What public service is Tim Westwood performing?

This morning's Sun has given a warm welcome to David Cameron's attack on some of the hip-hop output of Radio 1's Tim Westwood.  Speaking yesterday, the Tory leader said:

"I would say to Radio 1, do you realise that some of the stuff you play on Saturday nights encourages people to carry guns and knives?"

The Sun responds:

"Plenty of decent people, especially in the black community, fear for their children’s lives every time they leave home.  The last place they want to hear exhortations to violence is on the BBC, our public service broadcaster.  Yet Radio One DJ Tim Westwood gives peak time airplay to violent rap and hip-hop music."

The Sun quotes black charity worker Shaun Bailey's warning that rap stars like 50 Cent, Eminem and the “grime music scene” are “peddling death to our children” by celebrating violence.

Gangsta rap has long been a subject of huge controversy in America with many leading politicians, and celebrities like Bill Cosby, complaining about violent and anti-women lyrics.  David Cameron with this intervention, following his recent remarks about the way some businesses promoted 'sexualised' clothing to young children, is showing that he is determined to mount the bully pulpit and use his public platform to champion the concerns of parents for their children.

Comments

[johnC]

I'm sure I would be appalled at the lyrics of violent rap music if I could ever make out what they were.

[Gareth]

This, like the comments on children's clothing, smack of nanny knows best.

[John Hustings]

"This, like the comments on children's clothing, smack of nanny knows best."

Surely is is a different matter when it is the BBC, which is funded by *our* taxes?

[Annabel Herriott]

The pity of it is, children can understand every word of this gangsta rap. There has to be some logical reason why young folk have taken to carrying knives and stabbing each other. What was the trigger? Rap? Drugs? the weather? I dont know, you tell me, but gangsta lyrics have to come well up the causes list.

[James Maskell]

We are a Christian country, and yet we allow rock bands to pedal lyrics that are anti-Christian. Ban rock music then. Pop artists dress like tarts..,.ban them. History leads some people to find Nazism attractive...shall we burn every book that says anything about Nazism? Shall we adapt the National Curriculum so that nothing controversial is taught? Perhaps while we are criticising Tim Westwood, perhaps we should take a pot-shot at Chris Moyles, who doesnt back away from controversy on his show? Where does it stop?

The parents of children who go feral, often dont discipline their children. Peer pressure can lead to crime. Rap music...its an easy target. Is the reason why parents arent being blamed because they have the ability to vote?

[comstock]

Oh dear oh dear oh dear Davey boy .....a gift of a goal to Mr Comstock.......

This from the man who used 'keep it real' during his leadership campaign to demonstrate how 'down with the kids' he was.

Oh and FWIW

Yet Radio One DJ Tim Westwood gives peak time airplay to violent rap and hip-hop music

err, since when has Saturday night been 'peaktime' on the radio? It's proberbly about as off-peak as you can get, apart from overnights.

[John Hustings]

"This from the man who used 'keep it real' during his leadership campaign to demonstrate how 'down with the kids' he was."

This is a good point. He also, if I remember correctly, upbraided David Davis for "not understanding the aspirations" of yobs in city centres on friday and saturday nights.

It's odd that he's sounding alot more socially conservative since becoming leader. While I welcome that, I do wonder how sincere it is, or how much of it is merely an attempt to show that he sympathises with the position of young mothers.

[James Maskell]

Yeah...the Westwood show is past the watershed.

[SimonNewman]

James Maskell:
"We are a Christian country, and yet we allow rock bands to pedal lyrics that are anti-Christian. Ban rock music then..."

I'm fairly libertarian, but I think there's a big difference between

(1) criticising the playing of music on Radio 1, and
(2) calling for it to be banned.

There are plenty of unpleasant things that (IMO) shouldn't be banned, but neither should they be immune from criticism. What Cameron said seemed reasonable to me.

[Hmmmm]

If you want to hear the lyrics clearly - here is a Nina Gordon cover of an NWA "song" called Straght Outta Compton. Compton is a part of South Central LA which is notorious for gang related violence and is about as bad as it gets....

http://www.ninagordon.com/audio/straightouttacompton.mp3

[Jack Stone]

Some rap songs do glorify violence and knife carrying.
All David Cameron is saying is what most parents are thinking and he should be supported for saying it. Not attacked by the usual idiots who have there own agenda and its not about supporting the Conservative Party.

[Hmmmm]

Simon you're right. Remember this is tax payers money going into Westwoods pocket, and his tax payer funded airplay promotes records, and puts money into the pockets of people like

Tupac Shakur - shot dead 1996
Snoop Dog - part time pornographer and now denied entry to the UK for violent behaviour
Biggie Smalls - shot dead 1997
50 Cent - ads removed from UK TV due to violent lyrics, and bans suggested in Canada and part of the US
and many more just the same

Oh and guess what the record companies are called?:

Murder Inc
Death Row Records
Bad Boy Entertainment

[comstock]

Speaking yesterday, the Tory leader said:

"I would say to Radio 2, do you realise that some of the stuff you play on your peak time shows encourages people to carry guns and knives?"

Indeed. And a lot more besides.

For instance:
The orginal gangster:
Bobby Darin- Mack the Knife

Violence against the police:
Bob Marley/Eric Clapton- I shot the sheriff (ah yes but I didn't shoot the deputy yr honour)
The Clash/Bobby fuller- I fought the law

Prison riots:
Elvis presley- Jailhouse rock

Glamorising fast, reckless driving to impress the girls:
Ricky Valence- Tell laura I love her

Arson:
Deep Purple-Smoke on the water
The Doors- C'mon baby light my fire (Some of those old folks might take it literally)

Drug pushing: LOADS of examples
The Beatles- I'll get high (with a little help from my friends)
Sammy Davis Jr- the Candyman

Sexual promiscuity:
FAR FAR too many to list.....

