[Commie Basher]

Notice how the media doesn't ask her if war is an acceptable answer if there is a Democrat in charge?

Notice how FReepers are outraged when MTV censors anti-Hilary boos, but when the Grammys censor anti-Bush statements, that's just fine.

[mewzilla]

Ms. Crow could still say it. No-one was holding a gun to her head to keep her quiet. Telling, though, isn't it that she shut up anyway. So much for principle.

[Lunatic Fringe]

I did watch the Grammys and there were not many anti-war or anti-American statements...

But the funniest line of the night is when one of the presenters was reading the teleprompter and she actually read out loud "[applause]".

Also, Eminem kept singing after his song ended and looked around kind of bewildered when he realized he screwed up. LOL!

[Just mythoughts]

So do you think CBS was right in passing the word not to make it political?


Could there be another motive here, that CBS did not want to be required to give free air time to the opposition?

[Jeff Chandler]

Notice how FReepers are outraged when MTV censors anti-Hilary boos, but when the Grammys censor anti-Bush statements, that's just fine.

In the first case the firefighters and policemen were expressing disgust towards a politician who dispises them and was attempting to gain from their pain, and in the second case, a pop star was trying to spit in the eye of the aforementioned civil servants.

[RobFromGa]

The Grammies claim they didn't censor anyone. If they had any real conviction, the loonies would had spouted off what they think, but they don't have convictions, they're just being "hip" (Garafolo).

And, spouting in front of main-stream America would have probably stunted or killed some careers

[jpl]

Notice how FReepers are outraged when MTV censors anti-Hilary boos, but when the Grammys censor anti-Bush statements, that's just fine.

Neither incident is "censorship", and furthermore you're comparing apples and oranges.

[VRWCmember]

Notice how FReepers are outraged when MTV censors anti-Hilary boos, but when the Grammys censor anti-Bush statements, that's just fine.

Equating the two is a bit of a stretch. MTV misrepresented an event by producing a DVD of the live event, but editing out the boos to make it appear that hillary was cheered by the firemen/policemen at the event -- a fraudulent misrepresentation of the reality of the event.

Here, the ORGANIZERS of an event, i.e. the property owners, tell the guests to behave themselves appropriately and refrain from using the event as a soapbox for their political agenda. As the owner of the event, the Grammy committee has a reasonable right to make such a demand on the people who will appear there. If these idiots want to pontificate on their political agenda, let them buy the airtime somewhere else rather than squatting on someone else's property.

[par4]

First, It was VH1, not MTV that put out a video with the soundtrack altered to eliminate the boos when Hillary! appeared on stage.

Second, there is a huge difference between deliberatly changing the historical record of an event to distort the crowd response (how would it seem if you were to take a video of MLK's "I have a dream speech" and change the crowd response to boos) and telling a performer to stick to what they are there for, entertaining, not "educating". After all Ed Sullivan told the Rolling Stones to change "Let's spend the night together" to "Let's spend some time together" and they agreed, then did it the right way anyway. If Sheryl wanted to make a statement she could have, it's her career to destroy.

[Texas2step]

"Notice how FReepers are outraged when MTV censors anti-Hilary boos, but when the Grammys censor anti-Bush statements, that's just fine."

And done in both cases to protect the stupid liberals.

In NY, Hitlery was booed big time by FDNY members. Now, how's that going to play in the Heartland? Isn't it going to make Hitlerly look bad to be booed by her constituents? I know that we sure thought it did.

Now, if the Celebrinazi's spew forth their anti-American diatribe, who's going to look bad in the Heartland? Not President Bush, it's the stupid celebrinazi's that will come off looking stupid.

BOTH of these instances further indict liberal hollyweird.

[Rastus]

Notice how FReepers are outraged when MTV censors anti-Hilary boos, but when the Grammys censor anti-Bush statements, that's just fine.

I watch neither MTV nor the Grammys, so I don't give a damn what happens on either. I'm simply responding to Crow's comments. And, it would be nice if she were made to explain exactly which wars are okay in her world.