Ban me? Try it
You might cause a riot
What the radio won't play the underground will supply
it
I'm a MC pirate, this loud not quiet
Radical as they make, they make a rule I'll defy it
-- Lyrics from Ain't a Damn Thing Changed
by rapper Ice T
You won't hear Eminem emanating from RAV FM. Don't
tune in hoping to hear 50 Cent.
No violence, no dope, no sexual objectification.
The station, broadcasting from Vaughan Secondary
School at 90.7 on the FM dial, manages to tread a fine
line, according to programming director Kristin Daniel,
a student at the school.
The station plays the mainstream music its target
demographic demands, while maintaining the high standard
expected by school officials, parents and the community
at large.
"We're very selective about the material we put on
the station," said Ms Daniel, 18, as she prepared to go
live on the air last Monday afternoon.
"We try to stay away from the really hardcore
content."
Under Ms Daniel's leadership, RAV FM has moved from a
mish-mash of musical styles to an urban music format,
featuring hip-hop, R&B and world music.
It can be risky territory; hip-hop and rap, in
particular, present numerous hazards for a station such
as RAV FM. Coarse language, racial epithets, graphic
sexual imagery, drug use, depictions of unimaginable
violence, denigration of women -- many of the songs at
the top of the charts today are rife with problematic
language.
Some artists, such as the aforementioned Eminem, are
rejected outright, said station manager Rob Basile.
Other songs can be digitally manipulated to edit out
material that's deemed unacceptable.
"If there's a song that's appealing to young people,
we listen to it," said Mr. Basile, who at 29 is a part
of the generation that saw today's hip-hop emerge from
the streetwise poetry of rappers such as Public Enemy
and Run DMC.
"If the content is suggestive, we make one of two
decisions: To edit the song or not to play the song at
all."
An example of this is the tune Slow Jamz, by Twista,
currently a hit on the urban charts. Rife with sexual
imagery, the song was salvaged through some fairly
radical editing. The edited version now plays on RAV FM.
"Basically, the first verse is OK, but the rest is
pretty raunchy," said Ms Daniel.
She recognizes such manipulation might be questioned
by purists, but offers this logic: If removing offensive
lyrics means a popular song makes it to air on the
station, the editing is worth it.
"Our radio station depends on the listeners and what
they listen to," she said. "If we don't play what they
want to hear, they're not going to listen.
"There has to be some give and take."
The careful selection of modern music and monitoring
of content that makes it to air is the responsibility of
the broadcaster -- in this case, the student radio
station, said Neil Press, communications technology
teacher at Vaughan Secondary.
The setting from which RAV FM broadcasts -- a public
high school -- raises those standards that much higher
than those adhered to by mainstream stations, he said.
"From our point of view, we have to be careful about
what we air and how we do it," he said.
"We have parents listening to our station. We have
people around the world listening to our station.
"We remember we are a school. We have an image to
portray."
@#%!!!#%
It's a struggle that's as old as pop music itself.
From its earliest days, pop has challenged societal
standards, preaching rebellion and resistance. It's
irreverent. It's loud. It's sex, drugs and rock 'n'
roll.
And it is a source of consternation, typically among
the older generation whose time in the pop culture
spotlight has come and gone.
The issue over the decades has been this: Where's the
line?
Back in 1951, when Dean Martin's Wham Bam Thank You
Ma'am was banned by radio stations in the United States,
it was for sexually suggestive material.
Fifty-some years and a couple of cultural revolutions
later, coarse language is most often the issue.
Although music is not subject to bans in Canada, the
way it often has been in the United States, this country
has specific guidelines relating to the acceptability of
song lyrics being broadcast, according to Ron Cohen,
national chairperson of the Canadian Broadcast Standards
Council (CBSC).
"There must be at least a half-dozen songs on which
we've ruled," Mr. Cohen said.
The council, which makes decisions on complaints
against radio and television broadcasters, takes into
account a number of factors when judging the
acceptability of material. Among the elements that make
material unacceptable for broadcast in Canada are
discriminatory or hateful comments; messages in
contravention of the law and, of course, obscenity.
Granted, the definition of what's obscene has changed
over the years -- and continues to be a moving target.
For Mr. Cohen, there's a distinct point of no return.
"One of the things that gives us some difficulty is
use of the f-word and its derivatives -- and there are a
few," he said. "I would say we've been fairly flexible
about some other kinds of language, but we draw the line
at that word."
