Uno! to have "clean" version

[melissawebster]

Okay, seriously, you are getting WAY out of line. I've already stated that I am anti-censorship, myself (I especially despise how extensive the broadcast regulations have become), and even I think you're being incredibly rude by forcing your views and opinions on everyone else. Just because some people on this forum don't see censorship as a big issue does not give you the right to accuse them of being corporate tools and the like. They just have a different--and sometimes more well-informed---opinion than you. If I were you, I'd honestly be ashamed that a bunch of people half my age were behaving more mature than me.

A large part of the reason that the argument has become circular is because you are blatantly refusing to acknowledge anyone's perspective but your own as legitimate. For example, I wrote a whole long post a few pages back explaining that this isn't the first time Green Day have allowed their stuff to be censored, in general, and that there is plenty of evidence to support the fact that the band, themselves, may not actually be anti-censorship. A point which, though you read the post and liked it, you completely failed to address, choosing instead to continue to ignore it in favor of clinging to your feelings of betrayal and moral superiority.

There are no plans, as of yet, to re-release anything prior to AI censored. And I doubt there will be since all of the albums prior to AI did not have Parental Advisories to begin with. You see, the RIAA's guidelines for issuing PALs (a decision which is left up to the artist and their label, not decided on by a third-party committee) specifically allow for exceptions to be made on the grounds of artistic integrity. So if you feel the swearing or explicit themes in a song are either not excessive and/or essential to the artistic merit of a song, you can opt to not put a label on the album. And no retailer--not iTunes, or Walmart, or anyone--is allowed to then treat that recording as explicit afterward. That is why Green Day were able to go so many years without putting PALs on albums that very clearly contained explicit content and profane language. But with American Idiot, things changed. Starting with that recording--and on every album since--the band started having PALs on their albums. And those albums--with the exception of 21CB so far--are the only ones that have clean versions. Because they're the only ones that can.

As for the music videos, they have *always* been censored. In fact, if you were to purchase the International Supervideos DVD they put out in 2001, which contained music videos from Dookie through Warning, you would notice that those videos have the curse words censored, even though that DVD is for private consumption and, thus, not beholden to broadcast regulations. With youtube, they have thus far taken advantage of it to show uncensored versions of their videos because they can; however, even though youtube isn't monitored by the FCC, it does contain advertising now, which could put pressure on some people to make sure their most popular videos, at least, are clean. That said, it is very possible that they really were just updating the video for quality purposes. If they had suddenly purged the entire account of all explicit content, then I'd be a bit more concerned, but that is not the case.

I can't speak for everyone, but I know that I, for one, have no problem with people disagreeing with the band's views on things. But when it comes to this issue, in particular, I really wish people would just stop acting like this is the first time they've done something like this ever. Because that is just so far from true that it isn't even funny, and the more people continue to insist that it is, the more those people start to seem ignorant, at best, and delusional, at worst.

Hahahahahahahaha! I want this so badly now

Um, what?! As far as I know, you don't work for Warner and none of my comments you've singled out were even directed at you specifically. If you do work at Warner, I apologize, but again, none of my comments were directed at you. My comment about Warner trolls is exactly directed at three of the people, who I won't name specifically, who have been posting on this thread in a way that suggests they are Warner employees trolling the thread. And I was sick of going in circles with them repeating myself because they were, and still are, posting what amounts to propaganda on the thread and ganging up on dissenters, while ignoring the specifics of what the dissenters are saying. And when they're not ignoring it, they're contradicting themselves. And as Andres has already pointed out, that fucking horse has been beaten dead.

As far as addressing your posts specifically, to be completely honest, in case you haven't noticed already, I have intentionally avoided responding to all of your comments in every forum, not because I only hear what I want to hear since we usually agree on things and makes no sense since I've responded to so many other people in this forum who have disagreed with me, but because, well, you're a bitch and I really don't want to talk to you. And I especially don't want to talk to people who insult me and tell me I'm immature for not agreeing with or addressing their point of view. I did, however, like your post because I thought you made some very valid points, and contrary to what you just posted, I acknowledge and appreciate differing opinions when I feel they are well-thought out and smart.

I never once ignored the fact Green Day has censored their music before. I know they have. But this time, with this current marketing strategy, it's different. If you read my previous posts, you would know that for me, in this particular debate, it is all about the reasons behind the censorship, and especially about the marketing. And again, I'm bored with going in circles over this. So I'm not repeating myself again. And just because I don't want to keep going in circles on this debate does not mean I haven't heard what other people are saying. I have and I get it. I really do. I just don't agree and never will.

I think the real problem on this forum is that the majority of you are refusing to hear what the few of us are saying, not the other way around. Which is understandable since this is a Green Day fan site. Do I agree with you? Fuck no. Do I understand where you're coming from? Absolutely. I'm failing to see how this makes me immature. Personally, I think throwing a tantrum over a difference of opinion is immature, but hey, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

[melissawebster]

I will admit, the amount of times he says variations of "fuck" in Let Yourself Go and Kill the DJ borderlines being excessive

Say it ain't so! The fucking with my head part of Let Yourself Go is my favorite part of the song.

[WhiteTim]

The only one here that works for a division of Warner is me so just say my name Melissa...

