CRTC seeks review of 'Money for Nothing' ban

After a single complaint about the Dire Straits song 'Money for Nothing,' the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council halted radio airplay in Canada a week ago. Now Canada's federal broadcast regulator, the CRTC is calling for a second opinion.

Watch: See all Videos in the Player

A A | Email This Email | Print | Comments (70) Tweet

British musician Mark Knopfler performs at the SAP Arena in Mannheim, Germany, during his first show in Germany of his 2008 European tour, on Friday, April 11, 2008. Knopfler was head and co-founder of the band Dire Straits. (AP Photo/Daniel Roland)

View Larger Image

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Fri. Jan. 21 2011 8:55 PM ET

In the wake of "strong public reaction," Canada's broadcast regulator is asking for a review of the recent ban on Dire Straits' mid-80s hit song "Money for Nothing."

In a letter sent to the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) on Friday, the CRTC said it has received more than 250 letters since the ban was announced on Jan. 12.

"Given the exceptional nature of this situation, the Commission has asked the CBSC to appoint a panel with a national composition to review the complaints," CRTC Secretary General Robert Morin wrote in the letter sent to the Standards Council Chair Ronald Cohen and published online.

In his request, Morin suggests the CBSC consider the age and origin of the 1985 Grammy-award winning pop hit, as well as its intended message.

The CBSC's Atlantic Panel weighed in after a classic-rock radio station listener in St. John's complained that the song's unedited lyrics made repeated use of an anti-gay slur.

In its decision, the panel said the unedited version of the song contravenes the human rights clauses of the Canadian Association of Broadcasters' Code of Ethics and Equitable Portrayal Code and should be banned from the airwaves.

In his letter, Morin said that decision has not only outraged members of the public, it has led to confusion "that it was the Commission, and not the CBSC, that determined that the version of the Dire Straits song containing the contested derogatory word was inappropriate for radio airplay.

"The volume of letters and perceived overlap of responsibilities between the commission and the CBSC has created uncertainty for the public and for radio stations requiring information on the continued appropriateness of playing that version of the song."

Unlike the CRTC, which regulates the Canadian broadcasting and telecommunications industry, the CBSC is a non-governmental association that represents private radio and TV stations across the country.

In the days since the ban was announced, the story has grabbed headlines in Canada and around the world. Several radio stations have also registered their protest in marathon broadcasts of the offending version.

Comments are now closed for this story

Alyx Crawford
said

Can I offer a point of clarification, please? The group that banned the song is the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) -- is an independent, non-governmental organization created by broadcast industry to administer standards established by its members. The Canadian Radio-Television Commission (CRTC) is a government agency that regulates broadcaster and electronic media.

Winston Smith
said

I am currently unemployed (and unfortunately, approaching retirement) and could probably do a better job at rewriting songs - and history for that matter - than CBSC or CRTC.

KJ in Kingston Ontario
said

Why don't we just ban all the songs from the radio without exception -- and then all the unpleasant news reports -- all the violent or silly programs from TV and better yet exile humans from the planet -- then it will be a much less offensive uninhabited sphere in space....

steve o
said

so how much money is being wasted banning, then reviewing letters, then evaluating the ban, then lifting the ban eventually? All becuase of one complaint and a knee jerk response.

Andrew
said

Everyone trying to have an ethical debate over a word. Give it a rest, it's a word, a silly little word. Stop using your feelings as justification to trample on people's rights. This goes for any word.

read the article
said

I have to laugh at the comments about the "CRTC should never have banned the song in the first place"

Did you people even read the article? It clearly states that the crtc DID NOT make this decision, but rather the broadcast standards council.

please read the article before making comments

Dawne
said

I really find this whole thing a complete waste of time. I grew up when this song came out. A friend of mine was being raised by Gay parents. They thought the song was hilarious and saw it for it what it was a poke at the rock industry. Really people do you not think we should be focusing on things that actually matter. We start banning books, songs for the words in them or changing them to suit political correctness, we are no better than leaders in the past that condemned free thought and burned books.

Dan from McMurray
said

Next we will be limited to listening to Barney and friends....What is this country coming to? Christmas heartache and song censorship. People in the country have to get a grip and grow up. If you don't like it, don't listen to it! Why don't we ban the color's of the "Rainbow" because it may offend someone who doesn't live an alternate lifestyle.....Unreasonable isn't it.........

Mike
said

OMG Haven't we wasted enough of our tax dollars on this already?

