, ‘‘When The Last Time’’ (twelve-inch single released 8/20/02, with ‘‘Strong 

Language, Sexual Content’’ advisory); 

• Rob Jackson, ‘‘Breakin’’ Sketti’’ (twelve-inch single released 7/16/02, with ‘‘Strong 

Language’’ advisory); 

• Youngbloodz, ‘‘Wathcu Lookin At’’ (twelve-inch single released 7/16/02, with 

‘‘Strong Language’’ advisory); and 

• Youngbloodz, ‘‘Cadillac Pimpin’’ (twelve-inch single released 9/3/02, with ‘‘Strong 

Language’’ advisory). 

The process that culminated with the announcement last June of our new PAL 

began almost a year ago. We at BMG recognize that parents and consumers are in 

search of more information to guide their purchasing decisions. At the same time, 

we sought to ensure that artists continue to maximize their creative expression. 

This is a delicate balance, but one we are committed to achieving, and refining if 

need be. 

We concluded in the final analysis that an expanded version of the existing industry-wide PAL that we have adopted achieves the critical balance we are seeking. As 

our Chairman and CEO, Rolf Schmidt-Holtz, said when announcing the new 

advisories: ‘‘BMG recognizes our dual responsibility to help parents make informed 

decisions about the entertainment their children consume and to protect the right 

of our artists to express themselves freely,’’ said Schmidt-Holtz. ‘‘Our labeling initiative will offer parents additional tools to help them decide what is appropriate for 

them and their families, keeping in mind the rich diversity in our communities.’’

According to the new BMG policy, any BMG record release in the United States 

that warrants a PAL will receive an additional label (or labels, as the case may be) 

describing the nature of the explicit content according to three classifications: 

Strong Language, Violent Content and Sexual Content. Depending on its content, 

a release may fall into more than one classification and therefore receive multiple 

labels, which will be placed on the bottom right corner of the album itself directly 

under the PAL. While all labeling decisions will continue to reside with the record 

labels, BMG has appointed me to oversee compliance. The BMG policy will be in 

accordance with and expand upon the RIAA’s Parental Advisory Program guidelines, which establish basic principles on which labeling decisions are based. 

At this early stage of implementation, we are still gathering feedback from all affected parties, including consumers, artists, advertisers, retailers, and our record labels. But based on the initial positive response, we are hopeful and optimistic that 

our expanded advisories are serving the interests of all involved. I would particularly like to thank you, Chairman Upton, as well as the Chairman of the Full Committee, Mr. Tauzin, for your kind words of support for our new advisories. We look 

forward to your continued support, and working with you on this important matter. 

Thank you. 

SONY MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT INC. 

October 31, 2002

Honorable W.J. ‘‘BILLY’’ TAUZIN

United States House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515

DEAR CHAIRMAN TAUZIN: Thank you for contacting us with your questions about 

Sony Music Entertainment Inc.’s views about BMG’s decision to change its policy 

concerning the labeling of recorded music. As we understand its new policy, BMG 

has decided to qualify the parental advisory label by separately categorizing the content of each labeled recording as containing strong sexual language or strong violent 

language, or a combination thereof. 

Sony Music has worked for some time to develop a system of labeling and informing parents that works as best as possible. We have been deeply interested in and 

respectful of the views of you, your committee, and parents throughout this nation 

who care deeply as do we about informed choices with respect to consumer purchases. In addition, we have found ourselves working ever more closely with retailers and distributors on these issues, to make sure we understand as best as we possibly can how people actually want to receive information with respect to their 

choices, so that we can be as responsive as possible. 

Sony Music has adopted and supported the RIAA’s enhanced guidelines for the 

parental advisory labeling program. Our goal is to provide adults and parents with 

notice of explicit content so they can act as they deem appropriate with respect to 

their children’s record buying and listening choices, including on the internet. To 

that end, we have extended use of the parental advisory label to all advertising in 

all media and have widely publicized the existence and meaning of the parental adVerDate 0ct 31 2002 15:17 Dec 06, 2002 Jkt 082882 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 W:\DISC\81964 81964
54

visory label through, among other things, a web site, brochures, an industry task 

force, and in-school educational programs. 

Unlike songs, movies and videogames which are longer, multimedia works, have 

visual and narrative context; content labeling of movies and videogames may therefore be possible. However, the only way to attempt to categorize a song is by labeling its unadorned language. The many problems with this include the fact that 

words and the various contexts they are placed in have different meanings to different people. Indeed, some words may have special ethnic or cultural meanings significant to the writer or a particular audience. Songwriters and recording artists 

might well object to having record company employees delegated with the power to 

review and impose value judgments on songs by imputing inferences and meanings 

where none may have been intended. An attempt to subjectively categorize the 

words and meanings in a song will all too often result in arbitrary and misleading 

labels and, possibly, threaten artistic integrity and freedom of expression. We believe that our successful implementation of the current parental advisory labeling 

policy, with its attendant publicity, continues to be the best way to achieve the goal 

of providing clear and reliable information to parents. 