I havr given you reasons why I disagree with you (you are also the only one who is being extreme in this matter "we're suffering!")

Contradict? Ok I cuss I dont want my son to hear it last time I looked I have every right to keep cussing or nudity or violence away from MY son (I'm not niave to think he doesn't hear any cuss words or anything else or what he may hear at his mother's but I can control what he hears or sees when with me...) so if I contradict myself bycussing up a storm when hes not around then so be it EVERYBODY contradicts themselves including you, if you say you dont then you are a fucking liar. I have no problems at all admitting my faults...

GD isn't going back pn their word or artistic values, they not going on Blues Clue and telling kids to pick up Uno or the "cleaned up version of American Idiot" they are simply offering a clean version of a cd that Billie has even said "we've never a record as dirty like thia before" he admits there is extreme cussing on Uno so the band is simply offering a clean edition of the album... if the band willingly records clean vocals (recorded at the same vocal sessions as the regular time) then wouldn't you agree that GD isnt being forced or compromised?

[gerardsangel4977]

Um, what?! As far as I know, you don't work for Warner and none of my comments you've singled out were even directed at you specifically. If you do work at Warner, I apologize, but again, none of my comments were directed at you. My comment about Warner trolls is exactly directed at three of the people, who I won't name specifically, who have been posting on this thread in a way that suggests they are Warner employees trolling the thread. And I was sick of going in circles with them repeating myself because they were, and still are, posting what amounts to propaganda on the thread and ganging up on dissenters, while ignoring the specifics of what the dissenters are saying. And when they're not ignoring it, they're contradicting themselves. And as Andres has already pointed out, that fucking horse has been beaten dead.

But the point is, aside from the one poster here who specifically mentioned that he does work with one of Warner's subsidiaries, you've no basis for saying things like that to anyone. Your comments may not have been directed at me, specifically, but that doesn't mean I can't still find the behavior distasteful.

And I'm sorry, but, when someone makes more than one post saying that it isn't likely for Green Day to censor their back catalogue (to name but one example of what I mean), and you continue to insinuate that they will, it doesn't really make it seem like you paid attention to what they were saying. I have a harder time believing that others aren't paying attention to your points--and the points of others who share your opinions--since many of their comments are directly refuting and/or questioning things you have said. Strong disagreement abounds on both sides, for sure, but I can't really say that you've been blatantly ignored all that much. And this is coming from someone who holds neither of the dominant opinions, as I disagree with elements of both sides.

And I honestly have no idea which posts you consider to be propaganda....but I'm not even going to to try to suss that one out.

As far as addressing your posts specifically, to be completely honest, in case you haven't noticed already, I have intentionally avoided responding to all of your comments in every forum, not because I only hear what I want to hear since we usually agree on things and makes no sense since I've responded to so many other people in this forum who have disagreed with me, but because, well, you're a bitch and I really don't want to talk to you. And I especially don't want to talk to people who insult me and tell me I'm immature for not agreeing with or addressing their point of view. I did, however, like your post because I thought you made some very valid points, and contrary to what you just posted, I acknowledge and appreciate differing opinions when I feel they are well-thought out and smart.

Seriously? How on earth would I ever have noticed that? I tend to lurk far more often that I post, as is. But even then, it's not like I go around keeping a ledger of every single person who does and doesn't respond to me on a daily basis, on a forum that has literally thousands of members....

Not only that, but I've held fairly frequent discourse with you over on the Idiot Club forums in the past, not only on the threads but in PMs too. Hell, we even follow each other on twitter. So, no, the thought that you were avoiding me because you hated my guts never even once crossed my mind.

I will say, though, that because of my past familiarity with you, I generally pay more attention to your posts on here than I do to some other people because I know that we do agree on a lot of things, as you said. Other things....not so much. And while I do normally respect your views and ideas enough to hear you out, we were never quite close enough for me to not call you out on something I felt was out of line. Furthermore, when it comes to any and all of my online interactions, I tend not to take things particularly personally. Sure, there's been times where I've been offended by things people have done and said....and have often railed against that person in return, but ONLY in the context of that particular discussion. Even now, having had this particular exchange with you, I have no intention of blocking you from my twitter feed, and if I were to find one of your other posts in another thread to be particularly interesting or noteworthy in another thread, I would have no problem liking it and/or responding to it. That's just how I am online: I don't curb my opinions to cater to people I normally agree with, and I don't hold past disagreements against other users across multiple discussions. I just don't see the point in either. If that makes me a bitch, then, so be it.

I think the real problem on this forum is that the majority of you are refusing to hear what the few of us are saying, not the other way around. Which is understandable since this is a Green Day fan site. Do I agree with you? Fuck no. Do I understand where you're coming from? Absolutely. I'm failing to see how this makes me immature. Personally, I think throwing a tantrum over a difference of opinion is immature, but hey, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

In the time I've been a fan, there's been times where I've defended Green Day and been accused of being a mindless sheep and other times where I've criticized Green Day and been largely condemned for it. So, I've been on both sides of that particular fence enough to know full-well how incredibly frustrating both scenarios are. As a result, I refuse to make similar assumptions about other users, regardless of which side they and I happen to fall on, and I don't really respect either of those kind of comments when I see them either. Just so you know.

