Censorship and Money For Nothing

 

This week's article involves a little controversy. Just a fair warning, there is language that may be sensitive to some readers. Understand that this language is used strictly in the sense of historical context and is no way meant to insult or be insensitive in any way.

In January 2011, the Canadian Broadcasting Standards Council (CBSC) acted on a complaint and ruled that song Money for Nothing by the British rock band Dire Straits was unacceptable for airplay on private Canadian radio stations. Keep in mind the song was released as a second single in June 1985 from the album Brothers In Arms. The song was the most commercially successful single for the band reaching the number one spot on the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 and Top Rock Tracks and remaining there for three weeks. The song also reached number one on the RPM Single Chart in Canada in October 1985. At the 28th Annual Grammy Award, the song won for Best Rock Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocals and was nominated for Record of the Year and Song of the Year. So why did a song that was released in 1985 and remained a staple on radio stations for decades come under fire and be deemed unacceptable for Canadian airplay. It had to do with a changing society and ultimately an argument against censorship on music. 

A short while ago, I was having a conversation with a friend of mine and I was telling him how I had this idea for an article about Money For Nothing, but there was a concern. Of course he was familiar with the song but did not understand why there was an issue. When I told him the song he heard on the radio was an edited version and was missing an entire verse, he was quite surprised. He was not aware there was a missing verse. I realized there was probably an entire generation who did not know there is an extra verse in Money For Nothing. Keep in mind, this is not some weird outtake that appeared in a rare special release of the song. This version with the extra verse is the original release from the 1985 release of Brothers In Arms. I showed him the reason for the edit. Here is the controversy. Remember, fair warning for sensitive readers. In the verse the word faggot appears three times. Here is the missing verse in its entirety:

See the little faggot with the earing and the makeup

Yeah buddy, that's his own hair

That little faggot got his own jet airplane

That little faggot, he's a millionaire. 

The CBSC determined that the song breached the code of ethos and character betrayal code. For a short while, the song was removed from radio play. Not all radio stations followed the ruling. A couple of stations continued to play the song with the offending verse intact and a station in Nova Scotia played for an hour straight out of protest. An edited version, with the verse removed entirely, had appeared on the 1998 compilation Sultans of Swing: The Very Best of Dire Straits and this is the version that is heard on the radio today. It is not the first time the song lyrics drew criticism. The lead singer and songwriter of the group, Mark Knopfler had received a letter from an editor of a gay newspaper in London shortly after its release saying it was below the belt. 

Let us closely examine the story of the song.  The story of Money For Nothing revolves around a working class boomer generation character. In the song, the character installs microwave ovens, cabinets and custom TVs for rich people. He comes home after a long hard day working for people with more money than he has. He turns on the TV and comes across MTV. As he watches, he sees a younger generation of musicians. He sees they have nicer, more expensive clothing, and is surrounded by women and wealth with things he will never be able to afford, such as a jet airplane. He also sees the musicians wearing a little makeup and earrings, as was the style of some musicians in the era of MTV (remember they had to look good as well as sing). As mentioned earlier, the main protagonist is of the Boomer generation. This is a generation where casual racism was the norm. In his eyes these musicians are making a lot of money for nothing and lashes out the only way he knows, by calling the guy with the earring and the makeup a faggot.

There is a term historians use when examining past behaviour in the present. It is called presentism, which judges past events in terms of modern values and concepts. To an historian, this can be a dangerous thing. What presentism can do is skew the past and misinterpret the context of what is being examined. In this case, we see a bitter person who is angry at a generation of slackers who have never worked a day and are getting more than he will. He is jealous, petty and has a very limited view on life. He is not necessarily homophobic but has no problem using such words as faggot to insult someone. In this case, the musician (who may or may not be gay, it is never revealed) is the target. For the protagonist, the target is going to be anyone who has it better than he has. This is how we should view the context of this song. Although the term has been used as a direct slur against gay people, in the context of the song, this is not the case. Knopfler is mocking the character highlighting the casual bigotry that was so prevalent at the time of the song's release. 

This is not the first time music has been the target of misguided censorship. Since the introduction of rock and roll in the 1950s, parents groups, religious groups, and over zealous politicians have tried to have songs banned because of some perceived danger. 1955 saw an onslaught of groups pressuring radio stations to ban certain songs they found particularly offensive. If the song was suggestive in any way, particularly if it was sexually suggestive, it was targeted. Variety wrote a three-part series on what they called leer-ics, their term for alleged obscene lyrics.  The late 1950s and early 1960s saw its own version of censorship with the rise of television. The Ed Sullivan Show was infamous for filming a second appearance of Elvis Presley from the waist up after a hip swaying first appearance. They continued the censorship by forcing the Rolling Stones to change the lyrics from let's spend the night together to let's spend some time together.  Sullivans heavy-handed censorship did not always work. Jim Morrison of the Doors agreed to omit the line from Light My Fire in which he sings baby we couldn't get much higher, implying drug use. Morrison not only sang the line but he also sang it louder. The Doors were not asked back to the show. The 1980s probably had one the most famous attacks on music with the Congressional Hearings led by uptight American social activist Tipper Gore. Gore was horrified over the sexually suggestive lyrics of the Prince song Darling Nikki that her 11 year old daughter was listening to from the album Purple Rain. Although it was never fully addressed why Gore bought a Prince album for her 11 year old and was then surprised by the lyrics, she decided something needed to be done. The result was the PMRC Senate Hearings in which Gore and other wives of politicians and prominent DC business tried to control and outright ban any perceived music they found offensive while claiming this was not about censorship but the protection of society. The result of this farcical waste of taxpayers time and money was the warning label you saw on any album release that had a swear word in its lyrics. Ironically, the label only served to make kids who were buying the music want the album even more. 

Censorship and music have been travelling together since the 1950s. If there is a group out there that finds something offensive in a song, you want to bet they will try to get it banned. Having said that, there are songs that take it farther than it should. Some Hip Hop songs are rife with misogyny and violence, but it can be argued this is due to culture and society. The lyrics should be looked at contextually and avoid the easy road of presentism. Does this mean we should just ignore the lyrics and pass it off as not offensive. Absolutely not. It is the same as accepting Grandpa's casual racism as that is just the way he is. The meaning of some words change over time. The word faggot, once used as a general slur against anyone, has now been deemed unacceptable by society as a whole. Terms like this that were once used so casually are now viewed as bigoted and homophobic. This is a good thing. It shows that we are hopefully growing as a society. People should not be targeted, threatened or terrorized of sexual orientation or any other belief. It really is nobody's business who sleeps with who or what they believe in. Censorship in music is the same thing. People are welcome to listen to whatever they like and should not be told by strangers what is appropriate. The fact there have been groups who feel they have the right to police what others are listening shows that maybe we have not grown as much as we like to think. 

This weeks sources include: 

Linda Martin and Kerry Segrave, Anti-Rock: The Opposition to Rock n Roll, (Connecticut, De Capo Press, 1993).

Money for Nothing, Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_for_Nothing.