Echo Issue Outline: copyright Echo Education Services
First published in The Echo news digest and newspaper sources index.
Issue outline by J M McInerney
Are the lyrics of some popular songs, such as those of the Australian grunge band, silverchair, likely to provoke violence?
On January 18, at a pre-trial hearing in Washington, the lawyer defending an American teenager, co-accused of three murders, claimed that the lyrics of the song `Israel's Son', written and performed by the Australian grunge band, silverchair, had played a key role in provoking the killings.
This case has led to renewed condemnation of popular music among some of its critics and to calls for restrictions to be placed on the lyrics of popular songs or, more generally, for ways to be found to make the popular music industry more accountable.
On the other hand there have been claims that suggestions that popular music promotes crime and violence are exaggerated and that the causes of crime and violence should be sought elsewhere.
Background
The triple murder case involves two young men, one 18, the other 16, who have been accused of the murder of the 16-year-old's parents and younger brother.
Mr Tom Copland, counsel for one of the accuseds, has claimed that after the killings the 16-year-old danced around the room, kicking his parents' corpses while listening to the song, `Israel's Son'.
Some of the song's lyrics have been highlighted as likely to cause violence.
Another silverchair song, `Suicidal Dreams' has also been criticised as likely to promote suicide among the young.
silverchair is made up of three teenage musicians from Newcastle, in New South Wales.
The band has achieved significant popularity.
The song, `Israel's Son', is the opening track on frogstomp, an Australian No 1 album which won an ARIA (Australian Record Industry Association) award for best debut album and had sold more than 210,000 copies by December, 1995.
Last year silverchair became the first Australian band to gain a place in the US top 10 in five years.
The controversy surrounding the lyrics of some silverchair songs is similar to that surrounding the song `Cop Killer', released by Ice T in 1992.
The then United States president, Mr George Bush, condemned the song; the band, Ice T; and the record company which produced the song, Times Warner.
Mr Bush claimed that the song was likely to promote ill-feeling between young people and the police and might even encourage violence against police.
Frequently, behind such complaints, is dissatisfaction with the level of control imposed on popular music.
In neither Australia nor the United States is popular music subject to the censorship or classification systems imposed on movies, television and computer games.
Arguments claiming that popular music provokes violence
Those who claim that popular music promotes violence tend to stress the capacity of music to influence people's actions. They also note that in a number of instances, both current and historical, popular music has provoked violence.
Those who stress the capacity of popular music to provoke violence do so on a number of grounds.
One of the criticisms made of current popular music is that its emphasis is frequently violent and negative.
Philip Young, head of the national family values group, Project Family, has stated, `It [popular music] infuriates me. It's a celebration of ugly behaviour, and these creeps make millions of dollars from ugly music and ugly lyrics, and put nothing back into the community.'
The lyrics of different songs have been cited in an attempt to demonstrate their negative and violent nature.
For example, some of the lyrics of `Israel's Son' have been quoted repeatedly, `Hate is what I feel for you. And I want you to know that I want you dead ... I hate you and your apathy. You can leave, you can leave. I don't want you here ... Hate and execution. Put your hands in the air. Put your hands in the air.'
According to this line of argument lyrics of this type may well provoke violence.
Critics of popular music and its supposedly negative influence also stress its pervasiveness.
Silverchair, for example, has sold more that 200,000 copies of its debut album in Australia. The band's songs also gain significant airplay on the radio. This means that they are listened to by hundreds of thousands of young fans in Australia alone.
These young fans, it is claimed, frequently listen to their favourite songs many times and at very high volume.
Critics argue that listening to songs under these conditions intensifies the capacity of their lyrics to affect the behaviour of their audiences.
One of the accuseds in the Washington triple murder case is claimed to have walked repeatedly around the bodies of two of the victims while listening to `Israel's Son' played loudly.
Further, it is claimed that the lyrics of some popular songs not merely create a predisposition toward violence in their audiences, but actually suggest what violent actions a person might take.
Thus, Tom Copland, counsel for one of the accuseds in the Washington triple murder case, has claimed of `Israel's Son', `This is almost a script. It's relevant to everything - the legal issues, the mental issues, why this happened, the way it happened.'
Similar concerns were expressed in 1992 about Ice T's song, `Cop Killer', which it was feared might actually direct some members of its audience to assume the role suggested in its title.
Finally, there are those who claim that not only does popular music have the capacity to provoke violence it can be shown to have already done so.
Psychologist, John Cheetham, has claimed that there are strong links, both historical and current, between music and violent behaviour.
Mr Cheetham has cited a supposed connection between religious wars and hymns such as `Onward Christian Soldiers'. Mr Cheetham has also referred to the claimed connection between the murders committed by Charles Manson and his followers and their fondness for songs such as `Helter Skelter'.
Arguments disputing that popular music promotes violence
Those who defend popular music against accusations that it provokes violence usually do so on three grounds.
The first of these is that very few of the lyrics of popular songs are intended to cause violence. The second is that popular music does not have the capacity to cause violence and the third is that the origins of violence are actually more complex than the music a person who commits a violent act may have been listening to.'
In relation to the argument that the lyrics of popular songs are not intended to cause violent behaviour, it has been claimed of silverchair's `Israel's Son', `It [the song] was never intended to provoke violence and cannot be interpreted by any reasonable person as doing so. In fact, the song seeks to criticise violence and war by portraying them in all their horror.'
A general defence of grunge music has been put forward regarding its supposed motivations.
According to those who propound this defence grunge music may be loud and fast, however, its lyrics are usually introspective and emotional.
James Duval, the manager of Beanflipper and Self Reliance has claimed of grunge music that in reality `It's teenage angst [summed up] in a song.'
