Behind the Headlines

Went to the Freedom Sings performance last night - it was great. Though, as most people pointed out, it would have been better if more people had attended (nudge, nudge). I think this is how most history and/or educational things should be taught - singing, video, talking, audience participation, etc.

It really got me thinking about our First Amendment rights - as a journalist and a human. As they put it in the presentation, the Bill of Rights and more broadly the Constitution is a contract between the people and its government. I feel like there’s such a disconnect between the behemoth federal government and everyday life though that most people forget we’re supposed to be in control.

It also jolted me to think that these songs that are now relegated to classic rock or easy listening stations - and the frozen foods section at the grocery store as Freedom Sings pointed out - are considered background noise. What used to be so powerful and socially important has now become limp.

Vietnam was one of the major eras of songs that delivered messages. While there is still music being made that comments on the political situation, I’m not sure what context it fits in. What I mean is, in the 60s and 70s, were these songs played all the time? Were they taken seriously? Were they considered anthems or pop music? If something is political now, it seems to either be criticized or mocked, gaining steam only under the radar. Why have comparisons between Vietnam and the Iraq war been so downplayed?

One of the statistics they sited during the Freedom Sings presentation was this: Directly following 9-11, 1 out of every 2 Americans felt the First Amendment went too far in guaranteeing rights for citizens. Now, they said, that is at 1 out of every five - or 20 percent. Is that acceptable?

(That title is taken from an Ani DiFranco song about speaking one’s mind.)