Writing in his own capacity, secretary of the Gender Equality Society Carlus Hudson discusses the underlying themes and motivations behind the forthcoming student vote on Blurred Lines.
Students may be aware of a proposed ‘ban’ on the playing of Robin Thicke’s Blurred Lines on ‘Students’ Guild premises and in student media that will in the near future be voted on in a straight yes/no referendum. Rather than get into the full argument here, I’d like to focus specifically on the question of freedom of expression which has been brought out in probably every single student referendum with ‘ban’ in the title.
Image credits: avhell
Certainly, the referendum on banning The Sun from Guild outlets seemed to strike me as blown out of proportion, considering that The Sun isn’t sold in Guild outlets to begin with and the minor scope of the proposed ‘ban’. Similarly, I think it is important to look very closely at what the exact wording of the motion is in this instance. If the motion is to ban Blurred Lines from campus, what this will ultimately mean is one song being struck off the Lemon Grove’s playlist or someone not being able to play Blurred Lines on their Xpression radio show.
With the former there is nothing even close to a monopoly held by the Guild on Exeter’s nightlife, so if any student was utterly determined to hear the song on a night out, they would easily be able to by visiting another club elsewhere in Exeter. Honestly, I’d be surprised if anyone’s decision over whether or not to go to the Lemmy on a particular evening was influenced by a ‘ban’ on Blurred Lines. It could only happen if, all of a sudden, there was a significant section of the student population who, before going out, looked up exactly which songs were being played at which clubs and – in the full glory of rational choice theory – made their decision accordingly. In those circumstances, a freedom of choice or expression argument becomes moot.
As for the shows on Xpression or any other student media, I’d be extremely surprised if there weren’t already rules and guidelines over what you can and can’t say, meaning that if there is a problem with freedom of expression, the focus ought to be on campaigning on the current state of copyright, libel and slander rules and not on something which one would struggle to convincingly describe as a ‘ban’ at all.
Furthermore, because the scope of the ‘ban’ seems to be on Guild premises alone, there’s nothing in the motion to stop anyone turning up with a sound system, finding out where the Guild and University define where Devonshire House stops and the Forum begins, and playing Blurred Lines from the Forum-side of that line. More seriously, a student listening to the song on their phone privately might technically be in breach of the ‘ban’ if taken to its extreme conclusions, but the idea that this would be enforceable or even attempted to be enforced is absurd.
Quite simply, the use of the term ‘censoring’ used by Guild campaigns officer James Roberts (quoted from the Exeposé article linked) is pure hyperbole. I highly doubt that several security firms are watching this referendum keenly, anticipating the chance to get the contract to enforce the ban by confiscating phones, destroying sound systems, and summary executions of those caught listening to it.
If the quotation marks around ‘ban’ every time I write it hasn’t given it away already, I’d urge the Guild to reconsider using the term at all in the motion. If a debate around a ‘ban’ is to take place and not be excruciating for everyone involved, it needs to be focused on the genuine issues of whether we are ok with the song being played on premises which belong to us as members of the Students’ Guild and what is so objectionable about the song in the first place, which will no doubt be emphasised by the ‘yes’ campaign in the coming weeks.
To the ‘no’ campaign, if you want to keep it focused on the real issue, and even to take the sex-positive feminist position as a recent article in the Tab did, then great! We can have a serious discussion! But I beg you, please don’t make this into a barely-applicable issue of freedom of expression and assume that your opponents are any less committed to such values. I’m not sure I can take another ‘debate’ along the lines of the Sun referendum.
Carlus Hudson
Should Blurred Lines be banned from campus? How should the motion be worded? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.
Warning: Below is the video causing all of the fuss. Some viewers may find it disturbing so don’t click play.
exeposedev 