Anarchy For Sale

"The revolution will not go better with Coke…"

-- Gil Scott-Heron, "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised"

Rebellion sells. Marilyn Manson, a shock rocker hated by conservatives for his decadent excesses, was rewarded for his sins by having the number one selling album in America during its first week of release. In modern America, the musical cries of teen angst can barely be heard over the "ca-ching" sound of profits rolling into the wallets of drooling corporate executives.

Dotting malls of America is a chain store called Hot Topic, a store that claims "It's all about the music." Inside one might find torn and safety pinned anarchy shirts or spiky bracelets -- all necessary accessories for today's suburban teenage outcast. "The Company believes teenagers throughout the United States have similar fashion preferences, largely as a result of the nationwide influence of MTV, music distribution, movies and television programs. [The Company recognizes] that music is the primary driver of teen fashion preferences," Hot Topic's website cheerfully announces.

From early rock n roll and 60s psychedelia, to punk, to hip hop, to grunge, the music of the counter culture has been eagerly sought out, re-packaged, and sold back to the youth of America. This is a process, that while useful in bringing underground music to the mainstream, guts that same music of the very thing that made it revolutionary and dangerous to the mainstream -- its independence from the status quo. It is essential for any musicians who advocate social change to not limit themselves due to corporate censorship or grow apathetic with the fruits of success. To avoid this, they must remain free of major labels and other corporate aspects of music, and refuse to participate in a system that turns rebellion into profit.

Music has a long tradition of social protest. From "The Times They Are a-Changing" by Bob Dylan, "Get Up Stand Up" by Bob Marley, "Fight The Power" by Public Enemy, or "Kill the Poor" by the Dead Kennedys, musicians are among the first to point out the flaws of society and advocate for change. Since the start of modern music, musicians have faced the question of how much of their art must be sacrificed to make it amenable to the corporate system. Artists concerned with social change have faced this decision doubly so. How much of the system they supposedly oppose can they embrace to spread the message of their music?

The arena of modern mainstream music is a carefully managed machine. A disparagingly small number of companies own all commercial radio stations, TV stations, record labels, and sizeable concert venues in the nation. One of the more sinister examples of this is a corporation named Clear Channel. Clear Channel controls 1,200 radio stations, including 60% of all rock programming. Clear Channel can count their number of listeners in the United States in the hundreds of millions. The end result of the consolidation of ownership (and therefore power) in the music industry is that companies can carefully pick and choose which artists the vast majority of Americans -- who are unwilling or unable to examine alternative venues for music -- hear, as well as control the artists themselves once they enter the mainstream.

As can be seen by the stranglehold Clear Channel has on the music industry, corporations in America are part of the status quo. Capitalism, and more specifically money, in America is a religion with followers more devout than any other. Any voice, in music or otherwise, that challenges the status quo is inherently challenging corporations. The typical corporate response is to fight these challenges by turning revolutionary music into a product. Instead of being authentic art, music becomes a thing to be bought and sold, which debases the very meaning of the music and defangs the threat.