3 ms·
This brings up a point I often ponder: should the records of horrific criminals be cancelled? Consider the two extremes: A) artist is never played again, no mo
by gosub100 6mo ago
This brings up a point I often ponder: should the records of horrific criminals be cancelled? Consider the two extremes:
A) artist is never played again, no more royalties are paid. Nobody gets to enjoy the music.
B) the artist's estate is sold to a victims compensation trust, that collects, say, $4m/year that gets distributed to victims and charities. You still hear their song occasionally on the radio and gradually forget about their plight over the years.
Which one brings the victims closer to justice?
- philipallstar 6mo agoThis is an incomplete dichotomy. Option a) means the victims never have to hear their abuser's voice again.
- eudamoniac 6mo agoC: they go through the legal justice system which has nothing to do with music, and people continue to play the songs they want to hear
- butlike 6mo agoShould they ban Mein Kampf?
- _sys49152 6mo agoi can seperate art from the artist. why do i need socially performative nannies censoring whether i can watch ren and stimpy or not?