Driving whilst under the influence of alcohol
Mungo Jerry- In the Summertime ("have a drink, have a drive")

Overthrowal of the goverment:
The Beatles-Revolution

All of which are at *least* as dangerous as anything Westwood plays......, yet all seem to be fine.......

[Ross Cowling]

James Maskell:

"We are a Christian country, and yet we allow rock bands to pedal lyrics that are anti-Christian. Ban rock music then. Pop artists dress like tarts..,.ban them. History leads some people to find Nazism attractive...shall we burn every book that says anything about Nazism? Shall we adapt the National Curriculum so that nothing controversial is taught? Perhaps while we are criticising Tim Westwood, perhaps we should take a pot-shot at Chris Moyles, who doesnt back away from controversy on his show? Where does it stop?"

You are quite right, James, in pointing out that DJs such as Tim Westwood sould not be banned, however I do not think that is what our glorious leader was getting at. He was simply pointing out that Radio 1, amongst others, has a social responsibility to uphold, and needs to steer away from what could be percieved as the promotion of the violent gun culture that is emerging in this country. Any attempt to ban "hip-hop" music, or any of the other things you list, would, however, come into the category of "nannying".

[James Maskell]

Hey Ross, hows Canterbury? Isnt this ignoring the fact that parents should have control of what their children listen to? The state should keep out.

People listen to the Westwood show for whatever reason. Theres obviously a market for it otherwise the show wouldnt last long. If we believe in free choice, shouldnt we allow people to listen to what they would lime to hear.

Cameron is criticising Radio 1 for playing music that the listeners want to listen to...isnt it missing the point then to criticise the producers? Music companies are still going to make it. Shouldnt Cameron be criticising music companies which create the music and encourage it to begin with?

Children go bad for a whole range of reasons, in which rap music is one. I fail to see how rap music is a serious factor in why children go bad. Parenting (or lack of it) is a much bigger reason.

[Hmmmm]

ITS TAXPAYERS MONEY DEMANDED WITH MENACES EVERY YEAR - THATS THE DIFFERENCE

YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU LIKE WITH YOUR OWN MONEY AFTER 21.00 HOURS

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

The bad news is that this type of music is rather popular. The good news is that the people who listen to it are highly unlikely to vote.

[John Moss]

Hang on guys, we're "Conservatives" remember, not libertarians.

OK, that means we are generally more liberal than either the Lib-Dems or Labour when it comes to letting people make choices about what they do with their own money/time/bodies, but that absolutely does not extend to stuff which harms others, either directly, by influencing them to do things which are illegal, or by requiring them to pay taxes to clean up the mess afterwards.

Cameron deserves credit for setting out conservative views on children's clothing, homework, bad food and inciteful music lyrics, in contrast to the - hopefully - more liberal approach we will be adopting to health, education, welfare etc. The former echoes the concerns of parents and older people, establishing us as sharing their values even though we can, frankly do very little about it. The latter would, over time, recreate a sense of responsibility, which again, over time, should change people's behaviour for the better.

Surely, this has to be better than the traditional pandering of the left to the lowest common denominator of public behaviour?

[malcolm]

Very good Comstock.But does someone with an intimate knowledge of the lyrics of Mungo Jerry and Sammy Davis JR really know anything about Gangsta Rap or Hip-hop?
FWIW.I approve of Camerons stance on this but it really is a minor issue over which a politician can only urge not dictate.

[Jonathan]

I'm becoming increasingly concerned with Cameron's paternalistic attitudes. Although at the moment his criticism of big business and Radio 1 has been purely rhetorical, I feel this preachy tone is likely to put voters--especially the young--off the Conservative Party, like the whole "back to basics" thing. In my experience, people who listen to rap music are not violent at all. Some of the biggest fans of Snoop Dogg and Eminiem I have known were girls at Univeristy who went to private schools.

I also think that political interference in free speech and enterprise is a slippery slope. Is Cameron setting the scene for regulations on rap music, chocolate bars and children's clothes? If so, he can count me out. I don't want to replace a red nanny state with a blue one!

If Cameron wants to criticize Radio 1, he should focus on the fact that it's funded by a poll tax, and use it as part of an argument to privatize the BBC. Similarly, if he wants to condemn things that encourage violence, he should mention the Koran. Many more people have died in the name of Allah than in the name of Dr Dre.

[Gareth]

I don't doubt it's probably worth a vote or two and has already won plaudits from The Sun, but where does this sort of posturing stop? He's not actually going to ban the music or legislate as to what children ought to wear, so why bother wading in at all? He risks sounding trivial, echoes of Blair back in 1997/98 saying Glenn Hoddle should be sacked or Deirdre Rashid 'freed' from prison.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

It's interesting that over the past decade the Conservatives have moved from John Major wanting a ban on dangerous dogs to David Cameron wanting a ban on dangerous Doggs.

Who says modern politics isn't trivial?

[Hmmmm]

Daniel

Why do you think the rise in gun and knife crime is trivial. Is it because its largely confined to the black community?

[Mike Christie]

I'm right behind Cameron on this. Why shouldn't a senior politician question the output of the tax-funded BBC? Especially when that output is something that seems to be glorifying crime and anti-social attitudes. He's not calling for a ban, just questioning whether it is the right thing for the BBC to be doing.

It makes people stop and think, shows we are looking into multiple aspects of an issue in a more thoughtful way.

As for whether Westwood's show is peak time, I'm sure plenty of people listen to it while getting ready for a Saturday night out, or listen to it whilst out cruising in cars.

[Editor]

Is it preachy Jonathan or is it moral leadership of the kind that parents yearn for?

