I believe that the artist is mostly responsible for being a role model for children, if that is the target audience they want. It an artist is making music and trying to be a role model for children, they are entirely responsible for being a role model to what they do. The artist chooses what they create, how they dress and how they act in front of people. All artists should take into account who may be watching or listening to their creations, and should be ware that children are being exposed to it.
If an artist wants to be a role model for children, they are taking full responsibility for what they expose the children too, and should think about the appropriate way to dress, behave, and what they can include in their material. They control how they are, and how they appear to the world, and in the end it is their say so on what they expose the world to. If they say they want children to listen to their stuff and then run around almost half naked, they are ultimately responsible for the children who watch. An artist needs to remember who is their main target audience in order to write and act appropriately.
If an artist doesn’t say they are a role model for kids, then they can’t be held responsible for what the kids watch. That is the parent’s responsibility. The parents should be the ultimate censorship for their children. If they do not want their children watching something, they shouldn’t allow their children to see it. If the artist doesn’t claim to be a role model for the kids, then the parents cannot blame them for ‘corrupting’ their children. Parents can keep their children from watching material they don’t want the kids exposed to, and if they don’t put any blocks or restrictions on the children, they can’t get angry and blame the artist.
Mostly, it is the parent’s responsibility, because they should control what their kids see and hear. Parents should take responsibility if they’re child is exposed to something that they find offensive, especially if they took no precautions to stop their children. The parents that do take precautions, and make sure they let their children watch only what they deem appropriate have little to know problems with the sometimes offensive stuff artists will say and do. The artists should not be blamed for expressing themselves, unless they called themselves a role model for kids.
And even in that case, the parents should still be involved with their children’s lives. That way they can see who is an appropriate model or artist for their child to see. This way, even if their child is exposed to something they think if offensive, they can stop it or explain it to their child so that they understand it. Parents are an important part of children’s lives, and if they don’t censor what their child watches, then they can’t complain about what’s on the media.
I completely agree with your blog but what do you have to say about the kids that do not have parents or have to turn to this type of view of the world because there simply is no other? I wrote about that in my blog but I wanted to know what other people who chose the same blog topic as me wrote. I talked about how much of the responsibility can be put on the artists because they should know what type of standard they are set at by the people who watch them. They should be at least slightly considerate of others and recognize that they can be blamed for this type image they put out. But it is so true about kids with parents who have these types of protection. If you have a child you need to be the role model and teach them the things that you want them to understand. You can't let their opinions on life be completely dominated by images they see in media or by famous people. If they don't like it they can tune it out because they really don't have a reason to complain if their child seeks that way of understanding.
ReplyDelete“I believe that the artist is mostly responsible for being a role model for children, if that is the target audience they want.”
ReplyDeleteWrong. Target audience has everything to do with how one conducts oneself. If they’re acting appropriately for children, lewd things won’t be happening. If they’re trying to break away from a child/young adult audience then they’ll make it a point to structure what they’re doing to force themselves away from a child audience.
“If an artist wants to be a role model for children, they are taking full responsibility for what they expose the children too, and should think about the appropriate way to dress, behave, and what they can include in their material.”
I refer you to my previous statement. If children are the target audience then the role of whomever is targeting them will act appropriately.
“If an artist doesn’t say they are a role model for kids, then they can’t be held responsible for what the kids watch. That is the parent’s responsibility.”
It is always the parents responsibility. No matter what another individual says. And honestly, what are the statistics on people saying word for word that they WANT to be a child’s role model for life? Not high I would imagine.
Also, delving further, are you implying that said “role model” is never allowed to change, grow up or make mistakes? That’s unreasonable. It’s foolish to allow children the delusion of perfect humans that don’t make mistakes; what if they never learn to accept people for who they are or the mistakes they make themselves? It’s also unfair to tell a human being to be above humanity. To be virtuous at all times when it’s impossible, especially when we as “normal” individuals don’t have a light shined on our private lives. It’s easy to point the finger and back others into an impossible corner when it’s not ourselves.