nstitution to protect the musician from the oppressive hand of government. Now, by contrast, the new communications technologies require that government work hand in glove with music companies...."(Lawrence K. Grossman, in Columbia Journalism Review) Who shall protect freedom of speech in this new system, and is it even necessary?
             Music is the language of the soul. In the past, the musician's right to control his work was not in question. This has begun to change in recent years, however, as the lyrics to popular music have become more explicit. Is a rap group portraying real life in the ghetto, or a heavy-metal band singing about suicide, protected as artistic expression? Or do these songs really influence society, becoming a cause of violence and hate instead of merely an expression of them? Is government censorship of offensive and violent lyrics a way to improve society, or simply a means of controlling artists who offend the wrong people?
             Regulation of the music industry is necessary. "Like tobacco executives, artists and record moguls who market death bare at least some responsibility for the consequences of their work." -- Jonathan Alter, Newsweek, Nov. 29,1993. "We need to acknowledge that there are obviously some correlation's between the constant, negative, violent messages that are being put out in rap and the violence that exists out there in the real world." Nathan McCall, Newsweek, Nov. 29, 1993. "Supreme Court Justice Holmes said it: free speech does not include the right to yell 'fire!' in a crowded theater. The lyrics of 'Cop Killer' go a lot further than that. They celebrate the murder of police officers." Charlton Heston, The National Review, Aug. 17, 1992. Musicians' right to expression should not be infringed upon. "The song [Cop Killer] is fiction, not fact. At no point do I go out and say, 'Let's do it.' I am singing in the first person as a character who is fed up with police brutality. I ain't ...