Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think that songs containing offensive language are not suitable to be played in shops?

57 replies

Steinerino · 21/02/2014 13:02

I was in York on Tuesday and I went into Urban Outfitters to buy a bag I had seen on the website. I was with my 2 children aged 6 & 8.

I noticed that the music being played in the shop contained the words mother fr, nr, bitch & f*k. Repeatedly.

In my opinion these words are offensive, racist and misogynistic and unsuitable for public airing particularly when there a may be children around. I felt strongly enough about this and so complained to a member of staff that I felt this was unsuitable music to be played in a public place. Her attitude I felt was not apologetic and she said it wasn't their fault because they have no control over the music played in store and anyway there was a parental advisory notice on the door. I had a good look after leaving and couldn't see any warning notice. I left without making a purchase.

I know I am too old to fall within their target market but surely this is shortsighted to possibly alienate a group of potential shoppers? Prior to this I was a regular shopper there.

Is this a sign that I'm extremely old and out of touch with what's acceptable or would others have found this offensive?

OP posts:
MrsCosmopilite · 22/02/2014 14:03

I've never been in UO but not sure I will now. I hate loud music when I shop, and I find many things that are given radio play to be inappropriate for the time of day, but I suppose that many people don't listen to the lyrics.

I commented on another thread about someone reading a book, which a couple of colleagues deemed 'offensive' based on their few seconds glance of the cover. In that case, the problem is the colleagues, not the person in the book. However, having no option but to hear offensive lyrics is unacceptable. Putting a 'parental guidance' sticker on the door of the shop is equally ridiculous.

I'd be more receptive to 'edgy' music at home (personal choice), or at a piercing or tattoo salon - rightly or wrongly so.

SirChenjin · 22/02/2014 14:08

Adds Urban Outfitters to my list of shops who will not get my money

I bloody hate this - it's got nothing to do with gender politics and everything to do with challenging the stereotypes that this music promotes. If that means making a stand and saying, actually - that's offensive, then so be it. Fine if you want to make a personal choice to listen to that sort of crap, not fine in a public space to have it imposed on you.

grimbletart · 22/02/2014 14:32

I wish someone could give me a logical reason why any shop (other than a music shop) should play music at all? Oh, for the bliss of silence. Oh for the blissful days when you could go into a pub or restaurant and actually have a conversation instead of being drowned out by this infernal musak.

SomethingkindaOod · 22/02/2014 14:33

My list of places I don't like to shop in is getting longer.. I hate loud music in shops anyway but offensive songs? No. Just no.
I worked in Woolies too, we used to stick to utterley bland as possible chart music or seasonal stuff.
Until we closed, then there would be a mob rush to the music desk to put the heavy metal on!

Steinerino · 22/02/2014 14:56

My husband posted a complaint about this in the York UO FB page and rather than answer it, they deleted it! How rude! Feel free to to add your feelings to there pages. Thanks.

OP posts:
Steinerino · 22/02/2014 14:58

Sorry for bad grammar, don't know how to edit!

OP posts:
Paragon59 · 19/07/2014 23:57

I have had this problem too, from about 14 to 5 years ago, and now have a post-traumatic stress disorder trigger as a result, set off by hearing bleeped broadcasting. I never used to have problems with that: and it wasn't bleeped versions so much that got me - instead altered sounds of words, that sound too close to the original and just add an unpleasantness onto it, or 'silences' that imply the words - or often, I later discovered, more severe words than were in the original - although even a bleeped version did get me. I find it more uncomfortable with it's 'hidden' nature yet you 'know' what it is. It stands out more and makes it impossible to pretend others do not know. At one stage, it was happening nearly every other day, when I was in my gym, with people around me. You should count yourself lucky that you managed to speak to the member of staff - I couldn't even bring myself to do so, because of the nature of my upset, I didn't want even to discuss the matter and was quite unable to do so face-to-face. Instead, letter after more private letter followed, during which the gym owner very much compounded the offence by the manner of their replies. On one occasion, a member of staff at the reception told me they 'couldn't control what they broadcast' and made me feel very uncomfortable (I think he failed to realise he was doing that).

Yet, during some of this I did once encounter an unaltered version of a song which contained the same words and also language such as "suck my cock" playing out in one of the local music shops. That didn't cause me offence at all, indeed I found it rather funny - at least it had a subversive and 'naughty' aspect to it that is just totally lacking in the (allegedly) 'censored' versions that, if they censor anything, merely censor part of the sound and often not the meaning (or otherwise replace the original meaning with some far worse implication meaning). They make such an issue of the language that, then, has me making an issue and having an issue with it, that tells me it is offensive (the last thing I wish to know when it is physically making me strongly and severely uncomfortable) and is more in my face. Sometimes the words themselves can be indistinct originally and I can 'pretend' they aren't they or that others around me might have missed them. But not so with the (unsuitable-for) "radio" versions.

However this was in a specialist music shop - and was 'just like watching a film' (in other words inoffensive) - it would not necessarily have been the same in a clothes shop with children or in a gym.

As regards MrsDmitriTippensKrushnic

"They definitely used to produce shop-friendly versions of albums. I still have a couple of CDs from when I worked at Woolies which had all the swearing muted ... which HO sent out to play during opening hours."

