Does Modern Music Negatively Effect Youths?
Debate Rounds (3)
I believe that most modern music has a negative effect on our children because the artists who actually have talent are not promoted because many of them have no good looks, which is what our music industry is based on now. It used to be that looks had almost no bearing on whether you had good music or not, but now, that's all that matters.
I think we share some of the same views on this topic, and that this will not be so much a true debate, but a way to bring out those similar views.
I think the other thing I find depressing is that you are right- most bands with true talent aren't promoted as they should be - but I think you may be overlooking a few. Bands like Fun, Florence and the Machine, The Killers, Mumford and Sons all get regular radio play on popular stations and they all actually present relatively admirable musical talent. Fun with their acapella singing styles mixed with bizzarre sounds, F+TM as well as Mumford and Sons with their amazing vocals and great musicianship and meaningful lyrics. The problem isn't that good music is dying - the problem is that it left for quite a while from about 2003-20011 but in the past year I've noticed a rise in true talent being played on the radio. But you're still right that promotion for many other true talents is lacking. I'm into metalcore (it's not devil music I promise if that's what you or anyone who reads this is thinking; there are even christian metalcore groups) this is a very under promoted genre that is slowing gaining ground but it is a very talented group because of the fact that it hasn't been widely promoted - as such it takes true talent to gain popularity with it. Most metalcore groups have a true vocalists besides the screamer and I promise you if you wanted I could show you plenty of those bands with amazing vocal talent. As well as beyond bright talent on all instruments played - even classical piano in some cases. So sometimes remember that lack of popularity can actually help keep talent in a genre alive.
Now on to rough waters though where we begin to disagree - slightly. You're right that the social aspects promoted by some artists is (in my opinion) stupid. The baggy clothes, pointless lyrics, poor standards for living your life, etc. but that doesn't mean that people imitating them gives us any ground to limit what they can do as artists. Now do I think those songs should be played on kid's channels or radio station? No. But we have to remember that it is also a parent/guardian's job to monitor what their child is exposed to. That's why I had to have my parents watch a show before I could growing up as a young child. Their imitating of artists behavior is still not something we can pin on artists - they're within their rights to "sing" about what they like. That's why radio is censored and why we have age restrictions on certain albums and CD's. As far as examples go though don't forget that it was rap idol Eminem who put out multiple albums about how drugs destroyed his life and how hard it was to move on from them in order to take care of his family. Here's an artists who's exceptionally well known even by those who don't listen to rap putting out something that isn't meant to be taken in a negative light. So the fact that people conform to what this music tells them isn't a direct fault of the music industry or the artists but rather the decline in responsibility that seems to be growing in America.
As such I do not blame artists or their music for the effects on our children though I do wish those younger than me could hear and see some of the bands I've experienced. I've seen Rush once a year for a while now, I've seen Dream Theater, The Wall performed by Walter Rogers. I've loved Toto, Thea Beatles, The Who, Yes, Genesis, and Van Halen for years. I find extreme amazement in classical cello pieces and desire to one day take the instrument up. I was raised in a family whose grandparents had made a fortune off of the jazz era but that was long ago and we reap no spoils from it now of course. M point isn't that music is better now than it was before - but I think there is still great talent out there. I also believe that because of the freedom of press and the freedom of speech that (as long as we maintain radio censorship of language and age labels on certain albums) then there is no way for me to fault the artists as an american. Do I wish morally (though I am an atheist) for the artists to try and set a better example? Of course - but it doesn't give me the right to try and force that behavior among them.
I'll leave you with this: groups like Twisted Sister and Alice Cooper were parts of the reason we now have age labels on albums. When asked why they behaved the way they did publicly they both responded with intelligent answers brought on through personal research and honest dignity for what they did. They both answered that they did it because people liked to see it. People (artists) do what's popular because that's what sells. The lead singer (referred to as Alice) of Alice Cooper is actually a talented golfer and christian and was raised by a pastor who supported his music the entire time he did it. The effects things have on our children fall on our nations parents - not our musical artists.
Thank you for accepting my challenge and I look forward to you're dispute.
emmakeynes forfeited this round.
emmakeynes forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.