I have my own form of censorship.... Its called my index finger. If the radio is playing a song I don't like, I change the station! And the best thing is it doesn't cost anything.

Unbelievable
said

I cannot believe that some people are trying to say that dire "straits" is a code word for heterosexual. To be in "dire straits" means you are in peril. "The word dire means 'having dreadful or terrible consequences'. A strait is a narrow strip of water between two or more pieces of land, as in The Straits of Gibralta."

NickG
said

As a parent, it is your responsibility to ensure your kids understand the difference between using a word in an offending manner and using it properly. It is NOT the governments responsibility, nor any other agency, to decide what is or is not right for anyone to listen to. You don't like it? Change the station. You don't want your kids listening to "I Kissed a Girl" then explain to them why you don't want them to listen to it. Grow some fortitude and educate your kids, don't leave it up to the government. This is just another attempt at the very few minority to censor media for their own twisted concerns rather than thinking about the general population. Someone will ALWAYS object to something in a song, movie, radio show or book. We are a country of over 30 million residents. How much consensus do you really believe we can achieve?!

mitch
said

Awesome! MY tax dollars at work. I'm so glad all the trivial things such as poverty, unemployment etc have been solved and we can concentrate on correcting history.

Lisa C
said

If you wanted the song banned it should have been done back in 1985 not 26 years later. This is absolutely ridiculas!!!!!

Marty
said

I'm not homosexual, but I do understand how a homosexual could be offended by these lyrics. Having said that, as long as the lyrics don't contain threats to murder or terrorize, shouldn't the music be considered somewhat like freedom of speech? Maybe I'm wrong...

Louise
said

If you listen to the song people you would see that they are not even talking about homosexuals....

There are plenty of songs out there there that really are degrading, and that contain much more offensive language....like almost anything that eminem puts out....

Really people listen to the song, and look for the meaning before pulling things out of context and making such a big deal out of nothing.....

Martin
said

Well, if we are going to placate these numbskulls, why don't we move on to movies, starting with In The Heat Of The Night - that movie is full of insulting terms. Ban the movie, no matter that it won five Academy Awards.

darlene
said

The fact is that everyone in my high school back in the 80s understood it to be satire. It probably made everyone less homophobic, because the guy that Mark Knopfler was quoting was making fun of the very bands and singers we loved. So then anyone that spoke that way was considered dumb and obnoxious. It's the total opposite of a gay slur, and it's sad some people don't get it.That's why it's a brilliant song - it gave kids something to laugh at - an obviously ignorant and jealous character (along with a great tune).

Kevin
said

Ban the damn song. It sucks anyway despite the band's B.S. about what it means. I hope none of them had kids.

stan2
said

All single tunes released in Canada for our public air waves should be authorized by our CRTC. With the new minority rules structure in place in Canada you never know what words mean what to whom. Safety is only fair. sarg

Kenn Grant
said

Bill, your suggestion to lodge a complaint against any song for any reason is exactly the right path. I lodged a complaint the day I heard the news. I selected "I Kissed a Girl" as I was concerned it was guiding my 14 year old daughter towards lesbianism.

Join the battle.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_128656893867736&ap=1

Bear62
said

Anyone who thinks this is all about disrespecting a certain community is missing the boat completely. This is about some people wanting to eliminate from existence, or re-write, cultural objects from years past...and force that upon the rest of us.
The minute they achieve this is the minute we lose our history altogether. It's just plain wrong.

Joe 2
said

As a manual laborer I'm insulted that Dire Straits assumes I'm a stupid, redneck bigot that hates homosexual and treats women like easy skanks. Thanks Dire Straits for painting an entire class in certain jobs as dinks. I wonder who cooks the band members breakfasts in the morning, cleans their swimming pools, tends to the gardens around their big mansions? Do they think these people are all stupid hateful people too? Sure is elitist of them to enforce stereo-types when it comes to class structure via your profession. How enlightening of them!

John
said

Because I never reported the song in the past, and only one person ever has, doesn't mean that I approved of it before. I've taken offense to hearing it for years.

I like Dire's music, and I understand the social satirical value of the song. But for wide spread consumption, it's not healthy since not everyone understands the meaning, they just understand it is okay to say those words.

With Mark Twain and the N word, it is your choice to read the N word. No one is holding the book in your face and saying read it and accept it. With radio waves you can't avoid it at the dentist office, elevators, shopping malls, etc.

The other arguement that the song is a piece of history being altered. 1985 is in the past. It does not enjoy a chart position or deserve one in 2011. Like movies from 1985, go buy it, it isn't running at the theatre this weekend.

