“Pinching nurses asses when I’m BLEEP or jerkin’…” This is a one of many lines, from the highly proclaimed rap artist Eminem in his song “The Real Slim Shady” (McConnell 54), that has been censored on radio airwaves. Individuals in today’s society are offended by the profanity of pinching a nurses’ ass and other inappropriate gestures in the song, so radio stations have decided to censor the lyrics. Radio stations today censor many artists’ songs because there are inappropriate remarks in the songs.
Although offensive music lyrics is a big problem faced by today’s society, a larger problems exists – the affect music videos has on individuals. With the accessibility to cable television, an individual of any age can turn on television and watch a music video on the channel called Music Television (MTV). Here, provocative gestures and inappropriate behavior that could once be seen in music videos, has now been censored as well. MTV began censoring music videos because of the impact these music videos have on today’s society, and has set certain standards for a music video deemed appropriate to air on television. MTV’s institution brought about a change in the way music was seen on television, creating a censorship of the music videos because of explicit fashions demonstrated by artists who feel as if America’s adolescents can view anything.
To understand why music videos were censored, it is necessary to understand the definition of censorship. According to Professor Chuck Stone, censorship is “the cyclical suppression, banning, expurgation, or editing by an individual, institution, group or government that enforces or influences its decision against the public of any written or pictorial materials which deems destructive to family values, national security and other constitutionally protected speech and which deems so obscene or pornographic as to be ‘utterly without redeeming social value,’ as determined by ‘contemporary community standards’” (Stone Fall 2002). Although the First Amendment to the United States Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech,” and music falls under the category of speech, there are limits to this amendment. One of the limits is obscenity, where the First Amendment does not protect speech, if the speech is seen as obscene (Winfield and Davidson 74).
The U.S. Supreme Court in the 1973 case of Miller v. California developed three prongs to determine if a work was seen as obscene or not. The first prong was that “the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.” The second prong states, “the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law.” The third prong instituted the LAPS test, which determines if “the work as a whole lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.” If the work violates one of these prongs, then it is not acceptable and can be censored (Winfield and Davidson 74). Some of the music videos seen on MTV have not passed one of these prongs, and therefore have been censored.
Robert Pittman founded MTV (The Progressive) in August 1981. The station premiered “as a 24-hour US cable program service presenting an endless stream of music videos” (Banks 293). In a music video, a musician is shown rather then only heard because “it is the shape and the aesthetic form of the visual images that matter.” An artists’ body is displayed and the artist is “constantly transforming this identity through the different ways they decorate and manipulate their bodies” (Johansson 16).
Pittman began with the idea of altering the form of television, making it work for music. He believed that since music is about mood, emotion and attitude, and television is about a narrative story, he had to make a network focused on attitude and away from a narrative story (Levin and Cohn 41). This idea worked, as MTV became the hit of television network. Everyone was watching and talking about this new station that played music videos the entire day. Individuals of all ages, and current music artists including Marilyn Manson, Pink and Lenny Kravitz, were “completely obsessed with it” (49).
On MTV, music videos of current artists, singing recent songs, are constantly shown. A music video was “meant to be interpretations of a song, and they were meant to be art” (Reiss and Feineman 7). To describe a music video, it is best to say that it is “more than just a tape of a band playing and singing. They are highly stylized visual interpretations of the music, using the most advanced video techniques” (19). With the sophisticated techniques, music videos have changed advertising. Now, many companies incorporate their products into a music video so that it is easily viewable to the audience (7), in order to sell their goods. When the viewer sees the product in the video, the viewer thinks that if the product is good enough for the artist to use, then they should go out and buy the product as well.
In becoming a successful force in the mass media and industrial economy, MTV had to set certain standards for material to be played, in case the material was in question about whether or not it was appropriate to be aired. The network claims that a music video can be shown as long as there is not “‘gratuitous sex or violence,’ smoking, gambling, hard liquor, and drug paraphernalia” in the music video. MTV reserves the right to show the music video, not show the music video, or censor the music video according to its standards (Denisoff 75). MTV knows its target audience and aims toward pleasing this audience. MTV’s audience “is more interested in images, emotions, and energy than plot and character and words” (253).
Overall, “the status of the artist or act appears to be a factor in which selections are chosen without editing or subject to absolute rejection” (Denisoff 75). One instance occurred several years ago in Michael Jackson’s “Thriller” music video. This video was considered to be very offensive because women seen in danger were set as a motif throughout the music video (313). This music video was not censored immediately since MTV is in it for the money. Jackson was currently on a hot streak, and if an artist on a hot streak releases a new music video that contains sexual images or violence, it will be played until a complaint is made. Once that complaint is made, MTV will edit the music video. But, as in this case, many individuals already saw the music video.
