Banned Music?

I Need The Sun

Has there been an agreement somewhere that has stopped, or at least severely curtailed the playing of Gary Glitter songs and any other music projects he was associated with from the radio? Eg: The Glitter Band?

I wonder what would have happened to the entire back catalogue of Jackson Five, Michael Jackson songs if he had have been found guilty back then.

I don't want this thread to turn into an issue of Glitters Crimes, but rather a discussion in the apparent air brushing of his musical existence.

When was the last time you heard a Glitter song on national radio?

rcaz

Maybe it's just 'cause his music isn't relevant anymore?

I Need The Sun

rcaz wrote: »

Maybe it's just 'cause his music isn't relevant anymore?

Maybe...But his back catalogue is still notable by it's absence from all the Retro Golden Oldie Radio Shows and Cd compilations.

personally I consider Rock N Roll Parts 1 and 2 to of incredible influence to so many other acts even to this day.

I think it's more a case of stations intentionally not playing GG songs due to his crimes.

If this is the case, I think it's a bit of a shame that The Glitter Band got dragged into it as well. Losing out on lost royalties from radio AirPlay etc.

Kold

I just reckon Glitter's name is more synonymous with paedophilia than music nowadays. Not true of Jacko at all. Music-wise they're not even close to being in the same league.

im invisible

im sure i heard a tune of his on an episode of reeling in the years a while ago, and i thought 'its been a while since i heard that..'



also

martinedwards

I haven't heard any for years.


even on the countdown oldies shows.

Funny because Jerry Lewis records still get played.......

and wasn't Bill Wyman known for liking younger ladies?

Welsh Megaman

Bit of a storm kicked up recently. From the Indo last month:-

THE BBC has been criticised for showing an archive performance of Gary Glitter on Top of the Pops that will earn the disgraced star hefty royalties.
Convicted sex offender Gary Glitter stands to be paid thousands of pounds in royalties after the BBC aired a repeat of him performing on Top of the Pops in 1977.

The footage, which was shown on Saturday as part of the popular re-runs of episodes from the 1970s, featured Glitter singing It Takes All Night Long, which also caused many viewers to remark on the rather unfortunate lyrics. The first line includes the words "Cuddle me close. Hold me tight".

Many viewers made official complaints, expressing their disgust that Glitter would receive money from the airing of the TV show, as well as making their opinions heard via social networks Facebook and Twitter.
But BBC bosses defended their decision to air the show - stating it would be inappropriate for them to have edited out Glitter's performance: “It would be inappropriate for the BBC to rewrite history, so the programme was shown in its entirety.”

Glitter (real name Paul Gadd) was convicted of possession of child pornography in the United Kingdom in 1999, after pleading guilty to 54 offences of making indecent photographs of children.
In 2006 he was jailed in Vietnam for 26 months for abusing two girls aged 10 and 11.

I Need The Sun

Kold wrote: »

I just reckon Glitter's name is more synonymous with paedophilia than music nowadays. Not true of Jacko at all. Music-wise they're not even close to being in the same league.

Indeed, but my point raised was 'What would have happened if Michael Jackson had have been found guilty? In that instance could the industry have sent all Michael Jacksons back catalogue to the archive dungeons?

The article from Welshman does seem to indicate that the industry has an unwritten
Total ban on GG catalogue. But the BBC felt their hands were tied as they could not edit an episode of TOTP.

Kold

I don't like the idea of whitewashing someone's artistic output at all and I think that people that push for it are idiots. Whilst his crimes are disgusting and rightfully condemned, fact is that a lot of fantastic artists have committed similar crimes and worse. In fact, my favourite painter is Egon Schiele who has similar kinds of allegations to his name. Go back far enough and you find yourself in a time where this kind of behaviour was acceptable in society. There's probably an abhorrent trait in every person who ever lived, maybe not of this standard but context changes over boundaries (things we view as animal cruelty for example) so judging a person's artistic output on something they've done could leave you with very little options. By the way, I'm not trying to belittle the crime of sex with children, just trying to make the argument for art.

It's just easier that it's Gary Glitter and the majority of people don't really miss his music.

Punish the human that commits the crime, not the world that would be denied the art. Book burners mang, these people are f*cking idiots. Dangerous idiots.

Lapin

No more Jonathon King on the airwaves too.

No harm either.

smokedeels

He's hardly f**king kids by singing is he?

I was only reminded of that awful Guns n' Roses song "One in a Million" recently, it's basically a dim-witted red-neck having a go at foreigners and gays and they are still widely played on radio/tv/youtube. Glitter's a bad dude but he never wrote a hate song.

I guess the nature of the crime is important, most people would prefer that the music of a murderer or a racist be played than the work of a paedophile.

SdoowSirhc

smokedeels wrote: »

He's hardly f**king kids by singing is he?

I was only reminded of that awful Guns n' Roses song "One in a Million" recently, it's basically a dim-witted red-neck having a go at foreigners and gays and they are still widely played on radio/tv/youtube. Glitter's a bad dude but he never wrote a hate song.

