Pearl Jam Censored @lolla

[John Smith]

Go figure, who would have thunk it?

 

chicagotribune.com

Band's lyrics cut in Webcast

Pearl Jam protests to AT&T about omission of anti-Bush lines; firm calls editing a mistake

By Jon Van

 

Tribune staff reporter

 

August 9, 2007

 

A live Internet broadcast of Pearl Jam's performance at Chicago's Lollapalooza music festival Sunday went off without a hitch -- until singer Eddie Vedder criticized President Bush.

 

Lyrics critical of the president didn't make it past editors of the show's Webcast, the band complained Wednesday on its Web site.

 

The performance, sponsored by AT&T Inc. and carried on AT&T's "Blue Room" site, omitted the lyrics "George Bush, leave this world alone" and "George Bush, find yourself another home" as part of a version of the song "Daughter," according to the Pearl Jam Web site.

 

Fans had complained to the band about the possible censorship, the site said.

 

"When asked about the missing performance, AT&T informed Lollapalooza that portions of the show were, in fact, missing from the Webcast and that their content monitor had made a mistake in cutting them," the Pearl Jam site said.

 

An AT&T spokeswoman confirmed the omission Wednesday, saying that it had been a mistake made by someone working for the agency hired by AT&T to handle its Blue Room content.

 

"We don't have a policy in place to censor," said AT&T's Tiffany Nels. "We have a policy on excessive profanity. This was an honest mistake. There was no censorship intended."

 

Nels said that there is a delay of a few seconds between the performance and its streaming to the Web so that an editor can cut out profane language because the Web site is available to all ages and AT&T doesn't want foul language going out.

 

She declined to name the agency in charge of the Web site content or elaborate on why an editor would cut out references to George Bush beyond saying, "We think it was just a little overzealous. It's not our policy to edit political commentary."

 

While stopping short of calling the omission intentional censorship, the band's Web site said the incident "troubles us as artists, but also as citizens concerned with the issue of censorship and the increasingly consolidated control of the media."

 

The band said it will post the unedited version of its performance on its Web site, and Nels said that AT&T hopes also to post an unedited version on its Blue Room site archives. The comments critical of the president were sung to the tune of Pink Floyd's "Another Brick in the Wall" as part of the performance of "Daughter."

 

Critics of large Internet providers like AT&T, Verizon Communications Inc., Comcast Corp. and others seized on the incident as an example of why Congress should pass legislation to guarantee the freedom of Internet content from manipulation by the large corporations that provide Internet connectivity.

 

This issue, referred to as "net neutrality," has roiled communications policy debates for more than two years. Consumer advocates and large Internet players such as Google have supported the legislation while telecom and cable corporations have opposed it.

 

The statement from Pearl Jam, a band with strong political views, cited net neutrality in its statement as an issue.

 

"If a company that is controlling a Webcast is cutting out bits of our performance -- not based on laws, but on their own preferences and interpretations -- fans have little choice but to watch the censored version," the band said. "What happened to us this weekend was a wake-up call, and it's about something much bigger than the censorship of a rock band."

[uncle wilco]

well, it got pj some extra coverage in the paper anyway. what the hell are they complaining about?

 

"George Bush, leave this world alone" and "George Bush, find yourself another home"

 

wooooo....did eddie think of those lines on the shitter before going onstage?....pretty clever there mr. vedder. this is 2007 and EVERYONE is a critic of the president now. why is this even a story?

[MrRain422]

well, it got pj some extra coverage in the paper anyway. what the hell are they complaining about?

 

"George Bush, leave this world alone" and "George Bush, find yourself another home"

 

wooooo....did eddie think of those lines on the shitter before going onstage?....pretty clever there mr. vedder. this is 2007 and EVERYONE is a critic of the president now. why is this even a story?

 

It was during a section where he was singing some Pink Floyd lines and threw those in. I don't think he was intending for them to be the most insightful lines ever. Is the quality of the lyrics relevent anyway?

 

And this is a story, as the telecom companies have already been shown to be in bed with the Bush Administration. Do you really feel okay about the communications industry regulating public speech?