Raising kids is one of the hardest jobs in the world and parents find so much of their work undermined by popular trash culture.

Hearing a political leader - and a father - who understands that is good politics.

As others have noted, David Cameron hasn't called for Tim Westwood's programme to be banned. He's just drawn attention to what licence fee payers are subsidising. I applaud DC for what he has said.

[Mike Christie]

He risks sounding trivial, echoes of Blair back in 1997/98 saying Glenn Hoddle should be sacked or Deirdre Rashid 'freed' from prison.

Whether an imaginary person is released from an imaginary prison in a television show is a trivial issue.

The issue of whether a tax-payer funded broadcaster plays music that encourages and glorifies a culture of drugs and violence that is causing death and misery on the streets of towns and cities across the country is not trivial. It is quite literally life and death.

[John Hustings]

"Isnt this ignoring the fact that parents should have control of what their children listen to? The state should keep out."

But the BBC *is* the state.

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"Why do you think the rise in gun and knife crime is trivial."

Actually, I don't.

I find the glorification of violence rather deplorable but I don't really see how the Mary Whitehouse act of tut-tutting at the BBC is going to address the rise in gun and knife crime.

It's because I think the issue of rising gun and knife crime is not trivial that I think we should be looking at more substantial means of tackling the problem.

"Is it because its largely confined to the black community?"

I don't appreciate the underlying implication in that question.

Not that it's any of your business, but my brother spent some time in prison after becoming involved in the gang culture in the town where I grew up, so your suggestion that I would dismiss this issue because you claim it is largely confined to the black community is both wrong and (on a personal level) deeply offensive.

[TaxCutter]

What public service does Westwood serve?
Why is Westwood on the BBC. Because he's a legend in the hip-hop world. He promotes the great music style of our times, which does far more for promoting black culture than any A list do.

What public service do most BBC programmes serve - surely the question should be why is the BBC not a private concern charging a subscription free for those who choose to describe.

[Ross Cowling]

Canterbury is very good thanks, James.

Record companies, and recording artists have the right to record whatever they so choose to. People also have the right to buy whatever they choose to buy. However a broadcaster, especially a public service broadcaster such as the BBC, has a responsability to ensure that the content of its broadcast, even after the watershed, is morally acceptable. If people want to listen to some American "hip-hop" artist talk about beating his girlfriend up, or shooting his gang land enemies, then they have every right, and every freedom to go to a shop and buy it. The BBC, on the other hand, should not be lowering itself to that level.

[Mike Christie]

"It's because I think the issue of rising gun and knife crime is not trivial that I think we should be looking at more substantial means of tackling the problem."

Who says we're not. In PMQ yesterday Cameron tackled Blair over failure to support tougher penalties for carrying knives. I think Cameron's comments are a sign that he is looking at these problems on a number of levels, some using the traditional legislative levers of a politician, others using more subtle methods to get society to look at itself and think.

Crime, culture, drugs, poverty of money and of ambition, family breakdown, poor education... the problems of knife crime and gang culture come out of a complicated tapestry. We need to address all the threads, not just one or two.

[Selsdon Man]

"Hang on guys, we're "Conservatives" remember, not libertarians."

John Moss, I am proud to be a libertarian and so are many other members of the Conservative Party.

The issue is not about censorship, it is about the broadcasting poll tax. The BBC does not provide any services that could not be provided by free enterprise. It should therefore be abolished.

[EML]

I agree with Mike Christie. Cameron hasn't made some 45 minute speech railing at the immorality of rap music; it was a sentence or two picked up by the media (anyone know where he said it?). And the more important comments were saved for Tony Blair in the House of Commons.

These small snippets come eeking out of Cameron every few days, and we're finding out what he is all about as a person. And I have to say that, for the most part, I am liking what I hear.

[Gareth]

"The issue of whether a tax-payer funded broadcaster plays music that encourages and glorifies a culture of drugs and violence that is causing death and misery on the streets of towns and cities across the country is not trivial. It is quite literally life and death."

Do you seriously believe that these kids are carrying knives because of rap music or that the phenomenon could be stopped if rap music were banned?

The last sentence of your post really is absurdly hyperbolic.

[Mike Christie]

"Do you seriously believe that these kids are carrying knives because of rap music or that the phenomenon could be stopped if rap music were banned?"

No, because as I said in a following post, I believe that the knife-carrying and gang culture are part of a complex web of issues.

Lets turn the point around a little... Do you seriously believe that rap music that glorifies violence, played on the oh-so-respectable BBC (which essentialy means it is an acceptable part of our culture) plays no part giving impressionable young people the idea that gangs, drugs and violence are just an ordinary part of life?

Of course I'm not so naive as to believe that banning rap music would bring about world peace. However questioning the BBC playing this music and presenting this minority criminal mentality as some essential part of youth culture or black culture might just be a start on the right road.

[Gareth]

I think the whole thing is tilting at windmills, at best. There are probably hundreds of legal and pirate radio stations playing this stuff. There are hundreds of shops selling this stuff and hundreds more clubs playing it.

My own view is that the music probably plays a small part in perpetuating the problem.

I also feel uneasy about censorship. This is the thin end of the same wedge that leads to banning films and books.

The programme in question is on after the watershed. It ought only to be listened to by adults. If not, that's the parents' responsibility, not politicians.

[Rob D]

If people want to pay Westwood to broadcast this stuff, fine. The taxpayer shouldn't.

The question "what public service does Tim Westwood perform" is as yet unanswered.

Plenty of Ali-G wannabees seem to get airtime from commercial radio.

[JohnM]

There's also the small matter that the vast majority of rap music really isn't very good at all and anything that might reduce the extent to which it is played is a good thing.

[Mike Christie]

"The programme in question is on after the watershed. It ought only to be listened to by adults."

