When Listening to Pop Music Really is Torture: The American Top 40 Torture Songs

Some big names in music confirmed their unintended involvement in torturing suspected terrorists. So this week, musicians got behind a Freedom of Information Act request to reveal an exact list of songs the government used to torture detainees in the war on terror.

According to some detainees subjected to the "acoustical bombardment", Britney Spears will be on the list and so will The Boss. There are a few songs I'm actually rooting for, like Shakira's She Wolf - accompanied with the full length video. No doubt, that's the equivalent of "shock and awe" in acoustical bombardment circles.

I'm also thinking that some of the artists will just be happy they made a list at all - finding comfort that someone somewhere is listening to their music - even if by force - while they dream of artist royalties and tax credit implications from the fallout of this first amendment government FUBAR.

I'm no psychic, so I'm not exactly sure what Britney was thinking when she recorded "...Baby One More Time" - but my guts say a good ol' Southern fried fuck fest was on her mind. However, if a Britney song can extract key information that keeps the country safe and free, shouldn't it be used - even if it's against her musical intentions?

I've sat through a couple of self-help events that clearly used music to torture the participants. So where do you draw the line?

It's a crazy problem. The very thing that we believe in - freedom of speech and of press - is being twisted and used to implement torture.

Similarly, you have a beautiful body. Theoretically, you are free to use it and express yourself however you desire. Theoretically. Still some kinds of body expressions are considered "pornographic" and morally dangerous, and the portrayal of which can land you in jail.

It's your beautiful body that you should be able to use however you intend, but everybody, from the religion to state to country thinks they have a stake in what you do with it and how you use it. In our country, your sexual expression is not necessarily protected, but come on - speech certainly is.

For me, here's the question: does the first amendment protect an artist's musical intent? Queen's "We Are the Champions," will be on the list, but who would decide the intent of musicians after they're gone, as in Freddy Mercury's case?

It's a total paradox when liberation and freedom become expressions of torture.

Should an artist have a constitutional right to exclude the use of their art in areas that they feel strongly against?

Technorati Tags: In the News Culture