Please be assured that we fully share your concerns and that we are committed 

to empowering parents with reliable information that helps them guide their children’s purchases. We have been responsive to concerns that our own practices needed improvement. We are proud of the commitments that we have made and continue 

to make to give consumers choices. We are respectful of the fact that there are different ways to approach this same goal, and we will as always be responsive to concerns and views about informed consumer choice, artistic integrity and freedom of 

expression. 

Respectfully, 

THOMAS C. TYRELL

Executive Vice President, External and Government Affairs 

EMI RECORDED MUSIC

October 29, 2002

The Honorable W.J. ‘‘BILLY’’ TAUZIN

Chairman 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515-6115

DEAR CHAIRMAN TAUZIN: I write in response to your letter of October 1, 2002 to 

Hilary Rosen of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), signed by 

eight members of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. As the Chairman 

and CEO of EMI Recorded Music, North America, I can assure you that EMI is committed to effectively addressing the concerns of parents and consumers. Because we 

take this responsibility very seriously, it is important to carefully consider the adoption of any new policy or practice. Specifically, regarding the inclusion of content 

descriptors in Parental Advisory Labels, EMI has not yet determined that such an 

expansion to the RIAA Parental Advisory Program is effective in achieving the intended goal, nor capable of doing so without unintended negative consequences. For 

that reason, although we remain open to the future adoption of such a policy, until 

we are able to evaluate the effects of an expanded Parental Advisory Program on 

an informed basis, EMI believes that the existing RIAA Parental Advisory Program 

best addresses the needs of parents and consumers while balancing the attendant 

concerns of our recording artists and our record labels. 

The overriding purpose of the Parental Advisory Program is to inform parents and 

consumers that a recording carrying the Parental Advisory Label contains explicit 

content and, accordingly, that parental discretion is advised when that recording is 

purchased for children or listened to in the home by children. The Program does not 

attempt to make the decision as to whether or not a particular recording is appropriate for individual listeners. As a record label executive, I want to ensure that 

parents and consumers are advised that a decision is warranted, but I also want 

to protect our artists’ First Amendment rights of free expression. As a parent, I 

would want to be the Person making the decision as to whether or why a particular 

recording is appropriate for my children, and not have it made for me by a third 

party. EMI is not yet convinced that the use of general content descriptors adequately assists a parent in making a decision and, therefore, believes that it is not 

necessarily an appropriate approach. 

Music, unlike film and video, is a non-visual mode of expression, and is often difficult to accurately characterize. Even the task of determining whether or not a parVerDate 0ct 31 2002 15:17 Dec 06, 2002 Jkt 082882 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 W:\DISC\81964 81964
55

ticular recording warrants the application of a Parental Advisory Label is not a simple, objective undertaking. At EMI, each of our label presidents is ultimately responsible for making the decision whether or not to apply the Parental Advisory Label 

on recordings released by that label. The decision is necessarily subjective, and a 

variety of factors are considered in addition to straight lyrical content, including 

context, frequency, emphasis and interpretation. An attempt to capture all of this 

subtlety through the use of a limited number of general descriptors may be inaccurate and misleading. 

EMI releases thousands of album-length sound recordings in the United States 

each year. While we applaud BMG for attempting to provide parents with additional 

information, we remain cautious about whether the new policy will be effective—

and we remain wary about any potential unintended negative consequences, including legal concerns over claims, however, unwarranted, that product is in fact mislabeled. In sum, therefore, before we take the significant step of making a far-reaching change to our current Parental Advisory Policy—one that we believe works quite 

well to achieve its goals—we want to better assess the effects of the new BMG policy. 

I hope that this letter is helpful in providing you with an understanding of EMI’s 

views on this important issue. I am happy to continue this dialogue and to update 

the Committee on any changes to EMI’s policy in the future. 