Sorry, I just can't agree. We are talking about music which condones and glorifies violence. Either violence against women or gang violence please note... links to lyrics that may cause offence!

It has no place on tax-payer funded radio. The gang culture is a sub-culture which has no place in the mainstream.

As you say, there are plenty of commercial stations which will play it. At least their sponsors can be lobbied and put under pressure if people so wish.

[Gareth]

As soon as the government starts dictating to the BBC what it can and can't broadcast, it ceases to be an independent broadcaster whose funding comes from the state and becomes the state broadcaster.

And really, what is the point in stopping the BBC broadcasting this stuff if you concede there are inumerable other sources?

[Harry]

David Cameron's approach to politics seems te be in line with the most recent strand of conservatism: 'crunchy conservatism'. This explains his interest in issues like environmentalism and localism. In the 'crunchy conservative' manifesto (point 4) changing today's (pop) culture is seen as more important to solving society's problems than politics or economics. Cameron's opposition to music promoting violence has to be seen in this context. Companies which sell sexy underwear for childeren, which promote unhealthy eating or produce violent rapmusic project wrong morals on today's society. Politicians who feel strongly that our society needs to encourage good behaviour, cannot ignore the wrongdoings of business. Another 'crunchy con' truth: big business deserves as much skepticism as big government. Ik am glad that David Cameron realises that culture is more important than politics and economics. Thatcher used economics to change society for the good, Blair used politics. Cameron is truely on his way to offer a real alternative at the next election to the failed ideas of the past.

[David Belchamber]

"The Sun quotes black charity worker Shaun Bailey's warning that rap stars like 50 Cent, Eminem and the “grime music scene” are “peddling death to our children” by celebrating violence."
Now here is a man who needs listening to. He wrote an excellent article recently in The Telegraph on the rise of knife culture among young people. He is the director of My Generation, a charity working with young people in west London and also the author of "No Man's Land: How Britain's Inner City Young are being Failed".
Why not try to get him on board? I only hope that IDS's policy group will come up with the proposal to work with such charismatic people, so that resources can be distributed by those who actually work with the disadvantaged on a daily basis.

[Mike Christie]

"As soon as the government starts dictating to the BBC what it can and can't broadcast"

Sorry, but you just don't get it! No-one is dictating, DC is asking whether the BBC honestly believe that they should be playing this stuff. No threats, no mention of bans, just a little whisper in the ear.

"And really, what is the point in stopping the BBC broadcasting this stuff if you concede there are inumerable other sources?"

Two reasons..
1/ having it played on Auntie gives it a respectability and a claim to be some legitimate part of our culture. It also gives it exposure people who would not necessarily seek it out on commercial radio.

2/ the BBC is funded by the tax-payer, under threat of prison, as a public service. Playing music that actively encourages violence is not a service to the public.

[John Hustings]

"2/ the BBC is funded by the tax-payer, under threat of prison, as a public service. Playing music that actively encourages violence is not a service to the public."

This is the argument that clinches it for me.

The only excuse for the existence of the BBC (not one I accept, but there you go) is as a public service broadcaster. That means it should be providing services that the commercial sector can't or won't. It certainly doesn't mean it should be broadcasting palpably offensive material that has a negative impact on society.

Do you think your taxes are well spent broadcasting this rubbish?

[Gareth]

I 'get it' all too well. I just prefer to steer clear of gesture politics and 'making points'. Government should not be 'whipsering in the BBC's ear' about music, politics or anything else to do with its content. As for 'making it respectable', I would have the yoof would think respectability the kiss of death!

I'm against censorship and am extremely sceptical that this music does that which it is alleged to do.

[Mike Christie]

Personally I'd far rather a politician had a quiet word, asked an organisation to ask itself whether it was really on the right track, than the current government's approach of rushing out poorly-drafted legislation banning everything it doesn't like.

[Gareth]

Needless to say, I do not agree that the choice is a 'quiet word' or legislation. We could always see how letting grown ups be grown up works ...

[AlexW]

No one is calling for censorship. However, it is perfectly acceptable for senior politicians to express views on particular social issues. It is a quintessentially Labour approach to assume that the only way that MPs can act is through the process of legislation. Cameron appears to be wisely using soft power and persuasion, and moderate libertarians need not be concerned by this approach - politicians are part of civil society as well as being part of the legislature. Sensible and moderate libertarians (unlike radical anarchists) believe that civil society can and should create its own norms, values and rules.

Oh, and as has been mentioned up and down the thread, having to pay a poll tax...sorry, licence fee, for this sort of dross just aggravates the matter.

[comstock]

David Cameron hasn't called for Tim Westwood's programme to be banned. He's just drawn attention to what licence fee payers are subsidising.

Personally I can't stand Westwood or his music but as for example a tennent of a first floor bedsitter, I don't much like "subsidsing" gardening programmes (no garden), nor home makeover programmes (not a homeowner)

For that matter I don't like "subsidising" Top Gear to show me cars I can't afford, nor do I like "subsidising" Radio bloomin Three to pander to white middle class classical fans most of whom could buy a mountain of classical CDs with their spare change.

IMHO "Subsidising" Mr Westwood pales into insignificance compared with that little lot

[Mike Christie]

"We could always see how letting grown ups be grown up works"

Regardless of whether the listeners to this stuff are adults are not, I see no reason why a tax funded BBC should play music with the sort of lyrics I linked to earlier.

Music that advocates slapping women around if they show 'disrespect', or glorifies drive-by shootings and gang warfare has no place on the BBC.

Cornstock, you have a valid point about the fact that the licence fee makes us all subsidise programmes in which we have no interest. I wouldn't call Westwood insignificant though, because much as you may despise Ground Force, if they start talking about slapping hoes around they mean something rather more socially acceptable than some of the music we are talking about.

