Telecommunications Act of 1996: Censorship in Alternative Music
''I asked just what the message was, the message that he [Booth Gardner] wanted me to give Nirvana. ‘’It sends a message that needs to be sent. I think the message speaks for itself''
One of the biggest hidden censorships of the 1990s occurred with Bill Clinton signing the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Primarily, the act allowed oligopolies in the broadcast industry to obtain further market shares. In contrast to the supporters of the act, DiCola and Thomson's 2002 study concludes that the act has not benefited the public or musicians and has damaged radio as a public resource.
‘’Radio's oligopolies interact with a five-company recording industry oligopoly, hurting musicians and citizens. Eighty to 100 percent of radio charts are dominated by songs released by the five (previously six) major label conglomerates. This “twin bottleneck” makes access to the airwaves even more difficult for musicians – and reduces choice for citizens’’ (DiCola and Thomson, 2002).
Ultimately, this has hindered the process of underground and local music in reaching mainstream audiences and granted more power and control for radio and music industry oligopolies to set requirements for artists in order to be played on radio platforms. This results in increased censorship and power for music industry oligopolies. They then control what music American audiences are exposed to. With this, diversity weakens not only through radio programmes but the artist’s work, as musicians striving for recognition from major labels need to fit the expectations of the radio’s oligopolies. Once again, this results in increased censorship as artists need to be ideologically and musically unified and standardised. Whilst understanding the change of consumer trends and preferences, this policy has partly constituted to the death of the rock genre (and the death of the 1990s Seattle scene). This is not because the genre lacks artistic works, but due to the major companies not broadcasting such material.
The fact that Bill Clinton used Eddie Vedder to boost his trustworthiness within the youth voters and then signed such an act showcases his lack of interest in free radio and underground music. This act hindered underground music progression to radio, maintaining that underground movements such as grunge with contrasting social and political ideas would no longer reach mainstream platforms. This is evident in the lawsuit heard in Detroit Federal Court in 26th May ,2006 in which the:
‘’filing argues that the Clear Channel Radio Company and the Live Nation Promotion Company worked in tandem, using their joint ability to control radio airplay and advertising, as well as dominate artists’ exposure on the radio. The two companies are accused of cutting out smaller venues and denying other artists airplay on radio, and only booking artists in venues controlled by the two companies.’’ (Arnold, 2007, pp 12-13).
Alternative and DIY bands have been marginalised and refused the right of entry. In contrast such companies have shortened the diversity of material played on radio and increased their power beyond means of music. John R. Arnold explains that:
“local stations in all U.S. markets took in more than $1.6 billion in revenues from political advertising” …According to the Washington Post, a single 30-second commercial on broadcast television could cost [politicians] $100.000. The cost for politicians to get their messages to the citizens via broadcast radio and television clearly contradicts the purpose of the Act to remove barriers of entry’’(Arnold, 2007pp.9-10).
Therefore, radio, once an outlet for discovery of independent and local artists or underground music has been changed into a mainstream outlet. The same corporation figures controlling the mainstream industry are now in control of the alternative signifying the issue of censorship that hid behind such an act and the fusion of the alternative and the mainstream.
John R. Arnold notes that ‘’between the passage of the act and 2006, the average price of concert tickets increased 82%, ‘’far exceeding the rate of inflation’’(Arnold, 2007,p.12). The alternative had become appropriated by major corporations. However this issue had not been unfamiliar before the act, as the issue of concert ticket prices became prominent through Pearl Jam's lawsuit against Ticketmaster in 1994, where the band claimed that ‘’Ticketmaster is intending to monopolise the ticket service industry’’(Bilodeau, 1995).Whilst Pearl Jam had tried to fight Ticketmaster, grunge as a movement was unable to transform or maintain its isolation from capitalist structures. Capitalism had integrated it and sold it to American society. But the control over musical broadcasts also signifies how much politics sought to control music and the alternative. The issue of rock music and those under eighteen becomes prominent just as throughout the PMRC.Before, the state legislature passed, Booth Gardner (Democratic Governor of Washington) ‘’proudly identified ‘’his state as the home of Nirvana in a 1993 address to the legislature. By then, Nirvana had become the most successful and influential rock band in the world. A few months later, the state legislature passed a bill making it illegal for kids under eighteen to attend rock shows that included profanity, even when there was no liquor present’’ (Goldberg, 2005, p.202). Danny Goldberg called on Booth Gardner to veto the bill, as it:
‘’would effectively end rock concerts in the state of Washington and also signal a terrible disrespect to the music scene in Seattle that he seemingly took pride in. Garden replied, ‘’I'm going to sign it, but it's unconstitutional, so it will never be enacted’’. I asked why he was going to sign it if he knew it was unconstitutional. ‘’I think it sends a message, ‘’he responded. I asked just what the message was, the message that he wanted me to give Nirvana. ‘’It sends a message that needs to be sent. I think the message speaks for itself,’’ the governor concluded, before hastily hanging up ‘’ (Goldberg, 2005,p.203).
