The Instigator
Adam2isback
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
focuswall
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

The Parental Advisory label is unnecessary and repressive

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 1 vote the winner is...
focuswall
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/29/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,019 times Debate No: 64191
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

Adam2isback

Pro

I will argue for the case. I believe the parental advisory label is outright unnecessary, the reason being that before this advisory came, there were already adult-oriented shops with explicit albums and adult stickers.
I think it's an unfair pressure on companies started because Tipper Gore wanted to ban music that wasn't to her liking.
focuswall

Con

Accepted. Of course adult-oriented content preceded parental advisory labels (PALs). However, these labels are not slapped onto a CD, for example, without reason. The possibly controversial content could include topics not appropriate for children including but not limited to sex; drugs; violence, such as gang fights, shoot outs, grotesque imagery (such as in certain genres of metal); etc. The PALs are in place so that children are not exposed to these things. If the issue at hand is full and free access to this music by all people, then we already have an answer and the topic is not up for debate: screw the CDs, go on YouTube.
Debate Round No. 1
Adam2isback

Pro

Accepted. Of course adult-oriented content preceded parental advisory labels (PALs). However, these labels are not slapped onto a CD, for example, without reason. The possibly controversial content could include topics not appropriate for children including but not limited to sex; drugs; violence, such as gang fights, shoot outs, grotesque imagery (such as in certain genres of metal); etc. The PALs are in place so that children are not exposed to these things. If the issue at hand is full and free access to this music by all people, then we already have an answer and the topic is not up for debate: screw the CDs, go on YouTube.
That's where it goes wrong. Music had warning labels before this whole gulag (as I figuratively call it) of censorship began. Albums that had sex and profanity had warning stickers. Look at any porno album from the late 70s and 80s and you can clearly see a sticker warning them.
This is different.
http://www.neatorama.com...
Clearly, one of the things here was an attempt to force radio and network TV not to air content. She clearly wanted to suppress demand.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

This wasn't concern about anything. It was them banning songs that wasn't to their liking.

The parental advisory label came as a result of this, as a comprimise to fulfill Tipper's demands.
It wouldn't have existed if it weren't for that
focuswall

Con

Please summarize your assertions/resolved point in a few sentences.
Are you arguing that Tipper's actions were unnecessary? They simply tightened the rating system on this content, arguably a positive action considering that consumers can now be well informed on what they buy. Are G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17 ratings on films unnecessary? No, for the same reason: people should know what they're paying for.
Debate Round No. 2
Adam2isback

Pro

The parental advisory label was an unfair compromise that prevented something much worse from happening -- Tipper's censorship. Yes she was completely out of line for doing that. Listen that's what a store is for -- you don't like the music, don't buy it. Don't like what's on TV? Change the channel.

http://books.google.com...
RIAA execs say that stickering was just a comprimise to avoid being forced to do it. Censorship

Tipper Gore is nothing more than a nanny state tyrant who bans stuff because it doesn't fit her views.
focuswall

Con

focuswall forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
Adam2isbackfocuswallTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: ff, but pro never really manages to fulfill his BoP, his arguments don't exactly show the unnecessariness or repressiveness of the PALs, while con logically shows that they are needed and aren't really that repressive.