[Gareth]

"No one is calling for censorship."

Surely that is precisely what is being called for. If he doesn't want the BBC to ban the playing of this music, why bother making the comments at all?

"It is a quintessentially Labour approach to assume that the only way that MPs can act is through the process of legislation."

I'm puzzled as to why people think the choice is 'saying something' or legislating? Why not just stay quiet about things that are none of a government's business (like, what music people listen to).

"Sensible and moderate libertarians (unlike radical anarchists) believe that civil society can and should create its own norms, values and rules."

Can you explain what you mean by this?

[Mike Christie]

"Why not just stay quiet about things that are none of a government's business"

If the music is part of a culture that celebrates violence and encourages young people to settle their differences with fists, guns and knives then I would say that it is government's business. I'm not saying that the music causes violence, and that banning it owuld stop the violence, but I'm afraid you must be rather blinkered if you can't see that it is a contributary factor that should not be ignored.

[comstock]

Music that advocates slapping women around if they show 'disrespect', or glorifies drive-by shootings and gang warfare has no place on the BBC

What even Bobby Darin's "Mack the Knife"?? If you check out the lyrics to that by copy and pasting this

http://www.bluesforpeace.com/lyrics/mack-the-knife.htm

you'll see it's at least as bad as anything Westwood would play.

And if you check out the FULL orignal translation from the 1928 German 'threpenny opera' you come across a verse

"There's a schoolgirl
Who's a call girl
With a baby at her breast
Someone's robbed her
Someone's raped her
Someone's flick knife did the rest"

Eminem suddenly seems pretty tame, no?

[Gareth]

I fear we're going round in circles. I thought we'd estanlished that the most you though that should be 'done' was that the BBC should ban it? As I thought we'd established earlier this is unlikely to have much effect.

How, in any event, is this to work? Is there to a be govt. minister tasked with listening to pop music and approving what the BBC can play? How about films? Or soap operas? Surely they all need to be checked as well?

There are lots of 'bad' things around that govts can do nothing about. How about concentrating on the few things it can effect?

[malcolm]

Apropos of nothing the BBC used to be quite circumspect of what they played.Cat Stevens 1966 song 'I'm Gonna Get Me A Gun' was banned.Didn't prevent it from getting into the Top 10 'though!

[Gareth]

When 'Relax' was banned by radio 1, it shot straight to No. 1 (I'm showing my age, I know).

[Mike Christie]

Sorry Cornstock, the difference is that Mack the Knife describes the violence. It does not advocate it in the way of Snoop Dogg,

"I went to your house; your girl came in and started cussing you out. You should have slapped her in her face"

nor does it glorify it in the way of 50 cent

"I cock that, aim that s**t out the window
Spray, there ain't a shell left in my heat"

There is a world of difference between a song about a killer, and a song by a former drug dealer, advocating killing.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

It was the late 60's, England was run by socialists who would put a stop to the burial of the dead if it meant a pay rise. Which multi million pound industry sprang out of nowhere to prove that a few scruffy kids could start an entire industry without a penny from Government? Yes, it was the pop music industry. Pop music, including rap and r'n'b is a big earner for the UK economy, as are computer games, another bedroom turned multi-million pound industry which Tombstoners no doubt bitch about constantly.

No Conservative MP has to like this music, but they should all see the dangers inherent in any attempt by Government to limit or ban its sale. They should also recognise the role this kind of publishing plays in the UK economy.

[Mike Christie]

"Is there to a be govt. minister tasked with listening to pop music and approving what the BBC can play?"

Of course not, the BBC should have the expertise, sense and experience to know what artists will release songs that might have this sort of content.

People like Snoop Dogg and 50 cent are getting extremely rich via selling songs encouraging violence, the least we can do is ensure that it isn't our tax helping them do it.

I also wouldn't advocate the BBC banning anything, simply not playing it or promoting it. There is a world of difference between whichever DJ it was that smashed his copy of 'Relax' and refused to play such 'filth' (totally predictable result being it shot straight back to the top of the charts), and the BBC simply quietly omitting songs which actively encourage violence from its playlist.

The BBC should be encouraging the positive side of rap, tracks like 'Lose Yourself' by Eminem are amazingly positive and motivating.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

I agree with James Maskell at the top. Junk food doesn't make people fat, people eating junk food makes them fat. Politians can't say, "Don't eat so much you tubber!" It's much easier to take it out on the food industry than people who have to be surgically removed from their sofas and cars. Rap music is a reflection of the times in which we live, not a cause. Besides, most of it is sold to white middle class kids who have no direct experience of the issues covered in the lyrics.

[matt wright]

I think DC is siganlling by this and other announcements that "anything goes" is irresponsible and that the community and society matters and all of our roles within it have to be reflected upon. This is equally true of big business as well as rap artists. He also hinted that the private sector does not have all the answers to improving the public sector. These views are the most important cahnges DC is implementing as far as I am concerned and are helping to map out a more compassionate agenda that is changing the perception of our party and widening our appeal. It is also right.

Matt

[Mike Christie]

Nice post Henry, except the music industry didn't start in the late 60s ;-)

On the point of computer games, I play them, I enjoy them. I particularly enjoy Grand Theft Auto. The difference between the games and the music on the BBC is :

1/ The packaging of the game is clearly marked that the contents are only suitable for over-18s

2/ My playing of GTA isn't funded by the taxpayer.

How many parents realise that the watershed principle applies to Radio 1 and that Radio 1 broadcasts songs extolling the 'joys' of gang violence and slapping women?

[Henry Whitmarsh]

late 60s ;-) I go by the establishment of Apple Records.

