Mike McCready comments on the AT&T censorship

my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
edited August 2007 in A Moving Train
Thoughts of an American.

I grew up in a democratic system of government. This is what was taught all through Kindergarten through College. Freedom of thought and expression were hallmarks of my early education. These concepts and theories integrated my belief in an American system of democracy. Consequently, I became a musician because of these inalienable rights. Make no mistake I am an artist and a capitalist because of this system that I believe in and our country. I don't however believe that a capitalist corporation such as AT&T has the right to subvert the first amendment of the constitution to which we all are accountable. This happened on the night we played Lollapalooza. I was dismayed to hear that the act of censoring free speech was used to edit our song Daughter for a webcast. Surely the American listening public can discern for themselves what they deem acceptable to hear. This is a hallmark of our American way!! The freedom to listen to what you want or don't want to. The American public was duped as was I in believing that I can speak freely without censorship.

I can only look to historical figures who are above reproach in my mind, such as Thomas Jefferson "I hope we shall crush...in it's birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." I feel that corporations can still exist without worry of a few words at a rock concert and need not trample upon our constitution for the sake of profit.

Another example that I believe is relevant is a George Orwell quote from Animal Farm. "If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." Some people don't want to hear our political beliefs in a song but that too is the beauty of America. WE CAN DISAGREE and still function as a democracy. When one person or company decides what others can hear, that is totalitarian thinking! This runs contrary to America and threatens the core of our freedom. We can think for ourselves, AT&T. I had the great pleasure of seeing the Space Shuttle launch live in Florida today. This gave me a feeling of excitement and patriotism in my country today.It showed me a future of ingenuity and promise for a better America.

With that I will leave you with a last quote from the quintessential American "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it." This is an example of my belief in what Ed was saying the night we were censored during Daughter. You can't get more American than Mark Twain!!! Say no to censorship, it leads to dictatorship!

Mike McCready

http://pearljam.com/news/index.php?what=News#197

FUCK YEAH MIKE!
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • Didn't AT&T apologize for that?

    Nonetheless, while I support free speech, I do not believe that AT&T must support the speech of the performers that it allows on its webcast.

    You can say what you'd like, but don't force me to enable your speech.
    All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
    -Enoch Powell
  • gue_bariumgue_barium Posts: 5,515
    Didn't AT&T apologize for that?

    Nonetheless, while I support free speech, I do not believe that AT&T must support the speech of the performers that it allows on its webcast.

    You can say what you'd like, but don't force me to enable your speech.

    That makes no sense whatsoever.

    all posts by ©gue_barium are protected under US copyright law and are not to be reproduced, exchanged or sold
    except by express written permission of ©gue_barium, the author.
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    Didn't AT&T apologize for that?

    Nonetheless, while I support free speech, I do not believe that AT&T must support the speech of the performers that it allows on its webcast.

    You can say what you'd like, but don't force me to enable your speech.
    I agree that AT&T is not obligated to broadcast speech that they don't approve of. But I also think that when they obtain the services of musicians or anyone else for their advertising, they are obligated to clearly disclose the terms, and it's pretty obvious that didn't happen here. When Lollapalooza allows someone to sponsor their webcast they should know what they're getting in return so that they can look for another sponsor if the terms aren't agreeable to them.

    I might have bought the "hired help with an itchy trigger finger" excuse if this were a one-time deal. Now that we know that it's happened at least two times in the past (and probably many more), that rings a little hollow to me.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • hippiemom wrote:
    I agree that AT&T is not obligated to broadcast speech that they don't approve of. But I also think that when they obtain the services of musicians or anyone else for their advertising, they are obligated to clearly disclose the terms, and it's pretty obvious that didn't happen here. When Lollapalooza allows someone to sponsor their webcast they should know what they're getting in return so that they can look for another sponsor if the terms aren't agreeable to them.

    I might have bought the "hired help with an itchy trigger finger" excuse if this were a one-time deal. Now that we know that it's happened at least two times in the past (and probably many more), that rings a little hollow to me.

    Hey, if it were me running the show, I'd let Ed say whatever he wanted. Better to let the opposition voice their beliefs. I don't think Ed's words were very different from what the majority of the American people are probably thinking right now.

    AT&T sucks though. Always has.
    All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
    -Enoch Powell
  • decides2dreamdecides2dream Posts: 14,977
    hippiemom wrote:
    I agree that AT&T is not obligated to broadcast speech that they don't approve of. But I also think that when they obtain the services of musicians or anyone else for their advertising, they are obligated to clearly disclose the terms, and it's pretty obvious that didn't happen here. When Lollapalooza allows someone to sponsor their webcast they should know what they're getting in return so that they can look for another sponsor if the terms aren't agreeable to them.