Despite protests, Gardner further signed the Explicit Lyrics Bill in 1992 which granted jail terms for any store owner who was selling explicit albums to minors. Gardner explained that the bill was of assistance to parents. He was determined to prevent minors from listening to Seattle rock music. Whilst MTV claimed that it had increased voting numbers of the youth population, Goldberg argues that:
’’The only result of demonising pop culture is to drive millions of young people away from politics. In the last Congressional election in 1998, less than 17 percent of eighteen to twenty five year olds voted….I believe that fifteen years of youth culture entertainment bashing in Washington has greatly contributed to alienation and apathy on the part of young people from politics’’ (Goldberg, 2005,p. 257).
Former Clinton counsel Paul Begala said: ‘’I think the reason young people don't vote is because the issue of government doesn't affect people until they’re married and have children’’ (Goldberg, 2005, p.260). But in order for Democrats to maintain influence when young people start caring about politics Bill Clinton expressed his idea of the media being as a third parent.
‘’[T]he effects of violent entertainment on poor children with disengaged parents. People from conventional backgrounds, such as those listening to him that afternoon, could easily distinguish between reality and fantasy, he said. But poor, neglected kids treat the media as a parent and emulate it the way normal kids emulate their parents’’(Goldberg, 2005, p.206).
Those who could distinguish between reality and fantasy were the Creative Artists Agency (CAA) and Mike Ovitz, as Goldberg notes ‘’one of the most powerful men in the entertainment industry’’ (Goldberg, 2005, p.206). Clinton urged others to imagine the effect of programmes on children who view the media as the ‘’third parent (Goldberg, 2005, p.206) as well as demanding the FCC to include V-chip technology on television screens larger than 13 inches, in order for the viewers to ‘’screen out electronically programming that they deem objectionable due to violent or sexual content’’(Creech, 2000, p.132). Clinton wanted to increase censorship. Just like PMRC or Booth Gardner, Clinton had become worried about the influence of the alternative and independent, what Ronald Reagan would characterise as the underground economy.
The mentality of alternative and underground music became the mainstream in the 1990s and contrasted the ideology of politicians such as Bill Clinton. As the demand for censorship in the 1990s showcases how threatening and powerful it had become. Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act in 1996 and his idea of the media being the third parent confirms Democratic desire for censorship and control over American youth culture. The concept of the media being the third parent can be applied to high profile individuals resulting in fans of celebrities being persuaded to follow and adopt a certain agenda, identity, or set of beliefs.
Due to the likeability of the public figure, they appear more trustworthy and reliable, especially when compared to political figures. Fans compare their community to a family or group alliance making such fan groups more meaningful for members. Victor J. Seidler notes that performative identities and celebrity consumer culture
‘’in which young people are often encouraged by the media to model themselves on celebrities which whom they identify, so adopting their styles and looks as their own….They become convicted that they will become be happy if they can somehow live out this ideal for themselves and so perform these identities as their own’’ (Seidler, 2010,p.36).
Individuals create their own identities as a means of security. However, when considering Booth Gardner, Bill Clinton or PMRC, such figures seem to oppose to freedom of speech in music. This showcases political concern about musicians influencing and reaching greater importance within youth markets and communities. If the youth grow up in a society and with a media that encourages one to model themselves on a celebrity, the celebrity is the greatest opponent for political candidates.
Grunge, hardcore punk and rock musicians opposing mainstream values or Democrats, or Republicans hinder trust in politicians or political parties. Voting ratings, candidate victories and the maintenance of power are harder to achieve as opposing celebrities shape the youth to distrust politicians. Grunge as a movement which had sympathy towards the Democrats, only showcases that alternative, underground music was never in the best interest of Democrats. Ronald Reagan or Republicanism was never the core issue of rock or hardcore punk music. Grunge protested by supporting Democrats, who in return had signed laws and created censorship organisations such as PMRC to minimise their influence and make sure that a movement like grunge never became a mainstream phenomenon ever again.