Sincerely, 

DAVID MUNNS, Chairman and CEO, 

EMI Recorded Music, North America 

cc: Alain Levy, Chairman and CEO, EMI Recorded Music 

Mike Dungan, President and CEO, Capitol Nashville 

Bill Hearn, President and CEO, EMI Christian Music Group 

Bruce Lundvall, CEO, Blue Note, Angel and Manhattan Records 

Matt Marshall, President, Higher Octave Music 

Jorge Pino, President and CEO, EMI Recorded Music Latin 

Phil Quartararo, Executive Vice President, EMI Recorded Music, North America 

Matt Serletic, Chairman and CEO, Virgin Records America 

Andy Slater, President and CEO, Capitol Records 

Wesley Van Linda, President and CEO, Narada Productions 

WARNER MUSIC GROUP

October 31, 2002

The Honorable BILLY TAUZIN

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce 

U.S. House of Representatives 

2125 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN, I am writing in response to your October 1st letter to Hilary 

Rosen in which you asked her to solicit from RIAA member companies their position 

on adding content descriptors to parental advisory labels. Warner Music Group understands your concerns in this area and your interest in providing parents with 

information that will be helpful in guiding their decisions about music choices. 

We are seriously considering your suggestions. Warner Music Group has been engaged in a process to evaluate the merits of including additional information on our 

parental advisory labels describing the nature of the recorded musical content. As 

part of this process, we are speaking with our record labels, our artists’ representatives, parents and music retailers. In order to reach a decision, we need to learn 

whether the addition of content descriptions (of the BMG sort or otherwise) would 

be helpful to music retailers and will assist parents in making purchasing decisions 

for and with their children. 

We expect to have all feedback by the end of this year so that a final decision 

can be reached at that time. We will keep you apprised of the process as we move 

forward. 

Very truly yours, 

DAVID H. JOHNSON, 

Executive Vice President & General Counsel 

cc: Hilary Rosen 

56

UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP

October 31, 2002

The Honorable BILLY TAUZIN

Chairman 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Hilary Rosen forwarded to me your letter regarding the programs we use to advise parents and other consumers about sound recordings that 

contain explicit content. My colleagues and I followed the Commerce Committee’s 

recent hearing and appreciate your views as well as those of others on the Committee. The Universal Music Group has a comprehensive review process in place to 

monitor the content of releases from all of its record labels, and over the years UMG 

has chosen not to release certain music. We take this subjective and difficult undertaking quite seriously, knowing that not everyone will always agree with the decisions that are made. 

The company is also committed to following the voluntary stickering program devised in cooperation with the record industry and the Recording Industry Association of America to alert consumers to potentially offensive material. A recent study 

by the Federal Trade Commission from September 2000 found that more than 70% 

of parents surveyed were satisfied with the current Parental Advisory label. UMG 

supports the Parental Advisory labeling system as an effective and recognizable tool 

for parents to help them determine if the content is appropriate for their children. 

UMG believes that the Parental Advisory label can be an effective tool for parents 

in the online world as well. It is noteworthy that pressplay, an online music venture 

with which UMG is associated, enables parents to block from their homes songs that 

have been stickered with the RIAA Parental Advisory label. Pressplay is virtually 

the only online music site to take such steps to educate and empower parents. In 

fact, the limited availability of parental advisory information or controls on peer-topeer networks was one of the concerns cited by Senator Rick Santorum and Representative Joe Pitts in their request that the FTC conduct a study on the problems 

of peer-to-peer networks. 

Importantly, as part of our ongoing relationships with our retail partners and 

with consumers, we continue to review and assess the viability of the current labeling system. In June of 2001, the Universal Music Group initiated changes to our 

Parental Advisory labeling procedures with respect to the marketing of albums carrying the Parental Advisory label, in order to more clearly identify such labeled 

product for parents. 

UMG required that all radio and television advertisements for ‘‘stickered’’ UMG 

releases carry the Parental Advisory label. Furthermore, it is our policy that such 

advertisements carry a notice indicating ‘‘Edited Version Available,’’ if applicable. 

UMG also adopted an internal compliance process to ensure that the appropriate 

steps are being taken by each label within the Universal Music Group. 

More recently, as you have noted, one record company—BMG—has opted to adopt 

a different labeling system. We have been meeting with retailers around the country 

to obtain their views on whether they and their customers find the RIAA system 

satisfactory, whether or not the BMG-adopted system is being well-received, or 

whether a different approach should be explored. At this stage, there has been very 

little practical experience with the BMG-adopted system, although it has certainly 

stimulated further analysis and internal debate. 

Universal Music Group takes this issue seriously and is dedicated to maintaining 

a viable balance among its artists, the preferences and demands of audiences in the 

marketplace and our effort to inform parents. 

Respectfully submitted, 

MICHAEL OSTROFF

Executive Vice President, Business & Legal Affairs 

cc: The Honorable Joe Barton 

The Honorable Eliot Engel 

The Honorable Paul Gillmor 

The Honorable Chip Pickering 

The Honorable John Shimkus 

The Honorable Lee Terry 

The Honorable Fred Upton 

Hilary Rosen