[uncle wilco]

It was during a section where he was singing some Pink Floyd lines and threw those in. I don't think he was intending for them to be the most insightful lines ever. Is the quality of the lyrics relevent anyway?

 

And this is a story, as the telecom companies have already been shown to be in bed with the Bush Administration. Do you really feel okay about the communications industry regulating public speech?

 

corporate america will get the grease regardless of who is in office, don't kid yourself. everyone is on the take and protecting their own interests. pretending otherwise is foolish. if anything, this attention is benefiting pearl jam even more. it keeps them out of the "where are they now?" files for another few years. hillary is just as "connected" as the bush family. regardless of who takes over in 2008, this issue is going to get even worse.

[Lammycat]

But AT+T apologized. They said they made a mistake.

 

I think they've got a right to be ticked off about this thing. It's not so much a band thing as it is a basic freedom thing. It's shady stuff. I'd rather have them publicly call AT+T on this than to just take it lying down and give more fuel to "the man."

 

I'm not sure I agree with the "where are they now" comment, though. PJ continue to tour on a semi-regular basis and still have a huge following.

[MrRain422]

Yeah, they're not as popular as they once were, but they're hardly obscure. Their last album still went gold, and they sell out arenas wherever they go.

[uncle wilco]

the "where are they now" comment is in regards to casual music fans. pj will always have their base, but they've already reached the mountaintop of popularity with the general public.

 

hell...it's august of 2007 and even i posted regarding a pearl jam story. that never happens, and wouldn't have if this hadn't made the news. they lost me after vitalogy.

[Mr. Kinsley]

corporate america will get the grease regardless of who is in office, don't kid yourself. everyone is on the take and protecting their own interests. pretending otherwise is foolish. if anything, this attention is benefiting pearl jam even more. it keeps them out of the "where are they now?" files for another few years. hillary is just as "connected" as the bush family. regardless of who takes over in 2008, this issue is going to get even worse.

 

God I hate it when you're right.

 

[Analogman]

the "where are they now" comment is in regards to casual music fans. pj will always have their base, but they've already reached the mountaintop of popularity with the general public.

 

hell...it's august of 2007 and even i posted regarding a pearl jam story. that never happens, and wouldn't have if this hadn't made the news. they lost me after vitalogy.

 

You should get No Code, son.

[hwllo]

alright, first off, that's bullshit and never should have been censored.

 

secondly, fuck eddie vedder. i'm not a fan of bush but really those lyrics are complete shit. they should have been censored based on quality alone. whatever happened to subtlety in music. maybe if he was a better writer he could have found a better way to word that without sounding like a jackass.

 

oh and i like pearl jam too, so i'm not complaining because i don't like them, i just think this is a joke

[Chendizzle]

the "where are they now" comment is in regards to casual music fans. pj will always have their base, but they've already reached the mountaintop of popularity with the general public.

 

World Wide Suicide was a #1 single last summer.

[Mr. Kinsley]

World Wide Suicide was a #1 single last summer.

Yeah, but that was LAST summer. Where are they NOW?! Eddie needs to hang out with Lindsay Lohan more if he wants to keep current.

[anodyne]

perhaps mentioning bush has become profane.

 

[uncle wilco]

World Wide Suicide was a #1 single last summer.

i really don't want to dump on pearl jam. but that song did nothing for me. who actually buys "singles"??? i don't get the relevance of that category anymore. all i know is they played the hell out of it on the radio and it didn't move me to dive back into their catalogue.

[MattZ]

I didnt read the article all that carefully, but I dont think I have a problem with AT&T censoring it. Even if it wasn't an accident.

 

It's their website, and I dont have a problem with them making a decision that they dont want to appear to be throwing their hat in the ring on either side when it comes to politics. I don't see this as "they're in bed with the Bushies" as much as "we have a business to run and music is good publicity for us, but politics isn't."

 

I know they apologized and said it was unintentional, but I dont think this is that big of a deal even if it was intentional. Nothing says AT&T has to present the music in the way that PJ wants it presented. Why can't they splice it up however they want? It's their website, no?