[Bastard of 1967]

@Matt, Andres, and Heather in particular - thanks for contributing some very good and positive perspective to this conversation all along (there are many others who I didn't name specifically there who also contributed constructively to the discussion, so I don't mean that to be an exclusive list). I'll have to agree to disagree with at least some of what you've posted, but you've given me plenty to think about and I appreciate that. At this point, I remain concerned about the direction that Warner's current marketing of the trilogy signals that Green Day is moving. The album sales, the upcoming tour turnout, and whether the fanbase grows or shrinks will tell whether the promotion efforts are successful, and whether they were worth whatever cost the band is willing to accept in order to achieve the level of success they're aiming for. In the end, I'm still a Green Day fan, I still love them for the same reasons that so many of us do, and I just want to see them succeed.

I've said all that needs to be said, I've reset my signature block (the point's been made now and y'all know me well enough to know I'm not going to be an asshole about it), and with that I'm done with this argument.

P.S. - If anyone wants to know how I superimposed static text over an animated GIF, give me a shout by PM. It's real easy to do with a GIMP plug-in and plan to use that trick again for more positive events.

[Heather.]

Glad to hear it. I think we were just worried about you It'd be a goshdarn shame if the fanbase lost someone like you, so that's my primary reason for getting defensive Fuck Green Day, keep Michael happy so he keeps posting on GDC!

[melissawebster]

The only one here that works for a division of Warner is me so just say my name Melissa...

I havr given you reasons why I disagree with you (you are also the only one who is being extreme in this matter "we're suffering!")

Contradict? Ok I cuss I dont want my son to hear it last time I looked I have every right to keep cussing or nudity or violence away from MY son (I'm not niave to think he doesn't hear any cuss words or anything else or what he may hear at his mother's but I can control what he hears or sees when with me...) so if I contradict myself bycussing up a storm when hes not around then so be it EVERYBODY contradicts themselves including you, if you say you dont then you are a fucking liar. I have no problems at all admitting my faults...

GD isn't going back pn their word or artistic values, they not going on Blues Clue and telling kids to pick up Uno or the "cleaned up version of American Idiot" they are simply offering a clean version of a cd that Billie has even said "we've never a record as dirty like thia before" he admits there is extreme cussing on Uno so the band is simply offering a clean edition of the album... if the band willingly records clean vocals (recorded at the same vocal sessions as the regular time) then wouldn't you agree that GD isnt being forced or compromised?

First of all, Warner or not, I'm tired of the trolling. No further explanation needed.

Second, I never used an exclamation point after the word "suffer" and that word was used in the context of something that was very reasonably stated and followed up with clarity. You aren't even quoting me accurately as you are insulting me over it. There was nothing extreme about it, which I have at least once already told you. This is exactly the point I was making about talking in circles. You and a few others are talking to the minority in this forum as if their opinions on this issue are either irrelevant, extreme or immature and dismissing them as such. I for one am done with arguing with you about any of it, because you just keep reiterating the same exact thing ad nauseum while you insult me.

Third, I assure you I haven't even once contradicted myself in this forum. Please give an example. As many of you have pointed out, I have been very rigid in my opinion on this subject. I do admit that. While I appreciate how others feel about this issue, my opinion isn't going to be persuaded or changed because of it.

Fourth, the band willingly and specifically censoring their own original music to accommodate Walmart and Warner's marketing plan towards the tween set IS in fact compromising the positions they have publicly held up to this point. Their willingness to do this only proves Warner doesn't totally control them and they do in fact have some say in the matter, again, as I've told you at least once already in this thread.

Fifth, while they have released clean versions of their albums in the past, this time it is different. When you combine the "clean" American Idiot video release and REMOVAL of the uncensored one at the same time, on top of the other marketing tactics that have already been expressed in this forum, there is valid and reasonable concern over the direction the band is taking with their image and their music. That doesn't mean everyone has to agree or disagree with it. But the concern is valid and deserving of respect.

But the point is, aside from the one poster here who specifically mentioned that he does work with one of Warner's subsidiaries, you've no basis for saying things like that to anyone. Your comments may not have been directed at me, specifically, but that doesn't mean I can't still find the behavior distasteful.

And I'm sorry, but, when someone makes more than one post saying that it isn't likely for Green Day to censor their back catalogue (to name but one example of what I mean), and you continue to insinuate that they will, it doesn't really make it seem like you paid attention to what they were saying. I have a harder time believing that others aren't paying attention to your points--and the points of others who share your opinions--since many of their comments are directly refuting and/or questioning things you have said. Strong disagreement abounds on both sides, for sure, but I can't really say that you've been blatantly ignored all that much. And this is coming from someone who holds neither of the dominant opinions, as I disagree with elements of both sides.

And I honestly have no idea which posts you consider to be propaganda....but I'm not even going to to try to suss that one out.

Seriously? How on earth would I ever have noticed that? I tend to lurk far more often that I post, as is. But even then, it's not like I go around keeping a ledger of every single person who does and doesn't respond to me on a daily basis, on a forum that has literally thousands of members....