Many music videos have been censored because “women are depicted in many videos as bitches, teases, castrators, and all-around sex-things,” said Elayne Rapping (Denisoff 313). These music videos are censored because they do not pass one of the prongs established in the Miller decision. A good example of this is if a woman is viewed as a sex object, the LAPS test is violated. There is no literary, artistic, political or scientific value to having an adolescent watch inappropriate behavior he is not old enough to view.
Although censored, music videos shown on MTV depicting women engaging in a lewd manner impact society. MTV is a commercial industry “filled with images of sexy women” showing an “endless parade of half-clad women and fragmented female body parts” (The Progressive). Individuals can see this in “booty videos – invariably featuring scantily clad women dancing in stock male-fantasy settings like mansion brothels or luxury yachts.” The dancers in the videos “wear hot pants, anything python, bikinis, thongs, and plunging halter tops” (Chaplin ST2). Any man in society will drool over a woman dressed like this whether on television or out in public.
In society, the booty video impact has made its way to the popular clubs of New York. In the clubs, the dancers still dress provocatively, but tone it down just a little to “tight leather pants, midriff-baring tops and lots of ghetto-fabulous accessories like gold belts and purses by Chanel or Dior. Fishnet stockings and stilettos are musts.” Whether dancing to Juvenile’s “Back That Thang Up,” Notorious B.I.G.’s “Notorious,” or Jay-Z’s “Give It to Me,” (Chaplin ST2) the men will stand around, watch and applaud the sexual actions the women make. This shows how “women are passive, submissive and/or exist exclusively for the pleasure of men” (Hurley 336). A woman is trying to appeal to the man whether performing in a music video or out in public.
Although every booty video has many shots censored, a lot is still shown. Images of body parts implying a sexual reference that is degrading to women are mostly censored, but sometimes certain images are left (Chaplin ST2). It is a must to eliminate all of these offensive images so women are not looked at as play toys. With some sexual images left in the booty videos an interesting question is raised: since many women copy the actions made by artists in booty videos while out in public, will we need to censor dance moves women display in clubs because of the impact MTV’s booty videos have?
Women of today’s society are not the only one’s impacted by music videos. Adolescents have the accessibility to watch music videos as long as they have a television “for substantial amounts of time each week” (Hurley 329). When watching a music video, adolescents feel as if they must portray a similar character to the artist in the song. This way, if they are seen as similar to the artist, society will see them as an equal individual (336).
Many adolescents favor watching music videos to listening to the same song on the radio. But, these music videos present a fantasy to the adolescent rather then the actual reality life represents. The camera angles, editing and shot sizes distort one’s view of what is really occurring in the video. Many music videos contain sexual imagery and sexual references, and MTV, which is seen as “containing a lot of sex,” is an overwhelming favorite for individuals to view.
While most adolescents do not believe the sexual content in music videos is appropriate (Christenson 71), it is still being seen in the music videos that have not been censored. Adolescents are going to be influenced by what is viewed in the mass media, and these “media messages (be they visual images, sound bites, printed slogans, or rock lyrics) teach objectionable beliefs and behaviors and that young people are particularly vulnerable to such messages” (Roberts).
Female artists’ music videos impact girls’ outfits. These music videos that are not censored but should be, display artists like Britney Spears, in her music video “I’m a Slave 4 U,” and Christina Aguilera, in her music video “Dirrty,” dressed in skimpy clothing where more skin is shown then covered. Young girls see these videos and want to mimic the artists because girls use these images as a “search of a style and an identity” (Johansson 15). Girls see these artists, who are young and beautiful, attracting men, and think that by dressing in a similar fashion, men will like the girl as well.
Girls go to the mall, to school and out to dinner dressed in a skimpy shirt and tight pants with hopes of capturing the eye of a potential partner. But, these girls are dressed in a senseless fashion. Most of the girls dressed like Spears and Aguilera are too young to dress in this manner causing many parents to take offense to this manner. One parent talking about a 12-year-old girl dressed in a shirt revealing her belly button and some cleavage, and pants that went below her waist said in contempt, “That is the most ridiculous outfit I have seen in all of my life. How can a girl that young be allowed to leave the house looking like that?” (Schafer)
Images presented by these artists impact how girls lead their lives. Girls display this manner from watching Spears and Aguilera’s music videos. Girls see how each artist has evolved from her earlier music videos. In Spears’ first music video, “Baby One More Time,” she is dressed in conservative clothing that is acceptable to be worn out in public without exposing much of her body. Her breasts are normal sized and she is not overly exertive on make-up. As her music videos have progressed, her clothes have become skimpier, her breasts larger and her make-up more colorful.
