Songs by Charles Manson, available on iTunes

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by aaronvan, Aug 28, 2015.

  1. aaronvan, Aug 28, 2015
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2015

    aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #1
    Are there troubling ethical points with Apple selling Charles Manson's music? I remember Guns & Roses receiving criticism when they recorded some Manson songs in the early 90s. Well, it's all available on iTunes now.

    Incidentally, during the Manson murders trial in 1970 Manson lost the rights to his music. Still, Apple is selling his music so somebody is profiting from Charlie's notoriety.

    Ethical quandary or much ado about nothing?

    manson.jpg
     
  2. citizenzen, Aug 28, 2015
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2015

    citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #2
    For anyone interested, here's a link to a twelve-part podcast, which takes an in-depth look at the Manson Family: http://www.infiniteguest.org/remember-this/

    I found it all very interesting. I'd forgotten that Charles Manson was an aspiring musician, hoping to hit it big in L.A., and who hobnobbed with a few people in the music scene.

    It is an interesting moral dilemma. But ultimately, I like that Apple isn't censoring material, leaving it up instead to the individual to judge what is worthy and what is not.

    Edit: Just listened to a few tracks ... it's pretty bad.
     
  3. shinji macrumors 65816

    shinji

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    #3
    I don't see a problem with Apple selling it. They aren't endorsing Charles Manson, just like bookstores aren't endorsing Mein Kampf and the Little Red Book.
     
  4. Technarchy macrumors 603

    Technarchy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    #4
    Don't like it, don't buy it. Not that complicated really.
     
  5. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #5
    That podcast is what prompted me to start this thread. At the end of episode #12, she mentions that Manson's music is available on iTunes. I was surprised to learn this, especially in today's politically correct world of manufactured outrage over everything.
     
  6. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #6
    Manson's ok because on his forehead is etched a swastika and not a Confederate Flag. Otherwise, Tim Cook would have to get involved and censor Manson.
     
  7. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #7
    That's a swastika? I always thought it was some crazy X.
     
  8. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #8
    He originally carved an "X" in his forehead during the trial (and his female followers did likewise) and after the guilty verdicts converted it to a swastika.
     
  9. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #9
    Well that joke fell flat on its face.
     
  10. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #10
    Well, I trust you will take heart that it's not very likely that Manson himself will see any monetary benefits from the sale of his works.

    Assuming this is the 2008 ESP (reissue) of Mason's "album" then according to the ESP website:

    "Because his songs were considered musically and historically significant, this record was released briefly by ESP in 1974, and is now being reissued. All royalties are paid to the son of one of the victims, who obtained a judgment against Manson."

    This Wikipedia article has some more info regarding royalty payments for the reissues of Manson's songs by Awareness Records and ESP -- e.g., "California law prohibited Manson himself from collecting any money or royalties for his work."

    So, it would appear that "the usual suspects" are the only parties that will benefit monetarily from the sale of Mason's song, e.g., the publishers (such as ESP, etc.) and retailers/distributors (such Apple iTunes, Google Play Music, etc.) But then this "album" has been reissued many times since 1970, so this isn't exactly a "Stop the presses!" news scoop.

    But then, this sort of profiteering isn't exactly unique to Manson. Numerous books, movies, etc. have generated much profit (largely for "the usual suspects") based on the "notoriety" of various historical villains for centuries.

    While some might insist that "Crime doesn't pay!", the creation, marketing, and distribution of short stories, books, songs, movies, musicals, news articles, etc. about "notable" crimes and criminals would seem to be a fairly profitable business.

    Amazingly enough, it would appear the there's even profit to be made even off the "less than notable" ones...

    [​IMG]








     
  11. Solomani macrumors 68030

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #11
    I see a problem. Apple is practicing selective censorship…. hypocrisy at its best.

    Apple feels that it can censor items depicting the Confederate flag in its Apple Store/iTunes….. because the flag is politically offensive. And yet Apple has no problems offering (for sale) the songs of an unrepentant mass murderer (who obviously "offended" and destroyed the lives of many people and their families). It doesn't matter who profits from the sale of the songs, by the way.

    Apple…. if you are going to practice censorship in your online Stores (and as a business entity, I understand Apple has the right to do this) then can you please be consistent? Have a consistent policy ok?
     
  12. shinji macrumors 65816

    shinji

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    #12
    Apple has an openly gay CEO and yet continues to sell homophobic music and books. Their censorship has less to do with ideology and more to do with the fact it makes financial sense to censor only the things that will result in lost customers.

    Just compare the number of customers they'd lose over the Confederate flag to the number they'd lose over Charles Manson songs.
     
  13. noisycats macrumors 6502a

    noisycats

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2010
    Location:
    The 'ham. Alabama.
    #13
    Excellent response. It's business. Hypocritical? Sure.

    I don't look to Apple as my moral compass.
     
  14. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #14
    The thing is, Apple advertises their position on social issues, obviously in anticipation of receiving a monetary lift from it, if not outright evangelizing. Probably both. But we're seeing an inconsistency at Apple as commerce and ideals collide.
     
  15. noisycats macrumors 6502a

    noisycats

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2010
    Location:
    The 'ham. Alabama.
    #15
    True. And?

    Or is this simply an observation?
     
  16. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #16
    Agreed. There is plenty of stuff out there that I don't like or find offensive. I just don't buy it. I find other things to spend my money on.
     
  17. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #17
    Is yours a question ?
     
  18. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #18
    Surely the confederate flag was removed under the policy of not having white power music/art/literature or symbolism on its stores.

    As far as I know Charles Manson wasn't a supporter of white power as such..... he predicted a race war, and tried to trigger it by murdering some white individuals..... no? Hence doesn't fall under the white power rule like the confederate flag does, or NS/Facist music etc.....

    Infact judging by the state of racial tension in America at the moment, it seems like he was just 40 years early in his predictions tbh.
     
  19. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #19

    Surely you mean the state of racial tension since Obama became president?
     
  20. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #20

    Nice to see someone finally admit what we've known since 1//21/2008, it was all about the black guy in the White House.
     
  21. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #21
    He wasn't a KKK member but he is a galloping racist and white supremacist thinking informs much of his crackpot philosophy. Hell, the guy carved a swastika in his freaking forehead...
     
  22. noisycats macrumors 6502a

    noisycats

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2010
    Location:
    The 'ham. Alabama.
    #22
    That tension was always there. Glad actually to finally see it exposed.
     
  23. maxsix Suspended

    maxsix

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2015
    Location:
    Western Hemisphere
    #23
    It's a perfect fit with Apples New Thug Life, Beats The Bitches, Mo Money, Mo Money, Mo money... Image
     
  24. FieldingMellish Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #24
    That is your racist, divisionist interpretation. The leftist / Marxist "harm America through division" politics would be the same, whether Obama was black or green.
     
  25. sim667 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    #25
    Because there was never racial tension in the U.S. Before Obama?
     

Share This Page