I wanted to clear what this actually mean firstly.
- (of the portrayal or description of sexual matters) offensive or disgusting by accepted standards of morality and decency.
Firstly why would you want underage people taking these songs into mind or thought or even listening to them? If this was your son or daughter and they were listening to this type of music would you be fine with it?
Many young people look up to singers or song artist but would you want Ur child looking up to a person who basically writes songs about pornographic?.
Research on popular music has explored its effects on schoolwork, social interactions, mood and affect, and particularly behavior. The effect that popular music has on children's and adolescents' behavior and emotions is of paramount concern. Lyrics have become more explicit in their references to drugs, sex, and violence over the years, particularly in certain genres.As with popular music, the perception and the effect of music-video messages are important, because research has reported that exposure to violence, sexual messages, sexual stereotypes, and use of substances of abuse in music videos might produce significant changes in behaviors and attitudes of young viewers.
Music has a massive influence upon the young mind and no child should be exposed to this type of music at a young age or when they are developing as music has a massive impact upon everyone's life's especially the younger generation.
Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-13 09:27:58| Speak Round
I would like to preface this debate a with quote from the UNDHR. The UN Declaration of Human Rights said: "Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,"
I would also like to explain and debunk a few pro arguments for government censorship of entertainment, in order to solidify why the con is the clear winner of this argument.
Children listening to the music shouldn't be exposed to obscene lyrics in songs, and therefore should be censored.
This argument, while one of the most common, is absolutely irrelevant to the censorship of any forms of media. It is the responsibility of the guardians of the child to expose the child to media appropriate for its age. The reason that children are being exposed to this media at all is the fault of the guardian and the rebelliousness of the child, which the latter can very rarely be helped. Following this logic, we should censor all media with curse words under the presumption that a child might view them. Assuming we do censor music of curse words because children might hear about inappropriate subjects for their age, we should censor everything that might be deemed 'inappropriate' for children.
Impact: Simply claiming that media should be censored because a child might view them is a borderline irrelevant argument to the debate.
We shouldn't glorify the things that don't do good to society, like drugs, violence, and sex.
This argument is also fatalistic, because it will inevitably create a false image. Problems and taboo subjects in today's societies cannot be addressed without talking about them, especially talking about the people that experienced these things first hand. These artists have a right to expression and share their experiences, no matter how they do it or what medium they do it through.
Impact: Simply because media contains distasteful subjects, doesn't mean that an artist's right to freedom of expression should be violated.
Addressing another one of my opponents cards, she claimed "The effect that popular music has on children's and adolescents' behavior and emotions is of paramount concern...research has reported that exposure to violence, sexual messages, sexual stereotypes, and use of substances of abuse in music videos might produce significant changes in behaviors and attitudes of young viewers."
However, my opponent cited no research specifically. However, a recent study conducted by Stanford University shows that the effects of violent media aren't nearly as pronounced as most people think. That study said "...for children without preexistingrisk factors, or for those who have a number of protective factors, music with themes of suicide or violence is likely to have little short-term or long-term effect." (The Effects of Violent Music on Children and Adolescents, 2003)
Because of the fallacies in the pro arguments above, I urge a con ballot in this debate.
Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-13 11:57:58| Speak Round
Aceronight: Do you think that all media containing obscene language should be censored, in every scenario that it's used in?
Natasha17: It depends upon which type of media we are talking here.
Natasha17: Social media shouldn't allow obscene language as there is younger users
Natasha17: Media as in news reports ect.. that report upon rape or anything else personally I believe they shouldn't be used to report from or make any money from. Social media already have an age limit but still need to be stopping the obscene language being used or being shown upon these sites.
Aceronight: Isn't censorship that doesn't explicitly attack a person's inalienable rights and infringement on freedom of expression?
Aceronight: And why would the government stop at just censoring media such as TV and news reports, and at that point, couldn't they censor anything that has obscene words in it?
Return To Top | Speak Round
Return To Top | Posted:
2019-03-15 11:58:01| Speak Round