| The Glade 4.0 https://gladerebooted.net/ |
|
| We Might Not Be Perfect, But At Least We Ain't Canada https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5234 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | We Might Not Be Perfect, But At Least We Ain't Canada |
While we debate how best to deal with the scum from WBC, and their funeral "protests", Canada bans "Money for Nothing". What amazing timing. Thank you Canada, for the reminder. |
|
| Author: | Corolinth [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Radio in the United States typically plays the edited version that has omitted the offending verse (as well as drastically shortened the song by removing a lot of Knopfler's guitar work). So, by that metric, I really don't see how we "aren't Canada." |
|
| Author: | Talya [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Corolinth wrote: Radio in the United States typically plays the edited version that has omitted the offending verse (as well as drastically shortened the song by removing a lot of Knopfler's guitar work). So, by that metric, I really don't see how we "aren't Canada." I have never heard the original version played on radio, anywhere. I only know it because I own the Brothers in Arms CD (first CD I ever owned, actually). I also never hear Sarah McLachlan's "Building a Mystery" thanks to the line "beautiful, **** man," as another example. Fairly sure the CRTC is just as bad as -- if not worse than -- your FCC. Fortunately, they're fading into obsolescence. Does anyone really listen to broadcast radio anymore? |
|
| Author: | Hopwin [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Corolinth wrote: Radio in the United States typically plays the edited version that has omitted the offending verse (as well as drastically shortened the song by removing a lot of Knopfler's guitar work). So, by that metric, I really don't see how we "aren't Canada." Ignoring your statement about the metric, the obvious answer is: "Bryan Adams and Celine Dion." Also, HAHA: 
|
|
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I guess the distinction between a Gov't ban and the choice a private enterprise makes is an important one to me, Corolinth. |
|
| Author: | Corolinth [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
And you think that it was a choice by private enterprise here, rather than a restriction imposed by the FCC? I do not, for one minute, believe that I hear a censored version of a song because a radio station manager is making a conscious decision to be sensitive. He's making a conscious decision not to be fined for obscenity. |
|
| Author: | Aizle [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Corolinth wrote: And you think that it was a choice by private enterprise here, rather than a restriction imposed by the FCC? I do not, for one minute, believe that I hear a censored version of a song because a radio station manager is making a conscious decision to be sensitive. He's making a conscious decision not to be fined for obscenity. This, in spades. |
|
| Author: | Talya [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
While this specific example may be poor, I think I am of the opinion the CRTC is worse than the FCC in many respects, so Vindicarre has a point. Dumb-ass CRTC rules: (1) Canadian-content quotas on broadcast TV/radio are ridiculous. (2) Attempts to prevent international communications companies from competing with Canadian companies inside Canada has resulted in wireless pricing in Canada being among the worst in the world. (3) We still have the same stupid obscenity rules the FCC has in place. There are probably more, those are off the top of my head. |
|
| Author: | Corolinth [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Is that why I had to register your deviantart account for you? |
|
| Author: | shuyung [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 2:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Corolinth wrote: And you think that it was a choice by private enterprise here, rather than a restriction imposed by the FCC? I do not, for one minute, believe that I hear a censored version of a song because a radio station manager is making a conscious decision to be sensitive. He's making a conscious decision not to be fined for obscenity. Well, with "Money for Nothing", I think it's instead a radio station manager. Say what you will about Favazz, though, KSHE plays the original version. |
|
| Author: | Talya [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 2:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Corolinth wrote: Is that why I had to register your deviantart account for you? Much to their chagrin, the CRTC has no direct control over internet content. |
|
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 3:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Corolinth wrote: And you think that it was a choice by private enterprise here, rather than a restriction imposed by the FCC? I do not, for one minute, believe that I hear a censored version of a song because a radio station manager is making a conscious decision to be sensitive. He's making a conscious decision not to be fined for obscenity. I know it's a choice made by private enterprise (the radio station in one instance and Knopfler in another, as the version on their "greatest Hits " CD was short and skipped that lyric). It's apparent to me that your assertion is incorrect; I'd be open to reading any evidence you would like to present. |
|
| Author: | Xequecal [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 3:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: We Might Not Be Perfect, But At Least We Ain't Canada |
"Here in the US, we are so schizoid and deeply opposed to government censorship that we insist on having unaccountable private parties to do it instead." |
|
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 3:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ummm, excuse me? Who's unaccountable? |
|
| Author: | Xequecal [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 4:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Large companies are not really accountable for their censorship because their censorship defines the market. If Wal-Mart refuses to carry a video game, that video game does not get made. It has no chance to compete on its merits. |
|
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
1) A private company deciding not to sell a product is not censorship. 2) Your initial statement is so full of loaded language, intentional obfuscation and vague, unsupported assertions as to be meaningful only as an example of how to say something in an attempt to sound really cool to those on the fringes of society. |
|
| Author: | shuyung [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Vindicarre wrote: I know it's a choice made by private enterprise (the radio station in one instance and Knopfler in another, as the version on their "greatest Hits " CD was short and skipped that lyric). It's apparent to me that your assertion is incorrect; I'd be open to reading any evidence you would like to present. That's just because Knopfler thought it was bad form when he found out George Michael really was a faggot. |
|
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I thought the whole George Michael thing was just an urban legend. |
|
| Author: | shuyung [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Oh no, he really is gay. |
|
| Author: | Talya [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
Vindicarre wrote: I thought the whole George Michael thing was just an urban legend. No, he's really a faggot.  The word has less meaning to the writers of Money For Nothing (Knopfler and Sumner) than it does here. A fag is a cigarette, a faggot is a meatball. While most are aware of the connotation overseas, it doesn't carry the same weight there. The song wasn't a satire of rock singers, anyway. It was a satire of the type of twits who complain about the easy life of a musician. In essence, the singer of the song is making fun of themselves, in more ways than one. Anyway, the FCC is more strict in some ways than the CRTC, but it's really hard to judge between them. They both really, really suck. Fortunately the CRTC is slowly being phased out. I don't think it will last another decade. |
|
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: |
shuyung wrote: Oh no, he really is gay. No, no, no the part about George Michael being in any way involved in the song. Knopfler wrote it after listening to a delivery guy in a store watching MTV and saying the lines. |
|
| Author: | Talya [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 7:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Re: |
Vindicarre wrote: shuyung wrote: Oh no, he really is gay. No, no, no the part about George Michael being in any way involved in the song. Knopfler wrote it after listening to a delivery guy in a store watching MTV and saying the lines. Maybe you're both right. Perhaps the delivery guy in the store was watching George Michael when he said those lines. However, I don't know whether Knopfler or Sting saw the delivery guy in the store. They cowrote the song. |
|
| Author: | Talya [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 7:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Wait, this thread is fast becoming uncontroversial, and therefore inappropriate for hellfire. I'll fix it. Mark Knopfler is the greatest guitarist to ever live. And an atheist. |
|
| Author: | shuyung [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 7:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The entirety of Sting's contribution was the "I want my MTV" line. Mark Knopfler has stated that he faithfully wrote down lines spoken by a delivery guy to use as the basis for "Money for Nothing". I think there are any number of claims as to who exactly was/were the recipient(s) of derision. |
|
| Author: | Vindicarre [ Thu Jan 13, 2011 7:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Nah, Sting didn't really have much to do with the writing of the song. His publishing company demanded he get the co-writing credit. Right around seven minutes in: edit: Damn, two ninja posts. |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|