Not only that, but I've held fairly frequent discourse with you over on the Idiot Club forums in the past, not only on the threads but in PMs too. Hell, we even follow each other on twitter. So, no, the thought that you were avoiding me because you hated my guts never even once crossed my mind.

I will say, though, that because of my past familiarity with you, I generally pay more attention to your posts on here than I do to some other people because I know that we do agree on a lot of things, as you said. Other things....not so much. And while I do normally respect your views and ideas enough to hear you out, we were never quite close enough for me to not call you out on something I felt was out of line. Furthermore, when it comes to any and all of my online interactions, I tend not to take things particularly personally. Sure, there's been times where I've been offended by things people have done and said....and have often railed against that person in return, but ONLY in the context of that particular discussion. Even now, having had this particular exchange with you, I have no intention of blocking you from my twitter feed, and if I were to find one of your other posts in another thread to be particularly interesting or noteworthy in another thread, I would have no problem liking it and/or responding to it. That's just how I am online: I don't curb my opinions to cater to people I normally agree with, and I don't hold past disagreements against other users across multiple discussions. I just don't see the point in either. If that makes me a bitch, then, so be it.

In the time I've been a fan, there's been times where I've defended Green Day and been accused of being a mindless sheep and other times where I've criticized Green Day and been largely condemned for it. So, I've been on both sides of that particular fence enough to know full-well how incredibly frustrating both scenarios are. As a result, I refuse to make similar assumptions about other users, regardless of which side they and I happen to fall on, and I don't really respect either of those kind of comments when I see them either. Just so you know.

Not ignored so much as insulted and dismissed. The ones I'm talking about specifically are ignoring it and then repeating the same propaganda. And yes, it is propaganda, not based on any reasoned argument or discussion. You'd have to read the entire thread to see the pattern, which I don't in any way recommend you do since it's a waste of time and not relevant. That was me directing a comment at specific people, and they know who they are. And if they don't, it doesn't matter. I've said my peace with it.

As far as them censoring previous records goes, I'm not even considering compilation records. I know you've talked about those, but to me, they don't count. Those are like bonuses to me. I'm talking about them specifically changing lyrics and recording "clean" versions of new albums in addition to the uncensored versions in order to sell their music in Walmart and reach a larger audience. And they're releasing censored and uncensored albums at the same time. The previous music they've censored for various reasons were done after-the-fact, not as part of the entire marketing plan on the run-up to an album release. And that's in addition to the other out of the ordinary marketing strategies they've agreed to, and it flies in the face of the public stance they took with Walmart only three years ago. And I know people keep saying it was only one album and only about 21st Century Breakdown, but here's a quote on the subject from the band about Walmart, "...They want artists to censor their records in order to be carried in there. We just said no. We've never done it before. You feel like you're in 1953 or something." What other way can that possibly be interpreted than the band was not, only three years ago, willing to censor their music to sell it in Walmart and reach a larger audience. They didn't give qualifications to it, because they specifically directed it at censorship in general, for all of their music, not just 21st Century Breakdown.

The marketing is inconsistent and their image is now inconsistent, and releasing a new "clean" American Idiot video while at the same time removing the uncensored one is basically the straw that broke the camel's back for me. They are, in essence, with this album trilogy, saying they're okay with censorship.

I get that it isn't a huge deal for most of the people on this forum and I respect that, but for me it is. It's not going to stop me from buying their music, because I know how to disagree or dislike some things they do while still loving the band and their music.

Ah yes, Idiot Club. It's not so much you specifically, and I'm sorry for being so harsh. That was uncalled for and unnecessary. It's that entire forum that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. So I've been avoiding all of it and everyone associated with it. I never hated you.

[On your last paragraph] Yes. It's this exactly.

[WhiteTim]

Trolling I'm simply posting on a forum that I've been a member LOOOONNNGGGG before my contract with Warner Films began (I'm not here trolling to make the label look good as I don't work for the label the film and record label are two seperate things but I do however have contacts with some employees at the label)

You're entitled to your opinion, If you felt insulted I'm sorry wasn't my intent at all.

[Heather.]

But... but I thought we all got along now?

[Femme Gauche]

Trolling I'm simply posting on a forum that I've been a member LOOOONNNGGGG before my contract with Warner Films began (I'm not here trolling to make the label look good as I don't work for the label the film and record label are two seperate things but I do however have contacts with some employees at the label)

Pretty sure she wasn't talking about you .

Thanks to melissawebster and Bastard of 1967 for injecting some healthy dissent into the lines. Glad to know we won't be losing you guys on this forum. I've not been here for long (active, anyway); don't want to think any of the interesting people are gone so soon .

[gerardsangel4977]

Not ignored so much as insulted and dismissed. The ones I'm talking about specifically are ignoring it and then repeating the same propaganda. And yes, it is propaganda, not based on any reasoned argument or discussion. You'd have to read the entire thread to see the pattern, which I don't in any way recommend you do since it's a waste of time and not relevant. That was me directing a comment at specific people, and they know who they are. And if they don't, it doesn't matter. I've said my peace with it.