Aguilera’s first music video, “Genie In A Bottle,” displayed her in a conservative manner without any provocative gestures as well. But, Aguilera’s most recent music video, “Dirrty,” is very sexual. Aguilera dances exotically and is promoting a sexual nature. She wears skimpy clothing revealing a lot of her body, which is photographed to enhance erotica. Adolescents, who have seen Spears and Aguilera’s first video, and then each artist’s most recent video, see a young girl grow into a woman. Girls feel as if these artists are being normal and going through a normal stage in life, believing it is more acceptable to dress in an erotic manner the older a girl becomes.
Male artist music videos also impact the fashions worn by boys. In the rapper Nelly’s music videos, he wears baggy clothing with his pants hanging below his waist and extensive jewelry. Nelly is also a sports fanatic. When thinking about music videos, “sport was more important to boys” (Hurley 334) so this allows Nelly to relate to boys. Young boys see how popular this artist is and the way this artist is highly regarded by other adolescents in society.
Boys want to be like this icon, and purchase baggy clothing, wear their pants below their waist, and purchase extensive jewelry. Since sports are so important to boys, and Nelly likes sports, there is a common bond causing boys to feel an even closer connection to the rapper. Boys will wear these clothes to school and out in public believing they are being viewed similar to Nelly.
The entire point of the artists dressing provocatively in music videos is because “MTV is ‘almost a subliminal fashion show,’” says MTV creative director Judy McGrath (Denisoff 258). An artist will usually wear an upcoming line of clothing, or a new fashion design, so that adolescents see the market line before it hits the stores. Since these artists are an adolescents’ role model, they want to wear what the artist is wearing and that is exactly the type of clothing the adolescent purchases.
These music videos have deeply concerned parents because of the images the music videos illustrate. To show the displeasure caused by music videos on MTV, the Parents’ Music Resource Center (PMRC) protested the visual images of sex and violence in music videos (Winfield and Davidson 17). Even prominent businessmen realized the concern society was facing. Media mogul Ted Turner proclaimed, “I am very concerned about the violence and the sadism [of MTV]. My wife used the description ‘satanic’” (Denisoff 168). MTV’s censorship of these videos deemed insulting by parents eliminates the sex seen by adolescents, but does not remove the views artists present.
One of the most censored female music artists in her music videos is Madonna. Madonna is able to portray herself in her music videos the way that she wants because she is able to pull any string possible to get on the air. “She was the puppeteer” (Mahurin and Pond). She is not afraid to express herself in her music videos even though she knows there is the possibility of her music video being censored or not shown at all on MTV. Madonna remains focused on her work, but she does it in a sexy, manipulative way. “She bares her breasts, rubs her crotch, masturbates with bottles and animated statues of black saints, and hops into bed with naked men while exclaiming about the size of their sexual organs” (Berns).
Demonstrating an erotic tone, Madonna has had many music videos censored. This list includes, “Justify My Love” (Moss 5), “Like A Prayer” (“Censored Music”), “Vogue” (Hurley 331), and “What It Feels Like for a Girl” (Scharff).
“Justify My Love” displayed Madonna in her normal sexual ways. MTV censored this music video because of its visibly sexual nature (Moss 5). MTV did not want to be responsible for exposing what it felt would offend the public. Madonna goes overboard in “Like A Prayer” where she burns crosses, shows stigmata and kisses an African American Saint. She also lost a Pepsi contract as her sponsor as a result of her actions in this music video (“Censored Music”).
Although society has learned to live together as a whole, the music video demonstrated the hatred some people still feel toward one another as a result of social controversy that is promoted between people who lived in different generations (Reiss and Feineman163).
In Madonna’s music video “Vogue,” there are male dancers who are bare-chested. The reason this was censored is because it is unusual to see a male naked in a music video. Normally it is the woman exposing herself (Hurley 331). “What It Feels Like for a Girl” was played only once on MTV before it was censored because in the music video, Madonna is dressed like a male and is very aggressive toward men. The time that it was played was surrounded with defensive comments by the host (Scharff). Madonna is such a provocative influence in her music videos that if she were not censored, it would provoke more controversy than already exists. “Madonna is rock & roll,” and since MTV is rock & roll, Madonna is continually played even though she creates such controversy (Mahurin and Pond). Each of Madonna’s music videos that has been censored have violated MTV’s standards by incorporating sexual imagery and has not passed the LAPS test, since there is little literary, artistic, political or scientific value in her demonstrations.
One of the most controversial male artists today is rapper Eminem. Eminem is “a young, hunky, attractive white man” (Tyler) that portrays himself to be African-American. In becoming one of the most popular artists of today, he influences many adolescents, as he appeals to both white and black audience in his rapping. His hit song “The Real Slim Shady” was played on the radio an average of 60 times during its peak in 2000 (McConnell 54). This song has many indecent references, impacting the way adolescents see the world.
