If we were gonna go down that road of censoring anything untrue: religious texts would be the very first things censored.
It is a fundamentally terrible idea.
Create a competitor media outlet and beat him in popularity due to my superior adherence to the truth.What if much of the media in a country is owned by a single individual, and that individual uses it to push an evil agenda? What would you do then?
Slayer is awesome. And I'm sure someone out there, somewhere thinks Cannibal Corpse is awesome too.Sorry - I missed this post earlier and just saw it now. I have a few questions: 1. Have you seen Cannibal Corpse Hammer Smash Face? Have you read the lyrics? 2. Have you heard Slayer's Angel of Death and read the lyrics? 3. How would you justify these two songs?
That's how I'd justify those songs, if justification were needed, but justification is not needed: because that'd be stupid.
People like exploitative music, just like people enjoy fast food, it's convenient, cost effective and it feels good in the right quantities.Aside from these two examples, a large part of what I was thinking of when I criticised music was the stuff that is just a cheap exploitation of sex appeal instead of music. I see that (song like Anaconda, etc) as a type of exploitation of the market, not a contribution to music. Would anyone really be sad to see 'songs' like these go? There are a lot of struggling musicians out there with great talent - it would be wonderful to see some of these unknowns given a chance, instead of having the music industry parade people who have no talent. Why not give some musicians the opportunity? Take some of the people who make great music and let them have their day, instead of the cheats and charlatans who are just out to make a quick buck out of showing off some skin.
The grounds you have cited are insufficient to justify a draconian blanket ban on such a wide variety of products.
If you want to give talented under-dogs a chance at success: start a label company and promote them.