[MMike]

http://www.montrealgazette.com/entertainment/Dire+Straits+song+ruled+offensive/4105743/story.html

Broadcasting council rules Dire Straits tune too offensive for radio



Money For Nothing, a classic-rock radio staple by Dire Straits, is too offensive for Canadian broadcasts because of its use of the word "faggot," the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council has ruled.

The ruling, released Wednesday, responded to a complaint submitted to St. John's radio station CHOZ-FM over a Feb. 1 airing of an unedited version of the song, which mentions the word three times.

 

[MMike]

And yet the comedy network (Canada's comedy central), shows South Park and does not censor the swearing. Go figure.

 

[X3pilot]

And they let people speak french in Canada...

 

[Serial Midget]

I agree with the Broadcasting Council - Les Boys is better suited to the delicate Montreal ear. Money for Nothing should be banned because its the worst Dire Straits song ever.

 

[MMike]

Commentary already

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Mark+Knopfler+Eminem/4105724/story.html

Mark Knopfler is the new Eminem in Canada, eh?

 

[Pesqueeb]

 

[rockofullr]

And yet the comedy network (Canada's comedy central), shows South Park and does not censor the swearing. Go figure.

South Park is a form of artistic expression. This...

is not.

 

[X3pilot]

See, it could be spun as a success story.. kid confused about his sexuality presses on in this cruel world and becomes a fruity kid done good story..

See the little faggot with the earring and the makeup Yeah buddy that's his own hair That little faggot got his own jet airplane That little faggot he's a millionaire

Hell, he's got his own jet airplane! I think MMike is jealous.

 

[MMike]

Who wouldn't be?

 

[Serial Midget]

Wasn't this song inspired by WHAM! ?

See, it could be spun as a success story.. kid confused about his sexuality presses on in this cruel world and becomes a fruity kid done good story..



Hell, he's got his own jet airplane! I think MMike is jealous.

 

[JohnE]

They are still sore about the past 2 WJHCs...besides, the song is about Justin Beiber, 20 years early.

 

[MMike]

http://www.montrealgazette.com/life/Ridiculous+decision+doesn+help+gays/4136647/story.html

 

[valve bouncer]

As a general rule censorship is daft but we exist in the real world where we can't say, do, listen or watch whatever we want, whenever we want, wherever we want. Obviously then someone, somewhere has to make the decision of where to draw the line. I'm reminded of that bit of Australiana in verse "Tie Me Kangaroo Down, Sport" which in its original version from 1957 included this lovely bit of white Australia sentiment;
Let me Abos go loose, Bruce
Let me Abos go loose
They're of no further use, Bruce
So let me Abos go loose.
I doubt you'd find many people who reckon that should be on the radio in that form but sans that verse the song is still a karaoke night staple.
Now I doubt when he wrote the song Rolf Harris was holding any aborigines in quasi-slavery but nevertheless those lyrics were acceptable at the time. He subsequently has expressed his regret at what he wrote. Now I'm not suggesting "Money For Nothing" contains any lyrics as risible as that but times change, standards of acceptability change. The main problem here is that they've used a hammer to crack a nut. They didn't need to announce anything, maybe just a quiet word at 7pm that it's bedtime for kiddies and from here on in they might hear some old songs using "colourful language" that are played in the interests of musical history only.

 

[MMike]

Well that's going to be stuck in my head all day........and it will no doubt morph into Quack Quack quack quack quack, COCKADOODLE DOO.........

 

[johnbryanpeters]

well that's going to be stuck in my head all day........and it will no doubt morph into quack quack quack quack quack, anycockle doo.........

wtmi5

 

[dante]

As a general rule censorship is daft but we exist in the real world where we can't say, do, listen or watch whatever we want, whenever we want, wherever we want. Obviously then someone, somewhere has to make the decision of where to draw the line. I'm reminded of that bit of Australiana in verse "Tie Me Kangaroo Down, Sport" which in its original version from 1957 included this lovely bit of white Australia sentiment;
Let me Abos go loose, Bruce
Let me Abos go loose
They're of no further use, Bruce
So let me Abos go loose.
I doubt you'd find many people who reckon that should be on the radio in that form but sans that verse the song is still a karaoke night staple.
Now I doubt when he wrote the song Rolf Harris was holding any aborigines in quasi-slavery but nevertheless those lyrics were acceptable at the time. He subsequently has expressed his regret at what he wrote. Now I'm not suggesting "Money For Nothing" contains any lyrics as risible as that but times change, standards of acceptability change. The main problem here is that they've used a hammer to crack a nut. They didn't need to announce anything, maybe just a quiet word at 7pm that it's bedtime for kiddies and from here on in they might hear some old songs using "colourful language" that are played in the interests of musical history only.

Yes, standards change. However, if it was acceptable by then current standards, it's fine by me as long as it can be considered "art". I classify music as an art form, and if we start judging previously constructed art by today's standards, we'd end up whitewashing a large portion of our history. Are renaissance nude paintings pornographic because they feature nudity that is unacceptable by today's standards? How about the Lady of Justice that Ashcroft covered up because of her bare breast? Or the banning/censoring of Huck Finn because of the use of the N word? Hell, even the Republican's whitewashing of the US Constitution was wrong. Can you imagine a censored or "fixed" Blazing Saddles? Yeah, neither can I...

"I said, the sheriff is a niggar an emancipated African American male"

 

[Pesqueeb]

Yes, standards change. However, if it was acceptable by then current standards, it's fine by me as long as it can be considered "art". I classify music as an art form, and if we start judging previously constructed art by today's standards, we'd end up whitewashing a large portion of our history. Are renaissance nude paintings pornographic because they feature nudity that is unacceptable by today's standards? How about the Lady of Justice that Ashcroft covered up because of her bare breast? Or the banning/censoring of Huck Finn because of the use of the N word? Hell, even the Republican's whitewashing of the US Constitution was wrong. Can you imagine a censored or "fixed" Blazing Saddles? Yeah, neither can I...

I found Blazing Saddles on netflix the other day. In honor of this thread I think I will watch it again today.