As a matter of fact, “The Real Slim Shady” is one of his most censored music videos. In this video, Eminem bashes gays and women. Adolescents believe that if a popular artist can say bad things about people, so can they. One group programmer realized this when he acknowledged, “We have to realize that kids are impressionable, and they look up to Eminem” (Ross and Saxe 76). Many gay and female advocacy groups protested not only “The Real Slim Shady” music video, but also the album the song is on, “The Marshall Mathers LP.”
These were both censored because Eminem portrays a “pissed-off-at-the-world attitude” (75). With this attitude, the censoring of his music videos is appropriate to limit what adolescents see. These music videos are censored since they do not pass the LAPS test since no literary, artistic, political or scientific value is presented. But, there is little society can do to limit everything adolescents see. The only way to limit what adolescents see is by parents talking to their children about the harmful way Eminem treats certain groups (Gordon 53).
Another male artist, Michael Jackson, has a tendency also to bring havoc to society. Not only does he create a debate ranging from his plastic surgery to holding his baby over a balcony, but also his expression of violence in his music videos. MTV censored Jackson’s “Black or White” music video because of the over excessive violence portrayed.
The violence demonstrated in “Black or White” depicts “the black artist’s vision of a racially-mixed world, followed by the white man’s equally fantasized perception of the African-American as a trope for the production of gratuitous violence and the practice of unbridled sexuality” (Muratore 94).
Throughout the music video, Jackson demonstrates indecent acts ranging from being violent and sexual, to grabbing his crotch. But, Jackson claimed he tried to convey the meaning of how African-Americans are trapped in a white society. Many critics did not accept his interpretation, and thought that it was more of an erotic demonstration toward America’s adolescents and therefore censored the music video (Muratore 93-95). Since, it was appropriate to censor this video the question remains: would it really be appealing to see America’s youth walking down the street hitting another individual for no reason or grabbing his private parts?
Prodigy is another group that released a very controversial music video called “Smack My Bitch Up.” In this video, the British techno band had a shot of a nude woman, exposing her breasts, sitting on a bed in a hotel room. There is a scene where there is a close-up of a woman’s rear end (Reiss and Feineman 37). The music video also has a shot of a man injecting himself in the arm with a drug needle (36). After a brief run on MTV the music video was censored, and then the station pulled this music video off the air. The music video clearly violated the LAPS test by not demonstrating any literary, artistic, political or scientific value, violated MTV’s standards by showing drug paraphernalia and gratuitous sex. It also exhibited violence against women by showing these women explicitly being harmed (“Bitch Banned From MTV”).
It is important that MTV censors its music videos because if it did not, many music videos would not be able to be aired. Most of the music videos that would end up not being aired would be the most popular ones. Without these popular artists being seen on MTV, ratings would decrease significantly – something MTV could not afford. Music videos have a high budget to pay for producing a video – between $60,000-80,000 in the 1990s (Banks 295).
Watching music videos brings in revenue through increased CD sales. When a music video is played, artist royalties and cost of label expenses are brought in. The artist receives a percentage of the gross revenues received from CD and tape sales, but then has to deduct the cost of the album’s production and advertising costs. Therefore, the net royalties the artist receives are going to be those debts minus the gross revenues (Banks 301). The artist still receives a significant amount of money, and therefore it is important to market the music video to promote the song.
Once a potential customer sees the song on television, censored or not, the customer is able to relate more to the song when heard on the radio, and will purchase the CD.
As rapper Nelly said, “Video helped the radio star – now you can have images when you’re listening to your favorite artist on the radio” (Levin and Cohn 100). It is a circular process where the artist performs the music video, the consumer purchases the CD, and the artist receives compensation from the total sales, whether or not the viewer sees the entire music video because of eventual censorship.
Does the public really want to see young girls exposing their stomachs and having their hips showing while walking around the mall? Does the public really want to see young boys having their baggy pants hanging below their waist? Young people probably do, but the majority of adults are opposed to such exposures. One who is in favor of not censoring music videos is former Vice President Al Gore. Gore said on MTV, “I’m totally opposed to censorship, and I might say Tipper is as well. We’re both former journalists, and we believe in the First Amendment” (Winfield and Davidson 26). This is a bold statement by a man looked at as a leader of our country.
The best way to keep adolescents from being exposed to sexual imageries in music videos is by censoring the music videos. It is fitting for MTV to censor the music videos that are inappropriate for adolescents to view if it does not live up to its standards, or if the music video does not meet up to the provisions established in the outcome of legislation in Miller v. California. American society cannot let artists like Madonna, Nelly, Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera and Michael Jackson sexually expose themselves to America’s youth. Censoring music videos when they cross a line that is not protected by The Supreme Court case on pornography, is a necessary tool used to set ethics and standards for the youth of today who will be the leaders of tomorrow.

Winfield, Betty Houchin, and Sandra Davidson, eds. Bleep! Censoring Rock and Rap Music. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1999.