#MeTooFar

[Amarok]

And the equal worry of turning any encounter vanilla

---

And it's kind of worrisome the standard is passed out . If that's so .

[I_am_not_mafia]

Of course I am. If a song can be pulled for the reasons given in the article - even when over 90% of the audience said it shouldn’t - then any song can be pulled for any reason.

Boru

How many of those radio stations play Prokofiev's 1st symphony? Or Jonny Greenwood's Bodysong? Obviously these pieces of music have been banned. It's terrible. Radio stations should not be allowed a choice about what to play!

[Angrboda]

That's not an answer to my question.  Or are you now saying that you said something you didn't mean?

Sorry, I thought that saying the radio station can play what it likes made it clear that they are the ones who decide.

Boru

That's fine, but that conflicts with your prior statement that "Who decides" was a problem, implying that the radio station's owners and operators deciding was a problem. Yet in your last statement, you seem to be saying that their being the ones to decide isn't a problem. Since you haven't retracted either statement, I'm simply unsure of which of the two Boru's to believe. Did I misunderstand your prior comments?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Of course I am. If a song can be pulled for the reasons given in the article - even when over 90% of the audience said it shouldn’t - then any song can be pulled for any reason.

Boru

Radio stations should not be allowed a choice about what to play!

I’ve said more than once in this thread that radio stations can play what they like.

Boru

[I_am_not_mafia]

And the problem with that is what exactly?

It's letting a minority opinion, based completely on emotion (in this song example "it feels rapey/creepy"), dictate what should be said or heard.

Or maybe there's just a greater awareness. I actually like the song in question and own Tom Jones' version. But it was my husband who pointed out to me quite what it suggests and I agree with him.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Sorry, I thought that saying the radio station can play what it likes made it clear that they are the ones who decide.

Boru

That's fine, but that conflicts with your prior statement that "Who decides" was a problem, implying that the radio station's owners and operators deciding was a problem.  Since you haven't retracted either statement, I'm insimply unsure of which of the two Boru's to believe.  Did I misunderstand your prior comments?

The station in the article pulled the song under pressure. My concern is that if a tiny minority of an audience can pressure a station into changing its playlist, then the station ISN’T the one making the decision. This is bullying, not free market. 

It isn’t a perfect analogy, but suppose 5% of the subscribers to a newspaper objected to negative articles about Donald Trump. Should the newspaper change its content based solely on that? The paper has every right to do so, but should they?

Boru

[brewer]

As oppose to letting majority opinion dictated by emotion (i want to hear this song. It's nostalgic for me etc etc etc ) dictate what should and should not be heard

---

Plus i point out no one is stopping them from hearing the song

That's kind of how it works. 

And no one was forcing the minority to listen. The easiest solution would have been to knob of the radio.

[Amarok]

As oppose to letting majority opinion dictated by emotion (i want to hear this song. It's nostalgic for me etc etc etc ) dictate what should and should not be heard

---

Plus i point out no one is stopping them from hearing the song

That's kind of how it works. 

And no one was forcing the minority to listen. The easiest solution would have been to knob of the radio.

And the easiest  for the people who want to hear it is too turn the knob or by a copy of it and that just goes back to my point if the majority get to decide what's not offensive is their any limit ?

[Angrboda]

That's fine, but that conflicts with your prior statement that "Who decides" was a problem, implying that the radio station's owners and operators deciding was a problem.  Since you haven't retracted either statement, I'm insimply unsure of which of the two Boru's to believe.  Did I misunderstand your prior comments?

The station in the article pulled the song under pressure. My concern is that if a tiny minority of an audience can pressure a station into changing its playlist, then the station ISN’T the one making the decision. This is bullying, not free market.

Boru

I'm not seeing how this is any different than a radio station pulling a song because a minority of advertisers consider the song controversial or offensive. Are you saying the station shouldn't safeguard it's interests by responding to pressure from it's audience and other ultimate sources of income? I'm looking for some clarity here. So if I and a vocal group of secular humanists decide to boycott a radio station for playing overtly Christian music excessively during the holidays, then I and my group are engaged in bullying?

[brewer]

It's letting a minority opinion, based completely on emotion (in this song example "it feels rapey/creepy"), dictate what should be said or heard.

Or maybe there's just a greater awareness. I actually like the song in question and own Tom Jones' version. But it was my husband who pointed out to me quite what it suggests and I agree with him.

Greater awareness is good, the issue should be discussed, but pulling songs from the air is not the answer. There are a lot of "suggestive" songs. Should the opinion of a minority pull them off the air? If yes, then I guess I'll be hearing less rap.