Don't worry, we understand our kind are not welcome, and you don't have to rub it in. With the backlash over this ban just goes to show how unaccepted my kind are in society still. I'm prepared for another 50 years of not being accepted in the country I was born in, but this is step to an improvement our relationship.

You people say that rap songs are offensive, well go and report them if you are offended by the lyrics... except they don't play those songs in elevators and at the bank. They are also not considered credible artists or credible messages by most people's standards. Get it?

Ignored Canadian
said

I think that if one complaint has that effect, then why hasn't CSRB acted on my complaint! As a parent of teenage children who is trying to raise them to be drug-free I am constantly undermined by songs on the radio that make light of casual drug use. Drugs are illegal in this country yet the still haven't banned any of those songs yet. Oh I am probably ignored because I am not a member of any type of minority. I am just an average white canadian. I no longer have any rights in this country. 'Nuff said.

Peter
said

So if a Gay rock group records a song about Straight people being trailer-trash A-holes who should be sterilized to stop them from creating new copies of themselves, you all would support that as 'artistic' freedom? How about if they insulted your parents in the song as being socially irresponsible for your birth. Or if they made a song that abortion is "easy" and why should anyone care? Would be as easy and relaxed and condone that as "artistic" freedom? Duplicity rules..eh?

Hendrik
said

Donny in Edmonton

Just a heads up that the CRTC and the CBSC are different. The CRTC is trying to fix the mess that the CBSC made :-)

Joe
said

Dire Straits (what do they mean by Strait anyway??? Code for "Straight " as in heterosexual?) Anyway why do they paint anyone who makes low wages as haters of Gays and women? Rather "elitists" of these guilded rock stars to paint low wage earners who do manual work as morons. I'm insulted that they trashed the average hard working citizen by painting them as bigots. I wonder how they treat their maids and gardener's in their chic mansions from the lucrative cash from "Money for Nothing"???

kestral
said

people really, really need to learn to understand what they read.the song, IS NOT BANNED. the unedited version is. ou can still listen to it on the radio with a bleep or whatnot. you can still go buy it, download it, steal it, whatever, in its original form.most songs on public radio have 'offensive' words bleeped out. it just look longer to get this one. the people involved in issuing 'bans' should really reword things to avoid uproar.

Mark Combellack
said

To Ella-Max, Yep that is just fine, it's called satire and pointing out the sexist, racist or other hateful attitudes in an attempt to mock them is a time honored tradition in music and entertainment and i hope the trend continues.
I also wonder why people can't quite grasp That this is not the CRTC that decides this sort of thing, it's the CBSC that does this.
Mark

LS
said

Beachtree - CBSC (private group) not the CRCT.Ella-Max - Actually yes, except once again realize the difference between insulting someone or group versus condoning killing. You are comparing apples to ornages. If someone wants to call me an inbred dummie I consider who said it and shrug it off not run to the laywer to sue or call discrimintation. People Grow some skin! Too much pandering to try be "politically correct" and running to lawyers is ruining this country NOT ignorant people who hurt others with stupid comments.

Cara
said

By the looks of the thumbs down against "Darel" who is Gay and feels targeted by the song you can well see that prejudice is alive and well in Canada and duplicity in their standards is very much condoned. I'm ashamed of you who rail against a Gay person/minority and disregard how these lyrics can damage their self-esteem. Sad lot you are.

Bill Phillips
said

I think many of you are taking the wrong approach in how to deal with the CBSC issuing a ban. Instead of complaining follow their lead and find your own song you take issue with (for whatever inane or trivial reason) and file your own complaint:http://www.cbsc.ca/english/complaint/form.phpIn other words, drown the officious bureaucrats in their own ridiculous process.

David
said

Sometimes a "majority" view can still be the wrong choice. The CRTC should ban these hateful lyrics. I don't buy Dire Straits' logic behind the song. I think the band has a problem with their view of homosexuals and are likely writing from their own perspective but using smoke and mirrors to hide it.

susan in toronto
said

Clearly the majority of posters here did not read this article correctly - just too eager to share your opinions with the world - really, really pathetic. It was NOT the CRTC that banned this song, it was the CBSC, I mean it is very, very clear in the article that the confusion is a problem with the CRTC - it is people like you who cause a lot of the problems, going off half-cocked without any facts, despite them being right in front of your eyes........just unbelievable!