As far as them censoring previous records goes, I'm not even considering compilation records. I know you've talked about those, but to me, they don't count. Those are like bonuses to me. I'm talking about them specifically changing lyrics and recording "clean" versions of new albums in addition to the uncensored versions in order to sell their music in Walmart and reach a larger audience. And they're releasing censored and uncensored albums at the same time. The previous music they've censored for various reasons were done after-the-fact, not as part of the entire marketing plan on the run-up to an album release. And that's in addition to the other out of the ordinary marketing strategies they've agreed to, and it flies in the face of the public stance they took with Walmart only three years ago. And I know people keep saying it was only one album and only about 21st Century Breakdown, but here's a quote on the subject from the band about Walmart, "...They want artists to censor their records in order to be carried in there. We just said no. We've never done it before. You feel like you're in 1953 or something." What other way can that possibly be interpreted than the band was not, only three years ago, willing to censor their music to sell it in Walmart and reach a larger audience. They didn't give qualifications to it, because they specifically directed it at censorship in general, for all of their music, not just 21st Century Breakdown.

The marketing is inconsistent and their image is now inconsistent, and releasing a new "clean" American Idiot video while at the same time removing the uncensored one is basically the straw that broke the camel's back for me. They are, in essence, with this album trilogy, saying they're okay with censorship.

I get that it isn't a huge deal for most of the people on this forum and I respect that, but for me it is. It's not going to stop me from buying their music, because I know how to disagree or dislike some things they do while still loving the band and their music.

Ah yes, Idiot Club. It's not so much you specifically, and I'm sorry for being so harsh. That was uncalled for and unnecessary. It's that entire forum that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. So I've been avoiding all of it and everyone associated with it. I never hated you.

[On your last paragraph] Yes. It's this exactly.

I do agree wholeheartedly that their marketing has been inconsistent, and that is largely what is causing these huge fights, but for me, the inconsistencies started long before the trilogy, which is why many of my posts, at least, have emphasized that this is not a new occurrence, nor a new problem.

The main place where i differ from most of the people on here is that I always considered the situation with 21CB and Walmart to be the anomaly rather than the rule. I mentioned already, in my previous post, that their decision to not censor 21CB seemed strange to me because of things Billie had previously said in interviews regarding the way he raised his own children. But that wasn't the only thing that sent up a red flag for me.

As I said, whether or not a Parental Advisory ends up on an album in the first place is up to the artist and their label, and they can make an argument against having one in favor of artistic integrity, which Green Day seem to have done for all of their recordings prior to American Idiot. Then, from 2004 onwards, they started putting PALs on their albums consistently. This was an easy shift for me to reconcile as the band were older and had been raising kids of their own, and it seemed to line up with the aforementioned quotes from Billie.

Where it started to not make sense for me was when 21st Century Breakdown came out....because they were clearly okay with putting a parental advisory on the album, but then doubled back by saying that they refused to make a censored copy because of artistic reasons. And while that's all well and good, I have to ask myself, if they really felt that strongly about their use of language on that album, why not push for it to not have the PAL at all, like their earlier albums didn't? That way, they still would not have had to censor themselves, and the album, itself, would've still sold in Walmart for maximum sales potential. Everybody wins!

Of course, if they had gone that route, then Walmart wouldn't have had any reason to not sell 21CB, and Green Day, likewise, wouldn't have gotten all the additional publicity from the resultant media storm. Not to mention earning tons of rebellious, anti-establishment punx cred with fans. People forget that, just because something seems ballsy and against-the-grain doesn't mean that it isn't a calculated marketing tactic.

In this case, though, the PR side of things has become more painfully pronounced as time has gone on, as the band very quickly dropped that "cause" once the most active promotion phase for 21CB was over. And people noticed. First, with Green Day: Rock Band, then with the Walmart-exclusive "Oh Love" EP, then the American Idiot video thing (though I still think that situation is a bit more iffy than the others), and now, with the actual trilogy. And every time, there's a fresh round of fans getting upset over it and saying "What about 21CB??" Personally, I can't help but wonder how many more times this particular discussion has to happen before people stop being shocked over it---not accepting or agreeing with it, necessarily, but just not being surprised.

E2a: Oh, and apology accepted. I'm sorry for my comments re: immaturity as well.

Trolling I'm simply posting on a forum that I've been a member LOOOONNNGGGG before my contract with Warner Films began (I'm not here trolling to make the label look good as I don't work for the label the film and record label are two seperate things but I do however have contacts with some employees at the label)

You're entitled to your opinion, If you felt insulted I'm sorry wasn't my intent at all.

Oh right....TimeWarner sold off it's music division in 2004, didn't it? Though I know they still like to use each other for things.

[WhiteTim]

Oh right....TimeWarner sold off it's music division in 2004, didn't it? Though I know they still like to use each other for things.

Yeah they are now under Access Industries but they still do business with certain departments like WHV (the department I do work in) helps distributes stand alone dvd/blu rays of bands on Warner Music

[melissawebster]

In this case, though, the PR side of things has become more painfully pronounced as time has gone on, as the band very quickly dropped that "cause" once the most active promotion phase for 21CB was over. And people noticed. First, with Green Day: Rock Band, then with the Walmart-exclusive "Oh Love" EP, then the American Idiot video thing (though I still think that situation is a bit more iffy than the others), and now, with the actual trilogy. And every time, there's a fresh round of fans getting upset over it and saying "What about 21CB??" Personally, I can't help but wonder how many more times this particular discussion has to happen before people stop being shocked over it---not accepting or agreeing with it, necessarily, but just not being surprised.

