"Money For Nothing" Banned ... Really?

One person can make a difference.

In the case of the Dire Strait's song "Money For Nothing," one person was all it took. Radio station CHOZ-FM in St. John's, Newfoundland played the album version of the song. Contained in the second verse are three uses of the word "faggot," and this offended one listener that happened to be a member of the LGBT community. After complaining to the radio station and receiving an unsatisfactory response, an additional complaint was registered with the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC). The CBSC is an organization comprised of broadcast industry professionals that monitor the standards of radio and television broadcasting in Canada. They look for the seven words you can never say on television and radio.

After careful consideration, the CBSC ruled "Money For Nothing" could not be broadcast over the Canadian airwaves. And predictably, the Canadian public went nuts. Cries of censorship went up almost immediately. The CBSC was inundated with emails and phone calls. At least two radio stations played "Money For Nothing" continuously for an hour in protest. It was the end of civilization as we know it.

At first glance, it would seem the CBSC decision was censorship and if not, at least bordering on censorship. In fact, the CBSC has no real power over what is broadcast in Canada. It can label things "not fit for Canadian airwaves," but it has no regulatory or legislative power. That hammer belongs to the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). The CBSC can recommend but it cannot enforce.

Plus, after reading the decision it is clear the CBSC neglected certain salient aspects of popular music. The first being context, which the Board claims does not apply to "Money For Nothing." The second is intent, and while the Board agrees that the use of the word "faggot" was not malicious or particularly nasty, it overlooks the circumstance in which the word is used. To smooth out the rough edges, the Board notes that "Money For Nothing" can be played in its edited version -- the version that was played on the radio when the song was initially released in 1987, the version most people have heard since then, and the same version included on Sultans of Swing, the Dire Straits greatest hits album released in 1998. 

So, while on the surface it appears the CBSC is censoring popular music in general and many arguments point to the use of other so-called objectionable words in other forms of popular music, and aside from the ridicule the decision has garnered from other parts of the world, there is no real damage done to Dire Straits, Mark Knopfler (the songwriter), "Money For Nothing," or popular music. Radio stations will continue to play the song, albeit in its edited version which was the one played initially, then the outrage will subside and the world will get back to what it was doing.

Chalk it up to bureaucracy trying to do the right thing.

And that is frightening.

The decision: http://www.cbsc.ca/english/decisions/2011/110112.php

Cross-posted at VideoJug: http://pages.videojug.com/pages/18118--Money-For-Nothing-Banned-Really-

Change the Anthem...Again?

It has started all over again. In the recent throne speech, Governor General Michaëlle Jean said, "Our Government will also ask Parliament to examine the original gender-neutral English wording of the national anthem."

Think now of "O Canada," the offending line is, "In all thy sons command." What about the daughters? That's the argument. Well, that line was inserted in 1914 during the years of the first World War. At that time it was sons that Canada was sending to war. But of course, that does not account for the women that serve our country. And in the interest of equality, the government now thinks we should re-visit this issue.

It is not the first time the line has been questioned. In 1993, then-prime minister Kim Campbell supported the O Canada Fairness Committee's attempt at an amendment that would change the line to "in all our hearts command." Obviously nothing happened. In 1990, the Toronto city council voted 12-7 to recommend to the federal government that the line be changed to "true patriot love in all of us command." Also in contention, the lines "our home and native land," and "God keep our land glorious and free." The former ignoring the contributions and sacrifices of the aboriginal people and the latter stating something that will never happen.

It's curious that the conservative government chose to bring up this issue after Canada's terrific performance at the Winter Olympics. Was it the thousands of people gleefully, and many times spontaneously, singing the anthem that sparked the interest, or was this planned all along?

On one hand, I hope the anthem stays the same. We've already lived through one change. In 1980, The National Anthem Act added the phrase "From far and wide, O Canada" to replace "And stand on guard, O Canada." I know I wasn't the only person that sang the old lyrics after the change. Given that I don't sing the anthem on a regular basis, it has taken a while to sink in.

On the other hand, I don't see anything wrong in changing the line to reflect something more gender neutral, like "in all of us command." But then there's the native and god thing. This could go on forever.

Maybe we should use that swinging version of "The Maple Leaf Forever" that Michael Bublé sang at the Winter Olympics closing ceremonies. How does that go?

In days of yore, 
From Britain's shore
Wolfe the dauntless hero came
And planted firm Britannia's flag
On Canada's fair domain.

Whoops. French Canadians won't be singing that.

Let's ask Neil Young to write a new anthem.

Mar. 5/2010 UPDATE:
The Georgia Straight reports that the anthem will not be changed.