Monday, September 29, 1997
Ban on hip-hop music unconstitutional
CENSORSHIP:
"I am providing specific direction that rap music not be played
at all front desks for the remainder of the summer season. This
includes hip hop stations KPWR 106 and 92.3 The Beat, plus any CDs
that are specifically rap-artist oriented."
The above message, authored by On-Campus Housing front office
manager Anne McDaniel, who sent it out to the residence hall
managers, is a clear violation of the First Amendment. The Daily
Bruin strongly condemns any abridgement of our constitutionally
guaranteed freedom of speech anywhere, especially on campus!
During the summer orientation and conference sessions in August,
several people complained that the music being played at the front
desk of Sproul Hall contained offensive language. The music, which
could have been anything from rock n’ roll to blues, just so
happened to be rap.
If On-Campus Housing banned the playing of sexist, racist or
otherwise vulgar lyrics in a public place, the Bruin would stand
completely behind that decision. But they did not.
Instead they opted to single out one particular genre of music
for their unconstitutional ban. Residence hall manager Alfred Nam
says that a meeting was held in early August to clarify that any
type of music with offensive lyrics must not be played. Yet the
only document supporting Nam’s claims was issued September 25,
after he was interviewed by The Bruin.
In the same memo censoring rap music McDaniel ordered her
employees not to protest the matter because it "won’t change (her)
decision on this issue."Apparently, the ban on freedom of speech
was not only restricted to music. Or maybe offensive speech
includes challenging your employers? We think not.
McDaniel’s comment that she did not "want to see petitions or
the like," is a blatant disregard of workers’ rights to seek
grievances. We do not support, under any terms, the stifling of
unpopular opinion.
So, in addition to violating the constitution, those responsible
for the ban poorly handled the situation once their actions came to
light. Rescinding the ban does not negate the fact that an
unconstitutional censor of rap music in the dorm’s existed for
nearly two months.
"To limit speech … a public university must show that its
regulation is necessary to serve a compelling state interest.
However, even if we assume that the interest is compelling, the
blanket ban on rap music does not pass this constitutional test,"
said Timothy Alger, a media law attorney with Gibson, Dunn, and
Crutcher.
We understand that the residence halls also function as a work
place; they do not have to play any music. To say no music should
be played at a workplace is one thing. But to prohibit one genre is
another.
Based on the directive, a staff member can bring in a copy of
her highly-inflammatory Marilyn Manson CD and not have to worry
about violating the front desk rules.
Because it’s not rap.
But she’s still not allowed to bring in a rap tune with
perfectly clean lyrics. This is neither fair nor logical.
If all rap contained vulgar language, then banning it as a whole
would not be a problem. But these gross generalizations just don’t
cut it. And we have the First Amendment of the Constitution to back
that up.