I guess the nature of the crime is important, most people would prefer that the music of a murderer or a racist be played than the work of a paedophile.

I agree, would rather the music of a murderer but that would usually be stereotyped into rappers and the genre being associated with violence

I Need The Sun

Great points there people..

Like, is this offensive? http://youtu.be/BIsbD0l_bEg

Exactly who is losing out here? My kids come into the room and say

"Who's that dad, sounds cool"....

Kold

God, sometimes I love youtube comments.

FishBowel

Heavy metal on Irish radio?

Sinfonia

Kold wrote: »

I don't like the idea of whitewashing someone's artistic output at all and I think that people that push for it are idiots. Whilst his crimes are disgusting and rightfully condemned, fact is that a lot of fantastic artists have committed similar crimes and worse. In fact, my favourite painter is Egon Schiele who has similar kinds of allegations to his name. Go back far enough and you find yourself in a time where this kind of behaviour was acceptable in society. There's probably an abhorrent trait in every person who ever lived, maybe not of this standard but context changes over boundaries (things we view as animal cruelty for example) so judging a person's artistic output on something they've done could leave you with very little options. By the way, I'm not trying to belittle the crime of sex with children, just trying to make the argument for art.

It's just easier that it's Gary Glitter and the majority of people don't really miss his music.

Punish the human that commits the crime, not the world that would be denied the art. Book burners mang, these people are f*cking idiots. Dangerous idiots.

Couldn't agree more. Wrote on a similar point in my Masters thesis, about the ban on performances of Wagner's music in Israel.

I Need The Sun

FishBowel wrote: »

Heavy metal on Irish radio?

HM? GG? Glam Rock, a fine purveyor of, some would argue the father of. Currently being air-brushed by the music/radio industry who have yet to agree on a policy to sort such matters out.

http://youtu.be/vdQZ4EHn0kE

nlgbbbblth

I DJ'ed for a while at my own 40th birthday party earlier this year and played Rock'n'Roll Part 2. It was also included on the souvenir CD (all tracks from 1972) which was given to guests.

Nobody complained and plenty people danced.

nlgbbbblth

Lapin wrote: »

No more Jonathon King on the airwaves too.

No harm either.

You never heard Round, Round?

Killer b-side.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUcobrGPWs8

Judge the art not the artist.

Glitter may be a despicable human being but that does not mean that his music should be erased from history. Plenty of artists musicians, film makers, writers, etc, etc have had similar accusations against them yet no one has ever wanted their work banned. I imagine that had Glitter written and performed "I Get Around" or "My Sweet Lord" or "Brown Sugar" and not throw away pop then his musical legacy would not have been so quickly swept under the rug

I Need The Sun

Deleted User wrote: »

Judge the art not the artist.

Glitter may be a despicable human being but that does not mean that his music should be erased from history. Plenty of artists musicians, film makers, writers, etc, etc have had similar accusations against them yet no one has ever wanted their work banned. I imagine that had Glitter written and performed "I Get Around" or "My Sweet Lord" or "Brown Sugar" and not throw away pop then his musical legacy would not have been so quickly swept under the rug

Indeed:



And if there were a notional league of "offenders" where would someone like Phil Spector (Second-Degree Murder) be placed? A 25% ban of back catalogue?

I am of course talking about the music and not the man. But the seemingly unwritten total ban by the broadcast media is an archaic way of dealing with the situation.

It reminds me of an incident in recent years where an outraged group of residents in an estate, I think it was Portsmouth, attacked the home of a man because he was listed as paediatrician in the phone book, (they thought he was a paedophile).

Try calling up a radio station and asking them to play a GG song. I wonder what the response would be.

Are we all meant to forget that GG's music existed?

Edit: The nearest reference to GG's music having been banned by the BBC was in an article written by Rebecca Seales in The Daily Mail 30th January 2012, where she writes,


"British television channels and radio stations have banned music by Glitter, whose real name is Paul Gadd, since he was jailed in 2006 for molesting two girls in Vietnam".

I would question the accuracy of this, and would suggest that if is a ban, its an unwritten, one, which is probably worse, because the authorities are unable to come up with a meaningful and fair way to deal with the situation.

If this is a financial way of further "punishing" Glitter, the authorities should be reminded, its not just GG who is being denied royalties, members of the Glitter Band, session musicians and various other stakeholders are being denied income.

kunst nugget

I think any radio station that receives public funding or revenue from advertising is not going to play Gary Glitter because they don't want to be seen to be endorsing him or rewarding him financially. I have to laugh at Glitter's work being called art, it was pap designed to appeal to the masses and was extraordinarily inane with no lasting value to it at all. When you base your stance in life on appealing to the wider public, you're going to get an awful hiding when you step outside it's moral code.

Father of glam, me bollicks.

I'm not for burning books mind. Great art inevitably becomes separated from the artist on their death and becomes judged more or less on it's own merits with the artist's questionable morals being a back story to add colour. Glitter's 'art', I believe, will not last with any significance, beyond his death.

Sinfonia

na naa naa nana HEY na naa nana

I Need The Sun

na na na nah, na na na nah, hey-hey-ey, goodbye.