Haha! Good point. This shouldn't be surprising to anybody. It's just so blatantly pronounced now, from so many different directions all at once. I guess the little things here and there, like with Rock Band and even the Oh Love EP, it was so small and insignificant I really didn't think anything of it. I've never had a problem with bands making money off their work and never fell into the sell-out crowd. But when they start fucking with the music itself, willingly I might add, it really threw me. And that just became apparent in the last week or so. I'm going to get really pissed off at them if they manage, after everything, to make me a full-out cynic.

[gerardsangel4977]

Yeah they are now under Access Industries but they still do business with certain departments like WHV (the department I do work in) helps distributes stand alone dvd/blu rays of bands on Warner Music

Yeah, and likewise, I know WMG still distributes the soundtracks for Warner films and often supplies artists for them, as well. A nice big fuzzy pile of cross-promotion.

Haha! Good point. This shouldn't be surprising to anybody. It's just so blatantly pronounced now, from so many different directions all at once. I guess the little things here and there, like with Rock Band and even the Oh Love EP, it was so small and insignificant I really didn't think anything of it. I've never had a problem with bands making money off their work and never fell into the sell-out crowd. But when they start fucking with the music itself, willingly I might add, it really threw me. And that just became apparent in the last week or so. I'm going to get really pissed off at them if they manage, after everything, to make me a full-out cynic.

LOL well, my college courses accomplished that much more effectively than the band, itself, did (re: cynicism). I actually got to the point where the indie label vs major label debate doesn't mean anything to me anymore. It didn't mean a whole lot to begin with, since I definitely don't care about the band making money off their work. But, without going into detail, I've come to realize that any artist has just as much potential for being "fake" or "real" at any given moment, whether they're a part of Big Corporate or not. The only true difference, for the most part, is the scale of impact and distribution. I don't know if that perspective makes you feel better or worse, but....there you have it It's like full-circle cynicism....I got so jaded that I came back out the other side into not giving a fuck

I also realized that, as far as Green Day is concerned, I still prefer their image and their way of doing things to a lot of other artists. Authentic or not, I have to give them some props for at least trying to be responsible to and for their fans and trying to encourage people to be themselves and to think and question.....even when that questioning can end up biting the band in the ass As long as I still enjoy the music, and they still put on an epic live show and treat us lot with respect, then I can continue to support them without too many qualms.

As for willingly fucking with their music, this is where my own feelings about censorship get complicated. I find that I am less bothered by the Parental Advisory system and edited albums than I am with radio and television censorship, largely because the former is far less strict and leaves a lot of control in the hands of the creator: The artist and their label get to decide whether or not to mark the album as explicit, whether or not to make a clean version of an explicit recording, and how to edit said recording if they do decide to clean it up. The RIAA does provide a list of "Things To Consider" when making these decisions, including things like context, discernibility (is the explicit content clearly audible or difficult to make out without reading the lyric booklet?), and whether or not those particular words are essential to the meaning of the song. But that's all it is...a list of suggestions to be kept in mind, which is *great* from an artistic perspective. Not so good, however, for the concerned parents of the world, since the effectiveness of the program relies heavily on artists and management policing themselves.

I tell people all the time, if you really care about what your children listen to, don't just go by the Parental Advisories (or lack thereof). Because the absence of a label does not necessarily mean that the content is not explicit or that the content is child-appropriate. And, likewise, something that does have a label may not be as bad as it seems.

Radio and television, conversely, are strictly regulated by the FCC. In this case, you do not have an artist or their management voluntarily deciding what parts of their language to censor and which to leave alone; you have a specific (and increasingly ridiculous) set of things that are not allowed, and anyone who wants airplay during normal daytime hours is essentially forced to comply. They have no choice in the matter, aside from whether they want to be played or not. Also, given how extensive these edits have become, there is far more risk of a song being compromised in this format than on an artist-sanctioned "clean" album.

Take "Kill the DJ", for example. We've already heard the clean version of that song, thanks to UK radio. The only real difference between that version and the unedited version is the use of profanity. So, "shoot the fucking DJ" becomes "someone shoot the DJ". Personally, I don't think the edited version works as well as the unedited, since it makes the chorus seem even more repetitive than it already is and dulls the sense of urgency a bit. BUT, the overall meaning of those lines and the song, as a whole, is still intact.

Now, if that song were to be played on US radio/television, it would be further edited to not only eliminate the swearing, but also any mentions of drugs, sex, and, most importantly, any mention of violence. Not much song left to work with at that point, is there?

I believe this is the biggest reason--if not the sole reason--why "Kill the DJ" was not released for the US market. The band would've literally had to rewrite the entire song for it to be playable, so that it would not have even resembled it's former self.

