FrostyWinnipeg Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/arts-and-life/entertainment/music/former-rock-star-gary-glitter-convicted-in-britain-of-string-of-sex-abuse-offences-290934361.html End of Rock n Roll Part 2 played at sporting events? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 I thought they stopped playing that years ago. He's been a known pedophile for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 They did stop. For a few months and then right back to playing it. Im sure this will be no different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RagingIce Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 They shouldn't stop playing it. You have to separate the art from the artist or you'll be excluding a lot of historical works from the public lexicon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 The issue is enriching him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted February 6, 2015 Report Share Posted February 6, 2015 http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/will-infamous-singer-gary-glitters-latest-sex-crimes-conviction-finally-convince-nhl-teams-to-stop-playing-his-music/ Will infamous singer Gary Glitter’s latest sex crimes conviction finally convince NHL teams to stop playing his music? By: Adam Proteau on February 6, 2015 Gary Glitter, real name Paul Gadd, leaves a London court in November of 2014 after being charged with sex crimes. (Ben A. Pruchnie/Getty Images) Notorious British musician Gary Glitter was found guilty Thursday in London of multiple sex crimes with minors, and if you’re wondering how this awful man has a connection to hockey, rest assured, you’re not the only one. Here’s why: Glitter’s hit song, “Rock and Roll, Part 2″, continues to be played at NHL arenas. It’s astonishing that teams feel justified in using it despite Glitter’s numerous sex crime convictions prior to this latest one – and the use of his music needs to end. Today. The 70-year-old Glitter was convicted of one count of attempted rape, one count of sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 13, and four counts of indecent assault. The charges all are in relation to crimes he committed against three girls in the 1970s; he’ll be sentenced February 27th and could receive the maximum sentence for unlawful sex with a minor of life in prison. And the former “glam rock” star, whose heyday came in the 1970s, has been found guilty of sex offenses with minors in courts around the world: in 1999, he was convicted of possessing child pornography (an offense for which he served a four-month prison sentence); in 2003, he was deported from Cambodia to Vietnam after sexual abuse allegations; and in 2006, he was sentenced to three years in a Vietnamese prison for sexually abusing two girls. And yet, even with that information in the public domain, NHL teams have continued to play “Rock and Roll, Part 2″. The Colorado Avalanche still use the original version as their goal song. The Florida Panthers and Nashville Predators used it in their goal song celebrations last season. The San Jose Sharks use a muzak version for their goal song. This is all so unnecessarily stubborn and, quite simply, unacceptable. Try and put yourself into the shoes of a sexual assault survivor – or someone whose life has been affected by sexual abuse – who is in attendance at an NHL game. Let’s say, for argument’s sake, you’re also an Avs fan and you’re in Denver at the Pepsi Center. Colorado scores, and at the moment you should be cheering as loudly as you can and revelling in your team scoring a goal, you’re instead confronted by the work of a man whom you know has committed these heinous acts. Do you really feel like cheering anymore? Or has somebody’s insistence on playing this song transported you back to moments in your life when you were in great pain? The answer is clear. When you should be thinking about sports, you’re forced to think about a human predator, and the agony they’ve caused. That’s not what people are paying for when they buy tickets to a game. Some will say that there should be no connection made between someone’s art and the person behind it, but this isn’t realistic. We’re seeing now that, with disgraced celebrities such as Bill Cosby and Jian Ghomeshi, the perception of any individual’s work can be altered forever by new information that’s come to the public’s attention. Tell me, Avalanche and Sharks game operations people – would you play a Cosby routine during the intermission right now? Of course you wouldn’t. The legendary comedian’s actions have made him a pariah, and no professional sports team would have anything to do with him. That’s what should’ve happened to Glitter and “Rock and Roll, Part 2″ in NHL circles, but that hasn’t happened – at least, not when it comes to all teams. That said, the Panthers now use a different goal song this season. And to the Predators’ credit, they realized the error of their ways and announced last summer they would no longer play Glitter’s music. “We try to take as much input from our fans as we can get,” Predators president and chief operating officer Sean Henry told RinksideReport.com. “But even if we had zero input from our fans, a lot of people have a tough time just stepping up and saying, ‘This is wrong.’ Being associated with someone like that was just wrong.” It is wrong, but apparently, not wrong enough for the Avalanche and Sharks. They still believe they can associate their team and their brand with a monster. If they don’t want to stop using Glitter’s music, the NHL must step in and ban it for them. There are all sorts of exciting songs the teams could choose that wouldn’t upset people the way this one does. Ultimately, the artist behind the art does matter. And when the artist proves to be a revolting criminal, it’s a revolting crime to continue promoting their work. FrostyWinnipeg and basslicker 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basslicker Posted February 10, 2015 Report Share Posted February 10, 2015 They shouldn't stop playing it. You have to separate the art from the artist or you'll be excluding a lot of historical works from the public lexicon It's absolutely worth putting the artist together with the art. And if they're pieces of garbage, their art should suffer. People need to held accountable for their crimes. Would you listen to music written by Josef Stalin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted February 10, 2015 Report Share Posted February 10, 2015 Its a difficult debate because there are plenty pieces of sh!t out there who make great music. Didnt Axl Rose beat the crap out of several of his GF's? One of the Rolling Stone's dated a minor too, no? I love Rock & Roll Part II but if Im in management of a sports team, I would have pulled that from the playlist years ago. Its just the right thing to do and being a good corporate citizen. Would i delete it from my personal playlist? Well....its not on my playlist so I dont have to make that decision. but if it came on the radio, I wouldnt change channels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RagingIce Posted February 10, 2015 Report Share Posted February 10, 2015 They shouldn't stop playing it. You have to separate the art from the artist or you'll be excluding a lot of historical works from the public lexicon It's absolutely worth putting the artist together with the art. And if they're pieces of garbage, their art should suffer. People need to held accountable for their crimes. Would you listen to music written by Josef Stalin? If Stalin made some decent music then I would have no problem listening to it. People still listen to the Beetles and we all know how John Lennon beat his wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
basslicker Posted February 10, 2015 Report Share Posted February 10, 2015 They shouldn't stop playing it. You have to separate the art from the artist or you'll be excluding a lot of historical works from the public lexicon It's absolutely worth putting the artist together with the art. And if they're pieces of garbage, their art should suffer. People need to held accountable for their crimes. Would you listen to music written by Josef Stalin? If Stalin made some decent music then I would have no problem listening to it. People still listen to the Beetles and we all know how John Lennon beat his wife. Did he? Sorry, not a Beatles fan. Makes me not like them even more if that's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatty Liver Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 Might as well add Elvis, Jerry Lee, Ronnie Wood, Vic Toews and countless others to your list of criminals while you're at it. Any of them prosecuted??? I hate ******* censorship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 Might as well add Elvis, Jerry Lee, Ronnie Wood, Vic Toews and countless others to your list of criminals while you're at it. Any of them prosecuted??? I hate ******* censorship. You think not playing (and paying for) music of a convicted child abuser is censorship? Or did I misunderstand? Because that's like saying you think child porn should be legal in the name of fighting censorship. I don't believe those guys you mentioned were ever convicted of anything. So very different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatty Liver Posted February 13, 2015 Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 Might as well add Elvis, Jerry Lee, Ronnie Wood, Vic Toews and countless others to your list of criminals while you're at it. Any of them prosecuted??? I hate ******* censorship. You think not playing (and paying for) music of a convicted child abuser is censorship? Or did I misunderstand? Because that's like saying you think child porn should be legal in the name of fighting censorship. I don't believe those guys you mentioned were ever convicted of anything. So very different. You're close to defending a perilous argument. "If you're not with us you're with the child pornographers" Vic Toews the man who impregnated his babysitter and now sits on the Court of Queen's Bench. It's music not child pornography. Do you think we should we burn all of Leonardo da Vinci's paintings and writings because he had a predilection for young boys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted February 13, 2015 Report Share Posted February 13, 2015 Was Vic's babysitter under the age of 16? Does Da Vinci collect royalties? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted February 27, 2015 Report Share Posted February 27, 2015 Sentenced to 16 years http://m.bbc.com/news/uk-31657929 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted March 1, 2015 Report Share Posted March 1, 2015 They shouldn't stop playing it. You have to separate the art from the artist or you'll be excluding a lot of historical works from the public lexicon It's absolutely worth putting the artist together with the art. And if they're pieces of garbage, their art should suffer. People need to held accountable for their crimes. Would you listen to music written by Josef Stalin? If Stalin made some decent music then I would have no problem listening to it. People still listen to the Beetles and we all know how John Lennon beat his wife. That's Yoko you're talking about.... Lots of fans would have applauded John as she's still despised & hated. And just to be clear it's the Beatles... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted March 1, 2015 Report Share Posted March 1, 2015 Glitter's song should be expunged from existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now