What separates the f-word from other oaths is its
continuing ability to offend a large segment of the
population, Mr. Cohen said.
Of course, the nature of complaints to the CBSC vary.
Listeners and viewers decry obscenity, sexual content,
violence, perceived racial slights and other material
they find offensive.
When a radio or television station is found to have
transgressed broadcast standards, it is required to air
a report of the CBSC's ruling and apologize.
That's a far cry from what's happening right now in
the United States, particularly in radio. Last week, the
Clear Channel network responded to a whopping fine, in
excess of $700,000, levied after hosts on its stations
were found to have breached decency laws.
Clear Channel fired Florida deejay Bubba The Love
Sponge and dropped New York shock jock Howard Stern from
several stations.
Mr. Cohen has watched the latest American drama with
interest, remembering how Montreal and Toronto stations
besieged with complaints voluntarily jettisoned the
Stern program -- the daily grab-bag of sexism, racism
and potty-mouth gibberish.
"I would say we're not quite as rigid in Canada as
they are in the United States," Mr. Cohen said.
"Which is somewhat ironic, given they are the home of
the First Amendment."
Mr. Cohen looks with pride on Canada's broadcasting
system, which for the most part, voluntarily adheres to
standards that were created by the industry itself.
"I think they've set up an admirable system, one that
works very well," he said. "The private broadcasters
create the codes. The private broadcasters created the
CBSC. They fund the CBSC.
"Here, we don't impose fines."
That system contrasts greatly with broadcasting in
America, where the federal communications commission has
the power to lambaste stations that cross the line.
"A government hand is, in principle, a heavy hand,"
Mr. Cohen said.
@#!!%%**@
Mr. Basile, the manager overseeing student operation
of RAV FM, said he has been impressed by the discretion
he sees exercised by the young people who take each day
to the airwaves.
"I could not believe 17 and 18-year-olds could look
beyond what the media was giving them and reject it," he
said. "I feel good a student at 18 years old can discern
between reality and a scene that's being dictated in a
rap song."
Indeed, it is those scenes and messages -- of
violence, drug use and outright misogyny -- that bother
Ms Daniel. Moreover, she is concerned about young people
she sees around her in upscale, affluent Thornhill
buying into the thug life message that's preached by
hardcore rappers and hip-hop artists.
"These kids are talking about living in the ghetto,"
she said. "They have about a five-bedroom house and
they're talking about living in the ghetto."
Taking on a lifestyle gleaned from the music they're
listening to can lead youth to think smoking dope and
engaging in senseless violence is the only way to
maintain their adopted personas, she said.
"They're being influenced by the music."
Jason Niven is a 20-year-old Vaughan Secondary grad
who continues to volunteer at the radio station. A child
of the grunge era, he's dismayed by the hip-hop and
R&B his little sister listens to.
According to some lyrics, "all life is about is
money, bling and 'hos," he said, expressing the dismay
you might expect from his dad.
"I just disagree with (kids) listening to that
stuff."
These young people recognize the debate over pop
music is nothing new.
"If you look back, Elvis Presley was hardcore at the
time," Ms Daniel said.
"If you look at it from my point of view, that's
nothing.
"But what are the kids going to be listening to when
I'm in my 50s?"
It seems Ice T was on the mark: Ain't a damn thing
changed.
··········
A BRIEF LOOK AT MUSICAL CENSORSHIP
1951
· Radio stations ban Dottie O'Brien's "Four or Five
Times" and Dean Martin's "Wham Bam, Thank You Ma'am" --
too suggestive.
1965
· In June, radio stations across the country ban the
Rolling Stones hit "I Can't Get No Satisfaction" --
lyrics too sexually suggestive.
1977
· The Reverend Jesse Jackson calls for bans against
disco music, insisting the music promotes promiscuity
and drug use.
1985
· The parents of John McCullom sue Ozzy Osbourne,
claiming his song "Suicide Solution" "aided, or advised,
or encouraged" their son to commit suicide. The judge in
the case decides overt lyrics are protected speech and
evidence is insufficient to connect the song to the
suicide.
1993
Wal-Mart and K-Mart refuse to stock Nirvana's second
major label album, In Utero, because they object to the
cover and one song title. Shortly after the record Is
the number one selling album in the country, the mass
merchandisers strike a deal to carry the album. The
album's back cover art is subdued and the title of the
offending song is changed from "Rape Me" to "Waif Me."