[WhiteTim]

Kill the dj not in us cause its not sept 4th yet

My thing with Wal Mart is they have no problems with selling unedited R rated movies like 300 or Scarface or Natural Born Killers but let a cd have a p.a. sticker on it or they have said no to non pa sticker albums too they refused to sell Nirvana's In Utero due to the song title of Rape Me and the fetuses collage on the back cover shockingly tho Kurt relented (Kurt was always against corps telling him what to do probally more so than BJ...) they took the fetuses off and Rape Me title became Waif Me (the actual lyrics remained the same)

[Panji x_X]

Cool, but stiil, i'm gonna buy the explicit version

[melissawebster]

I agree wholeheartedly with the FCC regulations. It's so stupid. They haven't figured out yet that making an issue of profanity, sex, drugs, etc... only makes it more appealing to kids. And it really bothers me with radio and TV editing, especially if editing the song to comply mangles the song's meaning and impact. Welcome to puritan America, where they think kids are helpless little babies who need to be protected and coddled, who's poor little ears can't handle explicit content that actually makes them think. It's like that with movies too, in that, as a screenwriter, I have to take all those things into consideration when I write. I swear, once I had a dream Tom Hanks told me to "Clean up the language" in my script. It was only a dream, but the reality is I really do have to concentration on how many "fucks" I can write in the dialogue if I actually want to sell a script because of FCC rules and the rating system. So far I've ignored it and written whatever works organically with each character, but that's probably why I haven't sold a script yet. And what's worse, is I can put as much explicit violence in the script as I want, as long as the characters don't use too many swear words while they're hacking people up. It's ridiculous. Okay, so maybe I am a bit of a cynic.

But the hypocrisy of Walmart bothers me the most. WhiteTim's right. They'll sell much worse in the form of movies, but God forbid there's a CD with "Fuck" in the title. That one has to be bleeped out. This reminds me of another episode of South Park, where every other word the characters spoke was "shit" until the word was so common and annoying, it lost it's value as a swear word, proving censorship is pointless because profanity used excessively loses its impact anyway. People will instinctively censor themselves.

In my city, there's one independent radio station that plays mainstream music. It's the most popular station in town, which is surprising because it isn't part of Clear Channel or Cumulus (I think). Years ago, the afternoon DJs (the most popular time slot at the time) played a song as a joke because they thought it was funny, that had the lyrics "Whip me/Beat me/Call me Edna" in it and got chastised on the air by the manager, who not only yelled at them while the song was playing, but demanded they apologize to the listeners. The DJs were so pissed they were reprimanded so publicly because of the FCC rules and their manager's own "morality," they locked themselves in the booth and played the song nonstop. For hours. They became local heroes. That was in the eighties, but it impressed me so much, I still remember it and, more importantly, I remember the song. The tune still sticks in my head from time to time. Now THAT's a prime example of how pointless FCC rules are, and how they end up having the exact opposite effect.

[gerardsangel4977]

Kill the dj not in us cause its not sept 4th yet My thing with Wal Mart is they have no problems with selling unedited R rated movies like 300 or Scarface or Natural Born Killers but let a cd have a p.a. sticker on it or they have said no to non pa sticker albums too they refused to sell Nirvana's In Utero due to the song title of Rape Me and the fetuses collage on the back cover shockingly tho Kurt relented (Kurt was always against corps telling him what to do probally more so than BJ...) they took the fetuses off and Rape Me title became Waif Me (the actual lyrics remained the same)

Yes. But I'd bet all kinds of money that the Sept 4th release is just when then song will be available for purchase on the US iTunes and other music stores. It is most likely not being released for radio play. If I'm wrong, then I'm honestly frightened to see what any station would attempt to do with that song.

[Femme Gauche]

Yes. But I'd bet all kinds of money that the Sept 4th release is just when then song will be available for purchase on the US iTunes and other music stores. It is most likely not being released for radio play. If I'm wrong, then I'm honestly frightened to see what any station would attempt to do with that song.

"Someone kick the DJ, kick him in his crotch" .

[Ryan]

Kill the dj not in us cause its not sept 4th yet

My thing with Wal Mart is they have no problems with selling unedited R rated movies like 300 or Scarface or Natural Born Killers but let a cd have a p.a. sticker on it or they have said no to non pa sticker albums too they refused to sell Nirvana's In Utero due to the song title of Rape Me and the fetuses collage on the back cover shockingly tho Kurt relented (Kurt was always against corps telling him what to do probally more so than BJ...) they took the fetuses off and Rape Me title became Waif Me (the actual lyrics remained the same)

Kill the DJ not in the US yet because there is strong speculation that Stay the Night is going to be the 2nd official US single...which I would fucking LOVE. There was a previous mention in an article or iTunes catalogue that mentioned a video for Stay the Night...this would be in line with having it as the 2nd US single. The official "Oh Love" video came out a couple of weeks after the song debuted. This would be in line with the "Kill the DJ" video being released a couple of weeks after the song's UK debut. By that logic, "Stay the Night" can come out in the US on Sept 4, and the video can debut a couple of weeks later...which would be right in time for the release of Uno. It would really be a great way of marketing by using the US AND UK to get singles out rapid fire in the short time span prior to Uno's release.

But the hypocrisy of Walmart bothers me the most. WhiteTim's right. They'll sell much worse in the form of movies, but God forbid there's a CD with "Fuck" in the title. That one has to be bleeped out. This reminds me of another episode of South Park, where every other word the characters spoke was "shit" until the word was so common and annoying, it lost it's value as a swear word, proving censorship is pointless because profanity used excessively loses its impact anyway. People will instinctively censor themselves.