 

EDIT: sorry peeps. Just read the article more carefully. If AT&T was covering the performance and Lolla, then yes, this is f*cked up. Sorry. I thought they were just streaming some Pearl Jam tunes. Ignore me.

[John Smith]

i really don't want to dump on pearl jam. but that song did nothing for me. who actually buys "singles"??? i don't get the relevance of that category anymore. all i know is they played the hell out of it on the radio and it didn't move me to dive back into their catalogue.

 

Kids buy singles via downloads thesedays.

 

I didnt read the article all that carefully, but I dont think I have a problem with AT&T censoring it. Even if it wasn't an accident.

 

It's their website, and I dont have a problem with them making a decision that they dont want to appear to be throwing their hat in the ring on either side when it comes to politics. I don't see this as "they're in bed with the Bushies" as much as "we have a business to run and music is good publicity for us, but politics isn't."

 

I know they apologized and said it was unintentional, but I dont think this is that big of a deal even if it was intentional. Nothing says AT&T has to present the music in the way that PJ wants it presented. Why can't they splice it up however they want? It's their website, no?

 

Ultimately this leads to AT&T determining what you hear...i.e. they have the ability to control the message.

[MattZ]

Kids buy singles via downloads thesedays.

Ultimately this leads to AT&T determining what you hear...i.e. they have the ability to control the message.

 

Yeah, I didnt realize that AT&T was sponsoring and covering the whole festival. I am an idiot. I agree that, if this was intentional (which it wasn't), it would have been messed up.

[uncle wilco]

Kids buy singles via downloads thesedays.

 

yeah...sure they do. that shit is all rigged imo. easier to fudge on those numbers when there's no actual inventory to account for.

 

same thing with radio. a little lettuce will get you more spins, etc., etc.

[John Smith]

Yeah, I didnt realize that AT&T was sponsoring and covering the whole festival. I am an idiot. I agree that, if this was intentional (which it wasn't), it would have been messed up.

 

That is a big leap of faith to assume that this was unintentional. Was anything else censored other than cussing & stuff that might get an FCC fine levied (I know this did not fall into that category, but am assuming those were the standards used). What if the only thing censored all weekend was the PJ stuff? Would it still follow that since AT&T said it was unintentional that it truely was? I think it is too early to make that call in the reality based world. I personally will wait till I hear what else was censored, if anything. If in the long run it is only the Anti-Bush stuff that was censored then I will assume that it was a delibrate move. If we find out that many random items were censored throughout the broadcast,t hen I will assume that operhaps it was unintentional. But I will not take AT&T's word for it without proof.

[John Smith]

yeah...sure they do. that shit is all rigged imo. easier to fudge on those numbers when there's no actual inventory to account for.

 

same thing with radio. a little lettuce will get you more spins, etc., etc.

 

 

My daughter buys singles only now via downloads, it's what most of her friends do. They buy very few CD's thesedays. I'm all for them buying the one or two songs they want and ignoring the rest of the crap on the crappy albums. (she listens to mainly pop music). As to how they are accounted for and the validity of the counts, I have no idea what will get you that accurate figure.

[marino13]

secondly, fuck eddie vedder. i'm not a fan of bush but really those lyrics are complete shit. they should have been censored based on quality alone. whatever happened to subtlety in music. maybe if he was a better writer he could have found a better way to word that without sounding like a jackass.

 

I was at the show and these lyrics brought up an interesting conversation with my friends. It's not his political views that bug me, it's the way he does it. We were talking about what a fantastic song "Dress Blues" is by Jason Isbell. Now there is a great message handled with some subtlety. Eddie Vedder has never and will never write a song that even comes close to touching it.

[bobbob1313]

 

Lame.

[anodyne]

i thought that image was a half-hearted effort, like the vedder lyrics.

[MrRain422]

They were just throwaway lines thrown into an improvised section of the song. Not like they were written down and presented as poetry or anything.

[Chris_H_2]

How in the world did this turn from a debate about corporate censorship based on content into one about the relevancy of Pearl Jam (who seem to be doing quite well in that department)? Does it really matter which band this involved?