On the other hand, my wife dislikes it intensely when they play anything in the contemporary banda genre... enough to actually comment about the choice of music.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
They need to call Saul and get hooked up to HD2 1260.
- Thread starter 34james
- Start date
I make comments too, in just about every store where I shop , but it has never occurred to me that the choice of music by the merchant was intended to keep certain people out, as implied by someone in a previous post.
Will Smith the character (on the original "Fresh Prince") said that was good music when Uncle Phil played it for him.
JCPenney makes me uncomfortable with the music they play.
Play Richard Harris and that'll get rid of them.
Well, that settles it, then.
I'm just saying he was a rapper and he had the chance to make a statement and he did it.
I don't want to shock you, but Will was an actor who, apart from exactly one episode of the show (season 3, episode 22), did not write the words he said on screen. The creator of the show and its head writer was a (then) 32-year old white guy named Andy Borowitz (now 65):
Andy Borowitz - IMDb
I don't think I said or implied classical music is racist. The type of music is not relevant. What does matter is the intent of the decision makers. It appears government employees chose a certain type of music with the goal of driving away certain classes of people from a quasi-public space under jurisdiction of a government agency. That is discrimination at best, and racism at worst.
What if instead of homeless people they decided they didn't want people of Jewish faith on the LA Metro, and played sound and displayed images with the intent of driving them away?
Authorities should enforce the law, but they should not do it in a way that is or appears to be discrimination or profiling.
In the case of the homeless perhaps the public decides the end justifies the means. In that case, why play music? Collect the homeless in police vans and drop them off in the desert to die. What group is next, old people?
Would you agree that being homeless does not cause crime, and that crime actually caused by mental health issues and lack of upbringing in a good family environment?
That is- homeless do not cause crime, people cause crime.
Now substitute the word guns for the word homeless. It's the same argument.
I think playing music to drive away homeless people is like taking away guns from the population. It may help in the short term, but it does not address the underlying cause. In places where there are not a lot of guns, they use sticks, clubs and machetes to commit violence and crime. People find a way to go where their head takes them. How could we help them find a better way?
Your thoughts?
What if instead of homeless people they decided they didn't want people of Jewish faith on the LA Metro, and played sound and displayed images with the intent of driving them away?
Authorities should enforce the law, but they should not do it in a way that is or appears to be discrimination or profiling.
In the case of the homeless perhaps the public decides the end justifies the means. In that case, why play music? Collect the homeless in police vans and drop them off in the desert to die. What group is next, old people?
Would you agree that being homeless does not cause crime, and that crime actually caused by mental health issues and lack of upbringing in a good family environment?
That is- homeless do not cause crime, people cause crime.
Now substitute the word guns for the word homeless. It's the same argument.
I think playing music to drive away homeless people is like taking away guns from the population. It may help in the short term, but it does not address the underlying cause. In places where there are not a lot of guns, they use sticks, clubs and machetes to commit violence and crime. People find a way to go where their head takes them. How could we help them find a better way?
Your thoughts?
Last edited:
My thoughts:
They are just playing classical music on their property. Their reasons are theirs alone and not for your guessing. Nothing illegal or immoral is going on.
A lot of time and electrons are being wasted on this thread though.
MacArthur Park has been that way for at least three decades. About thirty years ago, I arrived at 4 AM and started to drive down the road leading to the "acoustic shell" and found a cadaver in the way. I called the police, and in chatting with the officer in charge, was told that the area was a common drop-off point for "pre-killed" (their term) bodies that needed a place to be dropped off. The lake was the most common, but at the time it had been drained for maintenance and skeleton removal....
Later in the day, I had to call the police again for a flasher. Apparently the park was a favorite as there were so many "undocumented" people in the area that few wanted to call the cops to report them.
But the area is about 90% Salvadoran today, despite the Mexican consulate being at one corner of the park.
Homelessness isn't always a function of class. I've been aware of a large number of military veterans who are homeless. They had been receiving medical care at VA hospitals, and the previous administration decided they were taking up space in the hospitals. So they were released, and didn't have places to go. Homelessness affects people of all races, religions, and ages. You seem to have a very narrow view of it.
Something has to be done about homelessness. The city of Los Angeles is doing several things including the music therapy. As I pointed out in my previous post, using classical music is an internationally accepted way of handling the situation. If there's something illegal or wrong about it, I'm sure the people of LA will let their government know about it.
My PD at WUNO and I fired a jock one morning. A bit later in the day, he returned with a machete with the intent of taking revenge. Our maintenance guy stopped him with a rake and tied him with a water hose.
Anything can be made into a weapon if there is intent to harm. Or protect from harm.
Moral to the story: Necessity is the mother of sales at Home Depot.
Last edited:
Is the intent of playing classical music only to make homeless persons mellow out, not hassle people, commit crime or litter?
If that is correct, I have gone way off base and I apologize.
TheBigA, you made very good points in your last post, thank you for making me think.
Indeed, becoming homeless can happen to many people. I do have a very narrow view of some who take action against homeless people.
If that is correct, I have gone way off base and I apologize.
TheBigA, you made very good points in your last post, thank you for making me think.
Indeed, becoming homeless can happen to many people. I do have a very narrow view of some who take action against homeless people.
Last edited:
You guys are really amusing; thanks for momentarily taking my mind off the pleasures of the matzoh.
But isn't it possible that classical music has one overriding characteristic that most other music lacks, to wit, it's old, and thus it's Public Domain? No copyright to have to pay royalties on? No tracking of "spins" and no Soundscan performance royalties for a boatload of Metro stations or 7-11 parking lots has to add up quickly, no?
But isn't it possible that classical music has one overriding characteristic that most other music lacks, to wit, it's old, and thus it's Public Domain? No copyright to have to pay royalties on? No tracking of "spins" and no Soundscan performance royalties for a boatload of Metro stations or 7-11 parking lots has to add up quickly, no?
The orchestras, soloists and conductors still have to get paid. The centuries-old music is in public domain; the modern recordings are not.
I've had this conversation with music rights people. The composition is public domain, but the arrangement can qualify for royalty.
The musicians only get royalty if the source is a digital service. If they play K-Mozart, they don't.
Public performance royalties come into play though...
I never said he did, but I like to think he had some influence.
- Status