The Instigator
CapitalistPig
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
emmakeynes
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Does Modern Music Negatively Effect Youths?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/27/2012 Category: Arts
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,256 times Debate No: 27544
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

CapitalistPig

Con

I believe that not all modern music produced effects children in a negative way. And that even if it did it isn't at the fault of the artists but rather the parents that allow them to hear it - that's why there are album labels for age groups and censoring on certain songs on popular radio stations. My point is not to argue with you but rather debate and hopefully gain a better understanding as to why you think "99%" of artists out there have no talent and negatively effect our children. I also hope that out of this I can show you that (while there is bad music out there) there are still some fantastic musicians and singers out there. The issue doesn't lie with the artists - the issue lies with us as a society in the U.S. who've made that kind of music popular enough to seemingly drown out everything else.
emmakeynes

Pro

Modern music negatively affects youth by setting bad examples. Song titles and lyrics are filled with curse words and phrases that are bad for children to hear. I don't think it's completely the fault of the parents, but I think fault lies on many shoulders, such as the artists and the promoters of the music. Men and women alike wear skimpy clothes and do dances no child should be exposed to. I have seen the damage of this first hand. My cousin acts like them, dances like them, sings like them, and I think it is disgusting how people like Justin Bieber are aimed at little and preteen girls. Justin Bieber, Britney Spears, Miley Cyrus, Taylor Swift, Rebecca Black, the Jonas Brothers, etc. Most of the singers today have no talent. They sing into a machine and it corrects all the notes and makes it into something that sounds decent enough to have people buy it.

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.
Debate Round No. 1
CapitalistPig

Con

As an avid progressive metal/classic rock music nerd I do agree with you that there is a very low amount of talent out there in the mainstream. However; while as far as voices go I believe you to be very right - I think you over look some things in musicianship. I'll agree that Beiber, Spears, Black, Jonas Brothers, and Cyrus are below lack luster and as far as musical talent go they're below poor. However though I have the furthest thing from a liking of her music - as a musician I'll give Swift some credit - the fact that she at least can play guitar fairly well deserves at least acknowledgment as giving her a small step above the others. So on the scale of musicianship those artists certainly fall below the line of what I'd consider admirable. However let us not forget the Beatles weren't exactly the most talented band ever (for their day) and didn't exactly play about the best things - but they're still praised now as one of the big influential bands of the day. I'm in no way saying Bieber will one day be looked at as the equivalent of the Beatles for a different generation - that'd be disgusting. But I'm saying that don't forget age and time alter perspectives.

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

Pro

emmakeynes forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
CapitalistPig

Con

As my opponent has forfeited round 2 I will await their response in round three as his response to round two and we will count the debate as a tie so that my opponent has the chance to explain their opinion/view.
emmakeynes

Pro

emmakeynes forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.