Wal-Mart just won't sell anything with a Parental Advisory label. As previous posters have mentioned, that's why you can walk into Wal-Mart and buy Dookie, Imsomniac, and Nimrod. These albums did not have the PAL on them. Again, as a previous poster mentioned, Platypus is more "inappropriate" than all of 21st CB combined, yet you can buy Nimrod at Wal-Mart. So Wal-Mart's stance has nothing to do with not selling albums that contain the word "fuck." It has everything to do with the parental advisory label. so if Green Day (or Warner) didn't want to put that label on their new albums, than Wal-Mart would sell them as-is. However, Warner would not put themselves in that position by not putting the PAL on albums as explicit as these 3 will be. They would get some major backlash if these albums were released without that label.

[melissawebster]

"Someone kick the DJ, kick him in his crotch" .

"Someone kiss the DJ/Slick that sucker down"

Kill the DJ not in the US yet because there is strong speculation that Stay the Night is going to be the 2nd official US single...which I would fucking LOVE. There was a previous mention in an article or iTunes catalogue that mentioned a video for Stay the Night...this would be in line with having it as the 2nd US single. The official "Oh Love" video came out a couple of weeks after the song debuted. This would be in line with the "Kill the DJ" video being released a couple of weeks after the song's UK debut. By that logic, "Stay the Night" can come out in the US on Sept 4, and the video can debut a couple of weeks later...which would be right in time for the release of Uno. It would really be a great way of marketing by using the US AND UK to get singles out rapid fire in the short time span prior to Uno's release.

Wal-Mart just won't sell anything with a Parental Advisory label. As previous posters have mentioned, that's why you can walk into Wal-Mart and buy Dookie, Imsomniac, and Nimrod. These albums did not have the PAL on them. Again, as a previous poster mentioned, Platypus is more "inappropriate" than all of 21st CB combined, yet you can buy Nimrod at Wal-Mart. So Wal-Mart's stance has nothing to do with not selling albums that contain the word "fuck." It has everything to do with the parental advisory label. so if Green Day (or Warner) didn't want to put that label on their new albums, than Wal-Mart would sell them as-is. However, Warner would not put themselves in that position by not putting the PAL on albums as explicit as these 3 will be. They would get some major backlash if these albums were released without that label.

True, which is why the PAL is so pointless in the first place. It's a technicality that achieves nothing. It would be really funny if Green Day released an uncensored "Platypus" as a bonus single without giving any warning, just to see what would happen. My guess is a few angry parents, but nothing much more than that.

[Clayish]

Considering 21CB was the first time they said Fuck Walmart, I'm not surprised if WB was like "Look guys, that was all well and good, but 21CB didn't sell so fabulously so we're putting your albums back in Walmart" (where they had been until that point). And they're probably like, "That's fine. This trilogy was so insane we need to shoot from all directions with marketing anyway."

We've already seen in interviews (Billboard) how much the band is hyper-conscious and TALKING about the marketing of this trilogy. Billie said it was going to be "multi-multi-multi-media"... They really do want their golden, crazy idea to be a success, and they're willing to do things like make a clean version because that will help the success. But there's a difference between maximizing success and maximizing profit. At the end of the day yes, they go hand in hand, but it's also more about legacy, longevity, and continued relevance. Perhaps this hurts their legacy in your eyes, but in their eyes it's one minor detail on the path to continued excellence.

boom

/thread

[Ryan]

True, which is why the PAL is so pointless in the first place. It's a technicality that achieves nothing. It would be really funny if Green Day released an uncensored "Platypus" as a bonus single without giving any warning, just to see what would happen. My guess is a few angry parents, but nothing much more than that.

I agree that they are completely pointless. Warner was able to get away with it with Green Day's earlier albums because the FCC outrage had yet to hit its peak. Warning labels on music started as early as 1985, but really didn't become the norm until the late 90s. Considering that major labels are large corporations, and therefore probably have some political clout, they are probably not able to sneak things under the radar without monetary reprocussions. That being said, many smaller labels can release explicit albums without the PALs, but there's also a really good chance that those albums aren't getting sold in major retailers.

[melissawebster]

I agree that they are completely pointless. Warner was able to get away with it with Green Day's earlier albums because the FCC outrage had yet to hit its peak. Warning labels on music started as early as 1985, but really didn't become the norm until the late 90s. Considering that major labels are large corporations, and therefore probably have some political clout, they are probably not able to sneak things under the radar without monetary reprocussions. That being said, many smaller labels can release explicit albums without the PALs, but there's also a really good chance that those albums aren't getting sold in major retailers.

Yes, but that's exactly my point. The earlier albums weren't censored or given a PAL warning because it wasn't as big a deal as it is now and was usually left up to the artists and labels to choose it. So isn't it reasonable to assume, especially since they've recently released a "clean" version of American Idiot, that they will go back into the catalogue and offer clean versions of the other albums as well while they're capitalizing on the current spotlight from the album trilogy? At least with Nimrod and Insomniac?

[WhiteTim]

From what I've been told there are no plans to censor any of the past catalog to use one remark "for what reason they dont have a parental advisory sticker waste of time and money"