Rock on
said

The CRTC has given Dire straits the best advertising this song could ever have! I hope the song has a resurgence and the band makes a lot of ( MONEY FOR NOTHING.) In the words of Cee Lo Green (pc version).... CRTC... 'FORGET YOU'

Donald
said

"Beachtree", most people learn to read before they write, perhaps you should read the story again. The CRTC did not make the bone head decision, that was the CBSC. Two totally different groups. But I guess you are too stupid to read and understand that.

The CRTC makes plenty of bone head decisions, get on them for their decisions, but this is a bone head move by a media organization not the government regulator.

Carl
said

Read the story, people. It was NOT the CRTC that banned the song - It was the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC), which is not a government body. The CRTC is the good guy here - it is asking the CBSC to reconsider the ban.

Rick in AB
said

Are you kidding me?? This is what the CBSC and CRTC are doing to earn their pay cheques?? There is a heck of a lot more out in radio and TV land that is a billion times more offensive than some slur that predates most of the radio listeners today. Not to mention how old the lyrics to this great tune are.I'm incenced that this even made it to a ban at all since it is a down right violation of my right to listen to music of my choosing ( I know it's not constitutionally protected like in the States, but it should be). Have they listened to some of the CRAP that has come out in the last few years in terms of rap, grunge, heavy metal, rock ande even pop with their violence towards women, cops, talk of suicide as if it is a good choice etc.I swear that this society swings from one extreme to the other with no common sense middle ground.I am a parent of 3 kids and although they will make their own listening and viewing choices eventually, for now when I hear a tune on the radio that I think is ofensive or sends the wrong message ...I CHANGE THE STATION which is one of my contributions to their balanced up bringing.Also the latest thing in all radios is to have several stations able to be reached at the push of a button. Try it and quit wasting my tax payers money on this politically correct BULL.

MW
said

I'm willing to be that those "250" letters to the CRTC were mostly from a small group of people pretending to be more than they really are as a collective group. B.S. baffles brains out their in radio land being prompted on by bigoted egotistic slack-ass radio DJs with their own agenda.

T
said

Get over it! This song has been around for decades, and no one had a problem with it. You don't like it, DON"T LISTEN TO IT. I am so sick of all these little groups that love to stir up issue's over the smallest little things and the government that caters to every little whiner. Get over with it, everyone in there lifetime hears something they may be offended by, don't listen to it, or move on. Stop forcing your petty little complaints on the rest of the population.

Helga
said

The only people defending this nasty song are the ones not targeted nor touched by it. And if it was made from the perspective of an angry manual laborer, I must ask from what experience does Dire Straits assume that "manual laborers" in general are dumb and hate homosexuals? That's kind of a class-war Dire Straits is engaging in beyond just assuming that people who don't make much money are all idiots with intense prejudice and hate. Who the hell are Dire Straits to assume and encourage this as a fact when its built on "their" own assumptions? Unless the experience they're really drawing from is secretly their "own"??? Eureka!

sheri
said

they should be banning other songs like Porn star dancing, cause of the derogitory comments in that song, and also eminems and rhianna's song.. with the lyrics "going to tie you to the bed and set your house on fire.. songs like this and I am sure as many others are more sickening to hear about abuse etc than a song thats over 20 yrs old

calgarysandy
said

If this is a democracy why do relatively small special interest groups have so much influence? The majority ought to have a say proportionate to their numbers. I seriously doubt that the gay support groups are this petty so it is likely one of those trolls who pokes around looking for something negative, anything negative, to complain about. They do it because they are nobodies who want to appear to be somebody. Oh, look at me. I trashed a big rock group.

Paul
said

When's the review for banning the Flintsones due to one word in their theme song?

Dave in Perrth
said

Wow, we have become a nation of wimps! Absolutely disgraceful. We will ban a song because one person is offended, we will stop a movie because there may be a protest, we will stop serving fois- gras because some may protest. It's disgusting. If you don't like it don't go, don't watch, don't listen, don't eat it, but, let everyone else enjoy themselves.
This is a country where whiners, moaners and people with hidden agendas count more than the general population. We all need to show the rest of the world that we have some cajones. it makes me sick how this stuff taken to the extreme is ruining this country. A prisoner can now sue and win because he has a bad back and cannot stand for roll call, same B.S. just taken one step further.

Wayne
said

What a complete waste of time and resources this whole thing has been.

Beachtree
said

CRTC, enough already, admit you made a stupid mistake and reverse your decision.

