“EXPLICIT CONTENT” aesthetic value

I read a review of a songwriter’s latest album and want to listen to it, but I am warned of explicit content.

Does explicit content serve an aesthetic role or has it become another marketing ploy, a form of priming, signaling that the artist’s music is somehow more authentic than songs without such content?

none of the above. thank Tipper Gore.

Since 2015, digital providers such as iTunes, Spotify, and Amazon Music tag tracks as ‘Explicit’ if they have been identified as such. This frequently includes tracks from older albums that predate the use of the label, or were released afterward but do not feature the label on physical releases.


It’s weird seeing that little (not so little actually) “E” next to loads of tunes in my iTunes library. I sure as shit didn’t tag them as that, and as far as I can tell, I can’t untag them from that either.

Such a gross fucking thing this, and growing up in the 80s when Tipper Gore was really pushing all this crap, it’s a nasty reminder of what a weird time that was, and how terribly conservative people were. (I grew in Miami, and remember someone literally being arrested for selling a 2 Live Crew record…)

But as @speakerdamage said, I don’t see it as either, and just see it as a signifier of bullshit.


A blast from the past


this event had plenty of precedent as well:

[full transcript of hearings: https://archive.org/stream/juveniledelinque54unit/juveniledelinque54unit_djvu.txt]


Here’s a solid book on the whole genesis of that: https://smile.amazon.com/Parental-Advisory-Music-Censorship-America-ebook/dp/B002SR2QFK/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=parental+advisory+book&qid=1564068213&s=gateway&sr=8-1

One of my favorite books when I was growing up! I bought it in grade school since the author was from my small hometown.

1 Like