Fine, privatise Radio 1, it's well overdue. Then, if it decides to play degenerate music (first Jaz, then pop, now rap, what next!) then David Cameron can keep his trap shut. Happy slapping is never nice, especially when Politicians do it.

[buxtehude]

"I'm becoming increasingly concerned with Cameron's paternalistic attitudes." I don't like paternalism but this isn't paternalism - it's right to attack the BBC for promoting this stuff, given their special position.

[comstock]

Mike Christie, I would suggest the lyrics to I shot the sheriff are at least as bad as the ones by '50 cent' you quote

I shot the sheriff, but I swear it was in self-defense.
I shot the sheriff, and they say it is a capital offense.
Sheriff John Brown always hated me;
For what I don't know....

Freedom came my way one day
And I started out of town.
All of a sudden I see sheriff John Brown
Aiming to shoot me down.
So I shot, I shot him down

(my last trade of lyrics for this thread!!)

There is a world of difference between whichever DJ it was that smashed his copy of 'Relax' and refused to play such 'filth' (totally predictable result being it shot straight back to the top of the charts), and the BBC simply quietly omitting songs which actively encourage violence from its playlist.

Indeed, and Camerons intervention seems more like the former to me than the latter.

It's COMstock by the way :D

[Mike Christie]

"It's COMstock by the way :D"

Damn these tiny fonts! Apologies!

I'll have to disagree with you over 'I shot the Sherrif', the difference in my mind whether one holds up the violence as something to be admired and emulated, rather than simply singing about doing something violent.

[Rob Largan]

I have to say full credit to Cameron on this one. I fail to understand how this so called 'music' is liked by anyone. But by Cameron doing this, not only is he rightfully criticising the way our money is being spent, but it is also politically very clever. The people who hate this 'music' are in far greater numbers and far more likely to vote than those that actually like it.

[AlexW]

"Surely that is precisely what is being called for. If he doesn't want the BBC to ban the playing of this music, why bother making the comments at all?"

The ordinary meaning of censorship is that some authority uses coercive powers to prevent something being written or played. There is a difference between being a person should not do something, and believing he should be prevented from doing it. For example, I do not believe that David Irving should have published his works on Holocaust Denial; neither, however, do I believe that he should be subjected to criminal sanctions for doing so.

"I'm puzzled as to why people think the choice is 'saying something' or legislating? Why not just stay quiet about things that are none of a government's business (like, what music people listen to)."

Politicians have a dual role: both as members of the legislature (and possibly the executive) and as leaders of civil society. Would you have similar concerns if, say, a faith group leader or the head of a respectable charitable organisation had made these comments?

"Can you explain what you mean by this?"

Society functions because there are certain rules and values that govern it. Some of these rules are sufficiently important that they should be enshrined in legislation, with either criminal (for e.g. murder) or civl (for e.g. libel) visited upon those who break them. However, in addition to these formalised rules, there are certain informal social conventions and values that are not sufficiently essential to require transgressors to be punished, but whose upholding is nonetheless desirable for society. It is not, for example, illegal for me to gratuitously swear at passers-by. Nonetheless, this sort of behaviour should surely be discouraged.

The problem with Labour and the Left in general is that they assume that the response to any problem is new legislation. Legislation is, however, usually relatively flimsy as if it does not reflect general social attitudes it will not survive for long (e.g. the old law of "motor manslaughter"). Changing social attitudes and values is a far more important part of the political process, but one that the Government simply ignores.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

I don't know. Give me a Gansta rapper versus the Maude Flanders' of this word and I'm with the rapper all the way.

Dear God, won't somebody thing of the children!

If you don't like it, and I'm not guessing anyone here ever listens to Radio 1, then don't watch. I'd like to euthanitise the entire cast of Last of the Summer Wine but we don't all get what we want.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

thing = think

[Daniel Vince-Archer]

"the Maude Flanders' of this word..."

Excuse this indulgence in pedantry but the would somebody please think of the children?! line actually belongs to Maude Flanders's partner-in-crime Helen Lovejoy ;-)

[Rob Largan]

Please dont left this drift into a debate about The Simpsons but DVA is correct it's Helen Lovejoy, Maude Flanders died in a horrific t-shirt cannon accident.

I think both are as bad as each other, the difference is, Christian Rock doesnt get the same amount of radio time.

[Gareth]

"It is not, for example, illegal for me to gratuitously swear at passers-by."

It is actually.

"Nonetheless, this sort of behaviour should surely be discouraged."

Nanny really does know best then.

"Changing social attitudes and values is a far more important part of the political process, but one that the Government simply ignores."

If you really want to change what you term 'social attitudes and values', I suggest you become a priest or a social worker rather than a politician. There is scarcely a sight more stomach churning than a politician moralising. Which is no doubt why I involuntarily gag every time Bliar appears on my television. Let's leave this cant to the socialists and the liberals.

[AlexW]

"It is actually."

It isn't. It can, if repeated, give rise to an Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) under s. 1(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, but an ASBO isn't a criminal sanction. It is the contempt of court is breaching that civil ASBO that leads to the criminal process.

"Nanny really does know best then."

Are you genuinely arguing that everything that isn't illegal should be encouraged?

"If you really want to change what you term 'social attitudes and values', I suggest you become a priest or a social worker rather than a politician. There is scarcely a sight more stomach churning than a politician moralising. Which is no doubt why I involuntarily gag every time Bliar appears on my television. Let's leave this cant to the socialists and the liberals."

Isn't this slightly curious, though. Priests and social workers are permitted to try to change social attitudes, but politicians should not? Surely every political leader in history has tried to encourage a certain set of cultural assumptions and norms? Or do you believe that politicians should never ever do anything?

[comstock]

I fail to understand how this so called 'music' is liked by anyone.