    I might have bought the "hired help with an itchy trigger finger" excuse if this were a one-time deal. Now that we know that it's happened at least two times in the past (and probably many more), that rings a little hollow to me.



    absolute agreement.


    if nothing else, one can only hope that this sends a clear message to corporate america.....and that in the future, companies not comfortable in FULLY allowing for 100% content broadcast....stays outta the game.

    it HAS given ed's words a lot more airtime than it would've otherwise...so really.....kudos to AT&T for giving more air to ed's words. :)
    Stay with me...
    Let's just breathe...


    I am myself like you somehow


  • CollinCollin Posts: 4,931
    It's and its, Mike. Two different things.

    Anyway, I guess it kind of back fired on the people who censored it, right. I wouldn't have been a big deal, right?

    Or is America really that uptight?
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • CollinCollin Posts: 4,931
    absolute agreement.


    if nothing else, one can only hope that this sends a clear message to corporate america.....and that in the future, companies not comfortable in FULLY allowing for 100% content broadcast....stays outta the game.

    it HAS given ed's words a lot more airtime than it would've otherwise...so really.....kudos to AT&T for giving more air to ed's words. :)

    Your post has made my post considerably redundant.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • hippiemomhippiemom Posts: 3,326
    Hey, if it were me running the show, I'd let Ed say whatever he wanted. Better to let the opposition voice their beliefs. I don't think Ed's words were very different from what the majority of the American people are probably thinking right now.

    AT&T sucks though. Always has.
    Wow. Gonna go mark this down in my journal ....

    "8/12/07 - hippiemom totally agrees with a post by CorporateWhore" :D

    I'd be just as pissed off, btw, if some corporation censored Toby Keith's pro-Bush rant. Legal or not, it's just wrong. That's not the way we do things in this country.
    "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
  • ryan198ryan198 Posts: 1,015
    I don't like him but TKeith is not a big Bush fan anymore, but I agree with your sentiment. Maybe it'd be the equivalent of the Hannity all-star show or whatever that was being censored.
  • Didn't AT&T apologize for that?

    Nonetheless, while I support free speech, I do not believe that AT&T must support the speech of the performers that it allows on its webcast.

    You can say what you'd like, but don't force me to enable your speech.

    Saying "Doh"...doesnt cut it when you're lying just to save face ($$$).

    If nobody said anything about it, they wouldn't apologize for jack shit...don't kid yourself.

    They would roll in it like pigs in shite...and still be laughing about it.

    eyes open...remember?
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    hippiemom wrote:
    I agree that AT&T is not obligated to broadcast speech that they don't approve of.

    so NBC/CNN/ABC/etc can edit or censor the state of the union address if they dont approve of it, and that would be ok?
  • 69charger69charger Posts: 1,045
    Wait till Ed says something that pisses off Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson! They'll be forced out of the biz!
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    before we start giving coporations cart blanche control of speech and information...

    i think it is important to remember that major corporations will control nearly all information and content through media consolidation... the public being ok with them editing and censoring will only help them push that button in the future... the ywill take it as far as we let them... corporations such as AT&T survive onl becuase of public support and business...

    we control them, not the other way around
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 17,117
    69charger wrote:
    Wait till Ed says something that pisses off Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson! They'll be forced out of the biz!

    i would love to see someone attack those 2 frauds...
  • Pacomc79Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    well done Michael. I love the Mark Twain quote.

    Thanks, for posting.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • 69charger69charger Posts: 1,045
    my2hands wrote:
    i would love to see someone attack those 2 frauds...

    No shit! Al Sharpton a moral compass? For fuck's sake!
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    Apparently it was in the agreement that they wouldn't block political comments from the webcast. Therefore, AT&T made a mistake and should apologize or make reparations (and they have apologized).

    But...I have no problem with them signing an agreement with these bands where they are allowed to censor. If both parties agree, then it's fine with me.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • fanch75fanch75 Posts: 3,734
    I bet AT&T would never censor JET.
    Do you remember Rock & Roll Radio?
  • Mike's is the sort of American patriotism I've never had a problem with.

    Kinda like Wilson...
  • Mike's is the sort of American patriotism I've never had a problem with.

    Kinda like Wilson...

    WOODROW Wilson???

    Mr. "white man's burden" himself. Said we should help our dark brothers.

    THAT Wilson?
    All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
    -Enoch Powell
  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    WOODROW Wilson???

    Mr. "white man's burden" himself. Said we should help our dark brothers.

    THAT Wilson?


    no, the one that lived over the fence on Home Improvement
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
Sign In or Register to comment.