Clear All Channels! by antiGUY

I was talking to one of regular readers, Lucy, via email a couple of days after the cowardly terrorist attacks in the U.S. She like many other regulars was checking in to see if everyone here at antiMUSIC was ok. Thank God I could tell her yes. We are primarily located in Southern California, with a few contributors who live on the east coast, but none of them in New York. 

I'm still in somewhat a state of shock over what happened and like I told Lucy music seems like such an insignificant thing to be thinking about right now let alone writing about. Now a few weeks have passed and people are starting to get back to their normal lives, although I agree with those who say things will never be quite the same again. 

Shortly after the attacks Clear Channel sent out to their over 100 radio stations nationwide a list of songs that shouldn't be played on the air in the wake of the attacks. From what I have read, the list primarily came from program directors at various radio stations who began emailing each other lists of songs they pulled off of their playlist thinking that some of their listeners might find them offensive in light of what happened in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. It appears someone at the corporate headquarters got a hold of some of the lists and decided to send them out to all of their affiliate radio stations. 

I don't like censorship, but I can understand why they did it. However, the more I thought about it and the implications of this action I became more concerned. The first thing that set off red flags for me was seeing songs like John Lennon's "Imagine", Cat Stevens' "Morning has Broken", Neil Diamonds' "America" and the Youngbloods "Get Together" on the list. Sure it doesn't seem appropriate at the moment to be playing songs like AC/DC's "Shot Down in Flames" (although I'm not familiar with that track), Metallica's "Seek and Destroy" or The Gap Band's "You Dropped the Bomb On Me" but some of the songs seem grossly out of place here. I understand the thinking, they listed songs that have to do with fire, explosions, death, flying and religion but they went a little beyond that if you ask me. 

The biggest problem I have with this is the fact that by banning these songs, Clear Channel is actually giving the terrorist a victory. The Islamic radicals that are believed to be responsible for these attacks hate America and all it stands for, including our freedoms and our "unholy" culture. When they attack Americans, they attack our entire culture and our belief system. So in a way, when Clear Channel issued this list they may have indirectly fulfilled one of the terrorist goals of undermining our freedom and values. 

It is true that after the press caught wind of this "ban" and Clear Channel caught a little heat for this "list" they denied issuing it and passing it off as an Internet rumor. The problem with that is one of their V.P.'s went on record with a reporter for Slate.com and acknowledged the ban before Clear Channel "officially" denied it.  To save face the party line became �we didn't ban those songs, we just asked the stations not to play them'. Ok, sounds like something a lawyer would say. If your boss asks you not to do something, if you want to keep your job, what are you going to do? 

I don't fault Clear Channels entirely. It appears that the original intention was from the heart, the problem is they didn't use their head when compiling and issuing this list, which led to some criticism. So once they caught some heat instead of simply saying "hey we may have overstepped here but were just trying to be considerate in light of the terrorist attacks". Most people would understand that.  Instead, they decided to try and sweep it under the rug and ended up with egg on their face.  In hindsight, the smart thing would have been to trust the program directors to use their own judgment. Any rational person would know that playing "Another One Bites the Dust" might not be appropriate under the circumstances. But by originally issuing the "ban" list, Clear Channel may have helped fulfill one of the terrorist goals of undermining our freedom and values. 

Some things have fundamentally changed in our nation after these horrific attacks, and it is prudent for radio stations, news organizations, movie studios and television networks to be mindful of the current collective emotions of the American public when putting together their programming in light of the tragedy that has befallen our nation. But we can't let terrorist undermine our basic principles and rights.  Is it proper for radio stations to play some of these songs at the moment? No, it isn't. However, by issuing this list instead of letting the program directors quietly use their own judgment, the spotlight became focused on the action, where as if the stations would have been left to their own devices, John Q Public may not have even noticed these "offensive" songs missing from the airways. There really was no need to a concerted effort by the Clear Channel Corporate office to issue a list of forbidden songs.  

In the coming months people in this country need to take an exceptionally pensive look at the issues in front of them before taking actions that on the surface may seem appropriate but upon closer examination undermine our culture, our beliefs and the values that have made America the leader of the free world. The people at Clear Channel were well intentioned and are not bad people, they just made a mistake. It is my hope that their mistake will serve as an example to others, so that they might think a little more carefully before taking similar actions.

In closing, you know we are a music site and have really tried to stay clear of politics. But I think that there is a misconceived notion that some people have about Islam and Muslims in general that needs to be addressed, especially since I have seen some people post these beliefs on our message boards. The terrorist organizations that are believed responsible for these horrific attacks do not truly represent Islam or the beliefs of the majority of Muslims.  The NBC drama "The West Wing" gave an appropriate analogy of the difference in their special episode aired on October 3rd.  During the show the fictitious Assistant White House Chief of Staff was talking to a group of high school students about Islamic terrorist and pointed out that "Islamic Fundamentalist are to Islam what the KKK is to Christianity". The really does illustrate the difference between the terrorist and the average devout Muslim. There are millions of Muslims in the world who do not subscribe to the perversion of their religious beliefs that people like Usama Bin Laden subscribe to. Just like it isn't fair to compare the average Christian to Charles Manson or David Koresh.  For the most part, Muslims are peace loving, God fearing people.