Ella-Max
said

So if Dire Straits records a song from a stupid person's point of view that Jews and Christians deserve to be murdered by Islamic extremists - you would all be okay with that and support "artistic freedom"? Or how about if the song referred to (from a stupid person's view point) average Canadians as "inbred" dummies whose mother's legs should have been tied together the day they were born. Would that be okay and in compliance with your support for "artistic freedom"?

Joanne from Barrie
said

Its about time that we stand up to the silly, silly ways of the minority. Personally, I have had enough of standing to one side, not saying a thing, just in case I offended someone, but holy smok'n reality people, this political correctness has gone waaaaay overboard. I think we should take a stand on EVERYTHING we think is over the political correct edge. Having cross dressing in a public school in King City.....I dont think so. Changing Mark Twains classic......I dont think so, changing the word Christmas to holiday......I dont think so......shall I go on? Us Canadians are very, very nice people, but to tell you the truth, we are sick and tired of being bent over and taking it from anyone who is standing in line to change US! The average nice guy Canadian is at the end of their rope, and now its time to look out for US!

Enough is Enough
said

One person whines, ONE!!!, and the CRTC is ready to ban the song. This is political correctness at it's worst. The person who is so offended by the term 'faggot' should either change the station or turn off the radio...enough. This song is old and the word is used in a completely different context. Get over yourself.

Peter in MB
said

I would like to know who actually complained about this song and or if there was an actual complaint? Or Is the CRTC just assuming that someone might complain� hence forth (chasseing the paper tiger). And if someone did complain I would like to call them a MORON!!! Because they are a MORON for having nothing better to do then complain about the words in a 25 year old song! They are truly a Pathetic Moron! And CRTC are also a bunch of MORONS!!! for listing and acting on this morons complaint!!!

R/H
said

The song by Queen should be re-titled "We are the laughing stock of the World", and played as our anthem. We sure as hell are not "The Champions". Politically correctness will be the downfall of Canada, it's already started and gaining pace every day.

Censorship Fighter
said

A pretext to censorship other content the CRTC doesn't like. Connect the two people. They try to censor similar things in the States and they're trying to do it here. Stand up for your freedoms and rights, cause if you don't, then you'll lose them.

Darel
said

As a Gay person I'm very offended by this song despite Dire Straits claims that it is written from a stupid person's point of view. I think that Dire Straits used the word to get attention and sell records, thus throwing a targeted minority under the bus to do so. I do not find that they had "altruistic" intentions and laughed all the way to the bank but at the expense of homosexuals. Even their name Dire "Straits" could suggest that they are making a point of what "their" sexuality is and is not. And if it does why would they need to do that? Unless they want to make it very clear for "whatever" reason. Maybe it suggests that they don't like homosexuals? And perhaps the song is more from their own angle on how they perceive Gays, women as "easy" , money is "easy". After all their world is one of "rock-stars".with easy access to money and women and they can well afford to be prejudice given their high standing amongst a huge fan base.

Marion
said

That "F" word is highly inflammatory towards Gay people and all you have to do is look at the slews of young Gay children whose lives are affected by a "public acceptance" of use of such vitriol. Many young kids have committed suicide because they are seen as outcasts in society and allowing this song to parade itself about the airwaves with that nasty word is wrong. This goes way beyond artistic freedom when it targets and injures a group of people who for too long have been the subject of ridicule. It might be wise for artist to keep this in mind the next time they decide to use it or refer to black people with the "N" word, or refer to women in derogatory invective as well. Gays and especially young Gays need to feel that they are accepted so they can foster healthy and well-rounded lives with equal chance at success for achievement like anyone else. Songs like this need to clean up their act.

PEI Fella
said

They need to give their heads a shake and begin doing useful things with their time. Instead of wasting everyone elses time with this useless "ruling". If not perhaps the Harper government could start their spending cuts at the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council and try and balance those books.

Ari Thompson
said

First of all, anyone who is vaguely familiar with the lyrics knows they are written from the perspective of a bigoted frustrated manual laborer. Secondly, when did being offensive, become illegal? what's wrong with being offended? who determines what's offensive? being offended is completely subjective - what offends you may not offend me. should we randomly legislate against a select group of things that a select group find offensive?I am sympathetic to the problems of the homosexual community, but this is ridiculous...

Sam C
said

Finally! It's nice to see some common sense being applied to this situation.

Joe
said

So, we've been listening to this song for 15 years and now, less than 10 people have a problem with one word. There's something to be said about switching the channel when the song is on. We're being overrun by politically correct cry babies.