Oh no, these are the very songs every one of which would cause me serious (that is emotional) offence. And they're not "shop-friendly" at all.

Regarding Marylou2, where the bartender switched off immediately - wouldn't that have been too late, as the offensive lyric had already been played (assuming that there were no further examples of offensive lyrics later in the same song)?

The radio version of Gold Digger, on at least one occasion, managed to get me.

Steinerino "I emailed Urban Outfitter once over this and received an apology the same day. They said the stores are issued with cds of radio versions of songs and that they had spoken to the store in question (Oxford Circus) for playing the wrong version"

Oh no! So now they're going to be playing the wrong version, the radio version that gets me. Instead of that, they should play the right version instead, such as the original in certain circumstances (although I stress not others). In fact, neither is probably appropriate - the radio version slightly less so.

Orangeisthenewbanana
"It's not that difficult to compile a CD of any kind of music that's "radio-friendly" as it were."

Except that it does seem very difficult for these people (the radio programmers who choose to play music). The "radio" versions are not suitable for the radio, or TV, for me. Not even those versions. They raise the matter of the issue of swearing and the words themselves even more for me, and give me a greater problem with them.

60sname
"It's not the cussing I had a problem with, it was the misogynistic lyrics: "Bitch, you're breakfast ' repeated ad nauseum"

For me it would be more the 'cussing' (whatever you mean by that) rather than the emotionally (on me) mild word "bitch", that is rationally more severe but emotionally isn't, except that the altered sound version or the signature remnant version of the word "bitch" does cause me severe offence and has done so on several occasions on different gym sessions. It sounds even more annoying and adds annoyance onto the offence that, in that form, it is telling me about and making clear. (I don't wish to be told! I know that it is - except that, personally to me, it isn't, in most circumstances except that where I am being caused offence, to tell me it is offensive on top is the last thing I want to know or to be made clear as I am being offended by it and doing so draws attention to the language and is, therefore, for that reason, more offensive.)

SomethingkindaOod
"...I hate loud music in shops anyway but offensive songs? No. Just no.
I worked in Woolies too, we used to stick to utterley bland as possible chart music or seasonal stuff...."

Except that the problem is with the chart music these days.

I'm sorry if I've sounded a bit annoyed (e.g. in the "therefore, for that reason,") except that the message does not appear to get through to other people sometimes as to why it causes me severe offence, although it just does and that's it. (I shouldn't need to be justifying my offence - it is scientific and demonstrable in its impact of causing upset/depression to me. It is a matter of fact, not opinion. Sorry I'm getting real bugbear about this and I know I've gone on, but perhaps needed to get this off my chest.)

Finally, as regards your original question, which I know did not want an answer and I am sorry if this appears to be blunt, but yes I think you are being unreasonable to think this isn't suitable for the shops. Judging by me obviously being unreasonable about the persistent and continual offensive material played every time I went to the gym. (I am no longer physically able to go by the way - I last went in 2009 - after being caused, on that occasion, absolute profound serious gross offence at the culmination of many weeks and months of it, severe continual heart-racing that persisted for days and resulted in me seeking medical treatment, and thus I am no longer getting any exercise.)

I note the post refers to offensive "language". I suspect this was just a turn of phrase, although "language" does not have to be spoken words but, for example, can be "body" language. So that the dirty (inappropriate and worse, for the place they are played) songs that the record companies claim to be "clean" - still contain "language", namely a method of communication.

And regards "offensive lyrics", the lyric "you know what the .... I mean", where the "...." is an implied moment of silence is itself an offensive lyric as "...." means "fuck".

Lily Allen's 'Not Fair' - yes, the radio version of that has managed to cause me emotional offence. I haven't yet encountered the original version played for me in a circumstance in which it was inappropriate. But the radio version is so more widespread and has offended me on numerous occasions. If this is the one, is the one where she goes "so ...ing fantastic". What gets me is that they do not have it say "so very fantastic" and thus make it a clean version, instead it's not exactly like "...." but you can hear her, sounding as if saying it under her breath, with the signature clearly heard and like printing the full first four letters of the seven-letter word in light pencil (and thereby standing out) and also unacceptable for children to imitate even the way in which she is being caused to say it (sounding as if the full word under her breath) in the radio version of the song. I would not do it that way, in any circumstances and it is more annoying. When it was so easy to have done a version that would not cause offence (saying "so very fantastic"), yet they choose not to do so but to broadcast offensive material instead ('offensive' in the serious emotional sense and not the fairly harmless more rational).

Finally - I've gone on and on - I don't have children, though I have been told perhaps it would be very different if I did and sometimes - get this! - I wish that I did as it might then be taken to give more validity to my opinions - just a comment on how it seems, sometimes, people's views appear to be given, in some circumstances, greater value than others - and quite wrong in my opinion (of course, I'm talking within the bounds of rational debate and not, for example, the opinions of child abusers about abusing kids).

That said, what is "abuse"? I believe my parents and teachers in particular did me, in retrospect, immense harm by 'protecting' me from certain words in my childhood - and are probably the root of why I have had such problems (from 2000-2009 in the gym) ever since. That's certainly caused me damage into my adulthood and resulted in the very thing that has, over culmination of constant incidents over time, ended with me having PTSD.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page