The overall argument put here is that music aims primarily to entertain or to express emotion and that almost no music can reasonably be accused of attempting to provoke violence in its audience.
Further, it has been claimed, that, irrespective of its creators' intentions, music does not have the capacity to provoke violent action.
Mr Duval has stated, `Music does not turn people into killers ... They [a song's audience] may relate to a particular song but it's [a big leap] to suggest the song influenced their actual behaviour.'
Similarly, the deputy prosecutor, Mr Jerry Fuller, referring to the claim that one of the accuseds in the Washington triple murder case listened to `Israel's Son' immediately after the killings, has stated, `What does this prove? ... All it proves is that it was a song that he played.'
According to this line of argument a song is just a set of words, violent or otherwise, set to music.
Those who hold this view argue that song lyrics have no special motivating power to cause their audience to behave in a given manner.
Finally, there are those who go on from this to argue that if the lyrics of a particular song cannot be blamed for the violent actions of any of its audience, then we need to seek answers to the question of motivation elsewhere.
According to this line of argument, a complex interaction of past experiences and personal predispositions lead someone to commit a violent act.
Rock critic and historian, Mr Glenn Baker, has claimed, `If you are going to go off, you are going to go off, whether there is a silverchair sing involved or not.'
Those who hold this view maintain that other factors, such as physical or emotional abuse, create a predisposition in some people to act violently.
According to this viewpoint the most a particular song may do is act as an immediate trigger for a minority of listeners who may then do something violent.
Even this limited connection between violent acts and popular music has been qualified.
Supporters of popular music maintain that the crucial factor in the causation of violence is the person who commits it. Further to this it has been claimed that those who commit violence form a very small part of a total community of popular music fans and frequently have social or intellectual problems which lead to their violence.
Psychologist, John Cheetham, has claimed that only a very small and unstable group with the community was likely to be in any way motivated by song lyrics. `It (popular music) affects a moronic proportion of the population,' Mr Cheetham has said.
Further implications
The question of whether song lyrics can be seen as provoking violence has a number of implications.
In the Washington triple murder case the accuseds' defence counsel would appear to be making claiming for mitigating circumstances (features of the case which could be seen as reducing the defendant's responsibility in the crime and therefore reducing the severity of any possible sentence). The primary mitigating circumstance is claimed to be the supposed influence of the silverchair lyrics.
According to such a line of legal argument the defendants could be considered not to be fully in control of their actions and therefore not fully accountable, in a legal sense, for what they are claimed to have done.
Such an argument is either a possible defence or a mitigating circumstance. It remains to be seen what impact, if any, the claim that the 16- and 18-year-olds accused of the crime were influenced by popular song lyrics will have during their trial.
This whole question of `secondary responsibility', that is, responsibility for an action being assumed by someone other than the person who took the action, has raised questions in a number of areas?
Age columnist, Terry Lane, has referred to a number of related issues. If a minor commits a crime can that person's parents be considered responsible? In cases of employee to employee sexual harassment can the employer be held responsible? Currently the legal answer in the first case is generally no and in the second a qualified yes. The larger question which the Washington triple murder case and the other scenarios Terry Lane raises is to what extent is an individual to be held accountable for his or her own actions?
On the specific question of the possible influence of song lyrics, the current controversy raises the issue of censorship of song lyrics and the possibility of imposing other forms of control or restriction upon them.
Currently the possibility of overtly censoring song lyrics does not appear to be being seriously pursued in either Australia or the United States.
However, the discrepancy between the controls that are imposed on film, video and television and the almost total lack of control imposed on popular music has been noted.
It has been suggested that a classification system be applied to popular song lyrics, similar to that which is currently applied to films. This would attempt to restrict certain song lyrics to certain age groups.
Though it might be possible to implement such a system reasonably effectively at a CD or cassette's point of sale, once the item had been purchased restricting its subsequent audience would be virtually impossible.
Another suggestion which has been made by the Family Project is that `a tax [be imposed] on record companies that promote anti-social behaviour as entertainment.'
According to a spokesperson for the Family Project `This tax would at least help to pick up the pieces of the victims this music leaves behind.'
A number of social commentators have claimed that focusing on the nature of popular music and its possible influence on its young audience is to misunderstand the social problems encountered within both the Australian and the United States youth culture.
According to this line of argument, if popular songs are frequently harsh and violent, dealing with issues such as suicide, these songs do not create these problems among young people but are simply a reflection of them.
According to those who argue in this manner the solution to supposed youth alienation might be more effectively found through measures such as attempting to reduce strains on familles and providing greater work opportunities for young people.
Sources
The Age
19/1/96 page 1 news item, `Lyrics "incited murder"'
20/1/96 news item by Danielle Talbot, `Rock band denies role in US murder'
21/1/96 page 10 comment by Terry Lane, `Feeling harassed? Just sue someone'
The Australian
19/1/96 page 3 news item by Richard Jinman, `silverchair named in teen's trial for murder'
20/1/96 news item by John Ellicot, `silverchair deny song led to death'
The Herald Sun
20/1/96 page 5 news item by Nuite Koha and Steve O'Baugh, `Band denies killing links'
20/1/96 page 16 editorial, `The hot seat for silverchair'
20/1/96 pages 18 and 19, analysis by Nuite Koha, `Lyrics out tune with young lives'
20/1/96 page 18 analysis by Nuite Koha, `Violence set to music'
20/1/96 page 19 analysis, `Killings will haunt band, says critic
What they said ...
`If you are going to go off (lose control), you are going to go off, whether there is a silverchair sing involved or not.'
Rock critic and historian, Mr Glenn Baker
`It [popular music] infuriates me. It's a celebration of ugly behaviour, and these creeps make millions of dollars from ugly music and ugly lyrics, and put nothing back into the community'
Philip Young, head of the national family values group, Project Family