Music Censorship

Excerpts from a Senate committee hearing highlighting parental concerns over music their children listened to.

Primary Source

Background

The conservative backlash against the social movements of the 1960s and 1970s reached its peak of popularity and influence in the 1980s. Women, especially white, middle-class stay-at-home mothers, played a major role in advocacy for socially conservative values. Suburban housewives organized their own political advocacy groups and campaigns around issues that affected their children, like drug use and teen pregnancy.

In 1985, Tipper Gore, wife of then-Senator Al Gore, a Democrat, overheard her 11-year-old daughter listening to the Prince song “Darling Nikki.” She was shocked by the song’s lyrics, which include references to masturbation. Tipper co-founded the Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC) that same year. Susan Baker, wife of then-Treasury Secretary James A. Baker III, was another co-founder. Because of their close family connections to the federal government, they became known as the “Washington Wives.”

The goal of the PMRC was to raise parental awareness of explicit content in the music children were listening to. Their concerns tied into larger societal parental fears of bad influences on their children, which they felt would lead to sex and drug use. The PMRC released a list of fifteen popular songs of particular concern, known as the “Filthy Fifteen” in 1985. The organization urged the music industry to place warning labels on album covers. The efforts by the PMRC were ultimately successful when record labels agreed to place “parental advisory” labels on albums with explicit lyrics.

Musicians including Twisted Sister’s Dee Snider and John Denver testified in a Senate hearing against the regulation. They argued that the PMRC promoted censorship went against the First Amendment.

Documents

Picketing Against Tipper Gore

James Ruebsamen, Picketing against Tipper Gore, 1988. James Ruebsamen/Herald Examiner Collection/Los Angeles Public Library.

Document Text

STATEMENT OF SUSAN BAKER, PARENTS MUSIC RESOURCE CENTER, ACCOMPANIED BY PAMELA HOWAR, PRESIDENT; SALLY NEVIUS, TREASURER; TIPPER GORE; AND JEFF LING

(…)

Mrs. Baker: The Parents Music Resource Center was organized in May of this year by mothers of young children who are very concerned by the growing trend in music toward lyrics that are sexually explicit, excessively violent, or glorify the use of drugs and alcohol.

Our primary purpose is to educate and inform parents about this alarming trend as well as to ask the industry to exercise self-restraint.

It is no secret that today’s rock music is a very important part of adolescence and teenagers’ lives. It always has been, and we don’t question their right to have their own music. We think that is important. They use it to identify and give expression to their feelings, their problems, their joys, sorrows, loves, and values. It wakes them up in the morning and it is in the background as they get dressed for school. It is played on the bus. It is listened to in the cafeteria during lunch. It is played as they do their homework. They even watch it on MTV now. It is danced to at parties, and puts them to sleep at night.

Because anything that we are exposed to that much has some influence on us, we believe that the music industry has a special responsibility as the message of songs goes from the suggestive to the blatantly explicit.

(…)

Some have suggested that the records in question are only a minute element in this music. However, these records are not few, and have sold millions of copies, like Prince’s “Darling Nikki,” about masturbation, sold over 10 million copies. Judas Priest, the one about forced oral sex at gunpoint, has sold over 2 million copies. Quiet Riot, “Metal Health,” has songs about explicit sex, over 5 million copies. Motley Crue, “Shout at the Devil,” which contains violence and brutality to women, over 2 million copies.

Some say there is no cause for concern. We believe there is. Teen pregnancies and teenage suicide rates are at epidemic proportions today.

(…)

Today parents have no way of knowing the content of music products that their children are buying. While some album covers are sexually explicit or depict violence, many others give no clue as to the content.

(…)

Mrs. Gore: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are asking the recording industry to voluntarily assist parents who are concerned by placing a warning label on music products inappropriate for younger children due to explicit sexual or violent lyrics.

(…)

A voluntary labeling is not censorship. Censorship implies restricting access or suppressing content. This proposal does neither. Moreover, it involves no Government action. Voluntary labeling in no way infringes upon first amendment rights. Labeling is little more than truth in packaging, by now, a time honored principle in our free enterprise system, and without labeling, parental guidance is virtually impossible.

Most importantly, the committee should understand the Parents Music Resource Center is not advocating any Federal intervention or legislation whatsoever. The excesses that we are discussing were allowed to develop in the marketplace, and we believe the solutions to these excesses should come from the industry who has allowed them to develop and not from the Government.

Summary Text

Mrs Baker explains that the PMRC was founded by mothers who were worried about the music their children listen to.

Our main goal is to make parents aware of explicit lyrics and encourage the music industry to be considerate of offensive lyrics.

We understand that music is really important to teenagers.

We believe that the music industry should be considerate of the impact of the songs they produce.

Some people say this is not a big problem. We believe it is. These songs are very popular.

We are concerned about the increases in teen pregnancy and suicide rates.

Parents have no way to know what music their children are listening to.

Mrs. Gore asks the music industry to voluntarily put content warning labels on music.

This is not censorship. Censorship is the government making content unavailable. This is completely voluntary.

The PMRC does not want the government to get involved in any way. The music industry itself should make these changes.

Teaching Materials

Suggested Activities

Ask students to debate the issue of parental advisory labels. Assign the two sides and have the students conduct research into each side’s arguments before debating.
Consider how the increased influence of the conservative movement affected even Democrats like the Gores by teaching this resource alongside anti-LGBTQ+ activism and the life stories of Sandra Day O’Connor and Beverly LaHaye.
Explore the roles of women in the federal government during this period by combining this resource with Geraldine Ferraro’s acceptance speech, Hillary Clinton’s speech, Anita Hill’s testimony, the Year of the Woman, Maxine Waters on the Rodney King verdict, and the life stories of Sandra Day O’Connor and Barbara Lee.