Al in Orillia
said

A committee to review the committee.....talk about "money for nothin"

Richard
said

Censorship? What?If you don't like it, turn it off or turn the channel.CRTC what have you done for me lately?

Pip
said

It's about time! I doubt the CBSC is truly representative of the Canadian population, and this fact, in my opinion, gives them no right to censor - particularly on the basis, I believe, of a single complaint. However, can we expect that group to actually ". . . seek further comment from the public. . . ", where public means the general public, and not just lobby groups? Perhaps they should commission a nationwide random phone survey: that might get a clearer view of how people view the lyrics concerned

peter in MB
said

I am really getting sick and tired of the political correctness and the notion that it only takes one person to complain about something then we have to change it and ruin it for everyone. I would like to ask the CRTC did someone acutely complain about the original version of �Money for Nothing� or is the CRTC just chasing a paper tiger again? If no one complained then what is the problem? However over 250 people complained about the CRTC�s decision on this issue. So by their own logic they must change their ruling.

Karen
said

Well I should think so! The decision to 'ban' the song from radio play was a knee-jerk reaction. The business of being 'politically correct' can go far beyond reason at times and this is one of them. Canada has become the comic relief the world needed in the past several weeks and that's about the only good that came from this silly decision. Hope the CRTC gets the song back to airplay - which could not have been that often considering the age of the song.

Doug # BC
said

This was an assinine decision for at least a coupe of reasons.It was made to satisfy our ridiculous and relentless obsession with political correctness. The song does not promote hate or violence in any way,yet rap that advocates violence and hate, using with very vulgar language,is deemed to be a part of "free speech". There are many songs played on a regular basis that offend me,but being a hetero sexual while guy seems to render that reality irrelevant. Here's the thing people.It's time for people who DO NOT belong to a special interest group to speak up.The people who usually sit by and let the political activists control the entire debate in very aggressive ways.While I agree with the notion that the majority must not use that staus as an excuse to run rough shod over minotiry groups,it is also bad public poloicy to let the minority dictate to the majority.Spinning every story and every word to imply something evil,or to promote a particular agenda is nothing short of censorship and social engineering. Context.In this case,it's about context.Perhaps it's time the gay people stopped feeling sorry for themselves,listened to the song,and thought about context.Running around looking for a reason to feel slighted says more about a person than this song ever said,or inteneded to say."Guilting" the majority into thinking their words or actions are evil is a tactic employed all to commonly by activists seeking more attention for themselves.

Prof. Pye Chartt
said

I didn't think that the CRTC was capable of recognizing a "protectionist" overreaction, given the nature of its own common practice. Dandy. (I'm not using the word "dandy" as in, "Hey, look at him, he's a real dandy." That's old, and homophobic. Once upon a time, of course, "gay" was a synonym for "happy." Things change.) Hopefully, this turn in the song-story won't spark another debate about how liberal "political correctness" equates to "Christian censorship." The former is based upon a fear of, and oversensitivity to, "offending" minority groups, while the latter is based upon a morality attributed to the Bible, and the word of God. Quite a difference. However, as an areligious libertarian who keeps a watchful eye on social conservatism, and has noted the decline of the formal practice of Christianity, I can see the developing equation.

Jim-Surrey
said

Instead of a minority group having this much influence the decision made was the wrong one as there should never be a ruling made that effects a majority from enjoying entertainment.If this group were offended then change the station instead of expecting others to do without.If opera came on the radio and you didn't like it then wouldn't you just change the station????

Jeff From MTL
said

Banning a 26 year old song for using slurs is as foolish as editing the Mark Twain Classics to remove period specific racial slurs...We can't simply turn out backs at the mistakes of the past, ignoring the past will simply lead us to make the same mistakes in the future

Justin in Moose Jaw
said

Really ?? If your offended by the song then find another song to listen to !! If i walked around long enough i could find something that offends me as a heterosexual man, but do i ? and if i did would taht give me the right to say i wanted it banned ??Capper !

Donny in Edmonton
said

The CRTC still has a chance to close this can of worms they opened. It's probably in their best interests that they do, lest they generat more ire from the Canadian music loving public. I don't see how a review is needed when the right decision on the matter is as clear as day.

Today's Top Stories

Former Liberian President Charles Taylor waits for the start of his sentencing judgement in the courtroom of the Special Court for Sierra Leone in Leidschendam, near The Hague, Netherlands, Wednesday May 30, 2012. (AP / Toussaint Kluiters)

Pick your location

Top Stories -

News Sections

News Programs

Features

Browse: