MUSIC VIDEO CHANNELS GRAPPLE WITH STANDARDS & PRACTICES
BEVERLY HILLS -- While sex and drugs might be traditional bedmates of rock ‘n roll, music video channel executives said viewers shouldn’t expect to see much of either on air. At Billboard Music Video Conference, panelists said gratuitous violence or depiction of drug use or sexual activity were major reasons for videos not to be aired. “Violence without any purpose is a big no-no, as well as sex-role stereotyping, which is a line that keeps moving but is still a big issue for us,” Much Music’s David Kines said, and it’s still important to contextualize content. VH1 Vp-Programming Paul Marzalek said it was often simply matter of demonstration appeal.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
“There’s no real rule book, but excessive violence makes it very difficult for us,” said Amy Doyle of MTV: “We will work with labels if it is an artist they feel strongly about, that there is something happening with,” such as an album release or pending tour, “but generally, if there is a lot of violence or a lot of drug references or derogatory references, we tend to steer clear because we have to take some responsibility.” Most notable example of MTV and VH1 rejecting video was for Madonna’s “What It Feels Like for a Girl,” although network executives denied it was censorship, putting blame on Madonna for refusing to make suggested cuts. Doyle admitted: “That put us in an interesting position because we have standards and if we put this video on the air and into rotation a lot of labels would be calling asking why their band couldn’t do the same thing, so that factored in.” Marzalek said airing video, which included footage of Madonna spritzing policeman with squirt gun, would place VHI in unacceptable legal exposure: “We knew if we played that 25 to 30 times a week and some kid went out and pulled a squirt gun on a cop, it would be Viacom’s ass.”
Their decision to ban video was boon to upstart Much Music and Much Music USA, panelists said. “I thought the violence depicted was to make an important social statement. It wasn’t violence for the sake of violence but to prove a point,” said Kines, who aired the video after 9 p.m.
Great American Country channel executive Jim Murphy said country artists tended to be much more self-policing because of their highly specific audience: “Country tends to be inside the box so we don’t get videos with full frontal nudity or gratuitous violence.”
Moderator Carla Hay of Billboard asked if music video channels had changed in wake of Sept. 11. “It’s a moving target,” said Kines: “As people’s psyches heal, things become more acceptable. Obviously, there were videos at 9:15 a.m. September 11 we were furiously pulling off our playlists,” citing “Drowning Pool.” “But I think you'll end up seeing most stuff back on the air.” MTV’s Doyle said the nation’s grief made channel “more sensitive and one of the things we have to keep in mind is the changing social climate. We are at war and visuals that happen to make up some of these videos can be disturbing. We probably pause more than we would have with certain visuals but it doesn’t mean we will automatically reject any disturbing visual -- it all depends on the context.” Marzalek was quick to downplay notion of censorship: “I'm not convinced that’s happening.” He believes bands are being more introspective and sensitive and self-censoring in what material they want to present to their audience in light of world events: “I wouldn’t tag the major music video networks with causing that.”