I expect the average rap fan would feel the same way about my nerdy white guitar music, or what ever you are into, Rob. It's not really the issue.

You won't find any Tory supporters between about 30 and 36. (just to prove me wrong one will appear no doubt!) The Conservative party lost a whole generation with the CJA of the 1990's. That was aimed at acid house fans and new age travellers. Now I never did 'get' acid house, and much as I like the Levellers living in the back of an old bus never was for me ;) The point was it made Tory politicians hate figures for my generation. For me Conservative will always equal John Majors "not in this age, not in any age" speech. Indeed I think Major demonised 'da youth' in a way Maggie never did-though Tebbit had a good go! Now this isn't that serious-it won't cost Cameron the next election in itself (mores the pity!) but it is a serious foot in mouth jobbie :D

But by Cameron doing this, not only is he rightfully criticising the way our money is being spent, but it is also politically very clever. The people who hate this 'music' are in far greater numbers and far more likely to vote than those that actually like it.

The fact that someone may or may not care for rap music isn't really the point. I expect the feeling of 'I may not like it but I defend your right to listen to it' will strike a chord right from Elvis and Stones fans to todays teens (no what they are into)

[Mike Christie]

"If you don't like it, and I'm not guessing anyone here ever listens to Radio 1, then don't watch."

We are not talking about music I don't like we are talking about music that actively encourages the use of violence. This is an imported culture of gun-toting gangs, why the hell should we be promoting it on the BBC?

No-one is saying ban all rap and hip-hop, no-one is saying ban Gangsta rap (with mp3 downloads and Internet radio that would be utterly impossible anyway).

All we are saying is stop using taxpayer's money to fund broadcasting violent misogynistic garbage.

Would you like the idea of a Radio 1 show that broadcast favourite football hooligan chants? Or maybe a show dedicated to sectarian ditties from Belfast? So why have a show featuring the LA and New York equivalents?

[Mike Christie]

"You won't find any Tory supporters between about 30 and 36"

BOO!

[Rob Largan]

The fact that someone may or may not care for rap music isn't really the point. I expect the feeling of 'I may not like it but I defend your right to listen to it' will strike a chord right from Elvis and Stones fans to todays teens (no what they are into)"

But Cameron isnt going around saying that any sort of 'music' should be banned.

[Robert Cooke]

alot of the blogs on this website show just why the conservatives have been in oppostion for 9 years.

the problem is that most people here are hardened political animals inerested in ideal and whether a policy is left or right libertarian or authoritarain. whan in fact to the vast majority of people on the street don't. Cameron has managed to make himself appear human by talking about the things that the majority of people in smoking rooms and canteens are talking about up and down the country.

The fact is he doesn't care about what the hardcore tory voter thinks because lets face it how may of us are going to go and vote labour (rather stick red hot poker in my eyes) not many of us.

it does tp into teh thirty somthing mum vote who thinks hang on I agree with him and the end of the day we can critcise all we like but it is that 30 somthing vote we need. Not the right wing captalist bang em up brigade who he already has.

[Francis Mellor]

The argument that we should not use taxpayers money to fund rap is a risky one.

Taxpayers' money funds many things that the majority of taxpayers would object to. Child Benefit is paid from taxation, does this mean that we should put strict limitations on how it is spent? (maybe we could make sure children's clothes meet with Dave's approval) Should we control what students read in a university library because some of the money used to build it came from taxation? The examples could go on.

Equally, some of the posts on this page have claimed that we are a "Christian country". As an RE teacher I would question this. Many children have not been to church more than a few times. Very few have been christened. Their families marry in civil ceremonies and are cremated after secular ceremonies. The most religious groups are not Christian - they are Hindu, Muslim and Jewish.

[Robert Cooke]

Christian country in everything but deeds

[comstock]

""You won't find any Tory supporters between about 30 and 36"

BOO!

"

Mike how could you? :P

I'm only half joking actually. Yes this is a shamless thread derail, but look at what we had in 79, and compare it with 97. I can forgive the youngsters (who were just kids when Major was kicked out) and I can forgive the old uns who got rich in the 80's (or at least brought their council houses) but as the old saying goes "What have the Tories ever done for us?"

[Francis Mellor]

"Christian country in everything but deeds"

So we think like Christians, but do not act like them. That's like saying I think like a Tory but then vote Labour.

[Robert Cooke]

yeah i guess it is and when you knock on a few doors you suddenly realise just how many people do.

If you want an example read the daily mails front page from a couple a days ago what was six cars drove past a girl who had been involved in a hit and run before someone stopped!!! People complain about politicians moralising personally i would say a little more family values and little less chav is to be welcomed.

[Henry Whitmarsh]

I hate to defend the BBC, but it is the case that Westwood's show makes up a tiny proportion of Radio 1's schedule/budget. In itself, this programming pales into comparison compared to the sheer volume of unobjectionable pap and religious programming the BBC still produces. Radio 1 itself is usually very well policed in terms of its content and language, especially in terms of the lyrics allowable during daytime shows. Also, Radio 1 has shows like the Sunday Surgery, where teenage callers call into themed shows and recieve advice from a GP and a counsellor about drugs, alcohol, relationships ect. Would you get that on a commercial station? It's the most popular radio station for the 16-24 year olds for a reason.

[francis mellor]

Not being a church goer I was shocked to see Songs of Praise on TV recently. One of the payers called for God to help those people in Africa that were victims of international trade!! Do all churches do this?

[Sean Fear]

"Not being a church goer I was shocked to see Songs of Praise on TV recently. One of the payers called for God to help those people in Africa that were victims of international trade!!"

Writing as a Christian, that kind of thing makes me wince with embarassment.

[James Maskell]

Ahhh, interesting mention of "Relax". The song was number one when I was born!

Cameron wouldnt have made those comments jsut top point it out. He's hinting that he doesnt want that music on the radio. Hes hardly going to say that he dislikes the music because it encourages knife crime but then not push for it to be removed...its contradictory and weak.

[Tom Greeves]

Here is a little bit of pop history: the DJ who smashed a copy of Relax was Mike Read, who is, or at least has been, an active Tory.

Much hip hop music and rap music advocates violence. Even the liberalest liberal and the libertarianist libertarian should object to that.

As a distinct point, rap 'music' and hip hop are unfailingly crap. It breaks my heart to see so many morons embracing it.

I blame those who started the comprehensive school movement. Bitches and ho's the lot of them.

[Mark Fulford]

The song was number one when I was born!

You have no idea how scary that is!

[Selsdon Man]

Nick Robinson reports

"An eagle-eared reader of the Magazine Monitor has an interesting take on David Cameron's worries about music that promotes knife crime. Nick Rikker writes from Barcelona to point out that tracks from Mr C's favourite bands have the odd sharp reference:

The Smiths, I know it's over - "The knife wants to slit me/Do you think you can help me?"
Radiohead - Knives Out - "Look into my eyes/I'm not coming back/So knives out"
Radiohead - Phillipa Chicken -"I got bombs, I got guns, I got brains"

This dangerous rubbish has no place on the BBC, especially Desert Island Discs! LOL!

[Graeme Archer]

It's a libertarian/tory split this, isn't it? If you're a libertarian you will wonder why the leader's going on about something that's nothing to do with government, while if you're more conservative you'll think that (1) it's absolutely fine for political leaders to take part in this sort of national debate and (2) I would bet you agree with his sentiments!

Whichever wing you tend towards (and most of us are a confusing mix of the two, aren't we, formed by intellectual journeys and life experiences), you can't pretend that Dave didn't repeatedly indicate that he is a (strongly liberal but still) conservative. That's what's behind his repeated mantra "we're all in this together". It's not a code for big-government; I read it (and I appreciate this is getting into Kremlinology) as a signal that Cameron will try to stoke up shame where possible to coerce institutions - public or private - to act in a manner conducive to the public good.

I like it. I don't know how I'd characterise myself but honestly I find myself warming to every one of these statements he has made, which suggests there's been a gap in the market for a politician willing to point out that society implies shared interdependence; but that the solution to gaps in this is NOT to encourage more DEPENDENCY (which is what a socialist would do: find a problem and legislate against it).

[Gareth]

"It isn't. It can, if repeated, give rise to an Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) under s. 1(1) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, but an ASBO isn't a criminal sanction. It is the contempt of court is breaching that civil ASBO that leads to the criminal process."

It is a criminal offence. Possibly a breach of the Public Order Act 1986 but certainly a breach of the peace in the circumstances you described.

[Gareth]

"Are you genuinely arguing that everything that isn't illegal should be encouraged?"

Eh? Of course not. The choice is not between the illegal and therefore to be discouraged and the lawful therefore to be encouraged. How about not illegal, but not my cup of tea, therefore completely ignore it?

[Gareth]

"Isn't this slightly curious, though. Priests and social workers are permitted to try to change social attitudes, but politicians should not? Surely every political leader in history has tried to encourage a certain set of cultural assumptions and norms?"

Surely what you term a 'cultural assumption' is incapable of being encouraged or discouraged. It is, afterall, an assumption. That must certainly be the case with what you term a 'norm'. (Although I think these terms really require clearer definition.)

[Jonathan Powell]

It's not a code for big-government; I read it (and I appreciate this is getting into Kremlinology) as a signal that Cameron will try to stoke up shame where possible to coerce institutions - public or private - to act in a manner conducive to the public good.

Great, maybe he should change the Tory logo from the torch of freedom to a wagging finger to symbolize his approach...

[Henry Whitmarsh]

wagging finger Indeed.

God to help those people in Africa that were victims of international trade Well, that's the problem with the C of E. It's been pretty much entirely infiltrated (like the teaching profession and the civil service) by Independent reading business/commerce haters.

[Mike Christie]

"How about not illegal, but not my cup of tea, therefore completely ignore it?

Isn't it somewhat irresponsible to ignore something that is an integral part of a culture that actively encourages young men to beat up their girlfriends and settle their differences with guns and knives?

[Gareth]

"Isn't it somewhat irresponsible to ignore something that is an integral part of a culture that actively encourages young men to beat up their girlfriends and settle their differences with guns and knives?"

Isn't this where we came in? You've retreated from saying it ought to be banned. You're against government telling the BBC what it can and can't broadcast. You agree that the music isn't the major cause of the behaviour of which you complain. If 'doing something' amounts to a politician pontificating about something about which he intends to do precisely nothing, then I would advocate silence.

[Mike Christie]

I've not retreated, I've never advocated it being banned. I don't think the BBC should be playing it, but it is right that they decide. No-one (Cameron included) is telling the BBC what it can and can't do. However, David Cameron purely in his role as a TV licence payer, has every right to ask whether the BBC should be playing music which actively encourages violence.

The music isn't a direct cause, but it is an influence and part of a whole culture that should be abhorred rather than endorsed on the BBC. No other criminal gangs are feted and encouraged on Radio 1 in this way. Why are the braggings and posings of LA drug dealers worthy of airtime at the taxpayers expense?

We clearly disagree on the role of politicians as influential members of society. I see no problem at all in someone like Cameron kicking off a debate in this way. To me it is much preferable that he ask whether this is how the BBC should be carrying on and spark a debate than the alternatives of acting like an ostrich or rushing to legislate.

To me, there is a world of difference between a politician pontificating and telling people 'You must not do this' and a politician questioning society 'Is this really the way we want things to be?'