The PMRC vs. Music: How the “Parental Advisory” Sticker Came to Be, and Why it’s Still Important
As the summer of 1985 was heating up, so was music. A-ha released their debut album, Hunting High and Low, Guns N’ Roses took the stage for the first time, and it was the summer of the iconic Live Aid concert. However, at the same time that all these major moments were happening, there was a subversive force gearing up to take on the music industry. The Parents Resource Music Center, or PMRC, was formed by a group of the wives of powerful Washington politicians with the purpose of increasing parents’ control over the music their children were listening to by placing a warning label on explicit albums. The PMRC shook the world of music when their efforts eventually culminated in Senate hearings on the issue of so-called “porn rock.”
The hearings took place on September 19, 1985 in Washington D.C. to determine the need for industry standard reviews on rock music. Leading the charge for the PMRC was Tipper Gore, wife of then-Senator Al Gore. She was joined by the other founders of the PMRC, Susan Baker, wife of then-Secretary of the Treasury James Baker, Pam Howar, the wife of Washington realtor Raymond Howar, and Sally Nevius, former Washington City Council Chairman John Nevius’ wife. The PMRC came into the hearing with a list of fifteen songs they had determined to be obscene, dubbing them the “Filthy Fifteen.” Prince’s song “Darling Nikki” topped the list and was joined by songs from artists such as Black Sabbath, Madonna, and Twisted Sister, among others. The PMRC claimed that these songs (and many others beyond the “Filthy Fifteen”) promoted violence, drug use, sexual deviance, and the occult through their lyrics, music videos, and cover art. Gore argued that parents were unable to properly monitor the music their children were listening to. To combat this problem, she advocated for warning labels on albums similar to the film rating system. In her words, the PMRC was “asking the recording industry to voluntarily assist parents who are concerned by placing a warning label on music products inappropriate for younger children due to explicit sexual or violent lyrics.”
Tipper Gore & Susan Baker (Art by Wyatt Warren)
A surprising combination of musicians stepped up in opposition to Gore and the PMRC, Frank Zappa, Dee Snider, and John Denver among them. All three of these artists defended the rights of free speech and artistic expression. Zappa declared, “The PMRC proposal is an ill-conceived piece of nonsense which fails to deliver any real benefits to children [and] infringes the civil liberties of people who are not children.” Snider called out the PMRC for misinterpreting the music of his band, Twisted Sister, testifying: “Ms. Gore claimed that one of my songs, ‘Under the Blade,’ had lyrics encouraging sadomasochism, bondage, and rape. The lyrics she quoted have absolutely nothing to do with these topics. On the contrary, the words in question are about surgery and the fear that it instills in people.” Denver also claimed that his music was being misinterpreted and pointed out how problematic assigning an arbitrary moral watchdog would be. He even went so far as to draw comparisons between the censorship that the PMRC was advocating for to censorship in Nazi Germany, asserting “the suppression of the people of a society begins in my mind with the censorship of the written or spoken word. It was so in Nazi Germany. It is so in many places today where those in power are afraid of the consequences of an informed and educated people.”
John Denver (Art by Wyatt Warren)
Despite the points these artists made about freedom of expression and the dangers of censorship, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) agreed to put a general label, what we now know as the “Parental Advisory” label, on albums at their own discretion, even before the hearings had ended. As a result, some stores, such as Walmart, refused to sell any albums with the label or only sold them to adults. The “Parental Advisory” sticker has become so recognizable to modern music audiences that it can be difficult to comprehend its impact. But even today, the label continues to affect the way music is created and consumed.
As time has passed since the adoption of the warning label, many people have tried to determine whether it’s actually effective in shielding children from what the RIAA considers “mature” themes in music. Overwhelmingly, it has been found to be ineffective in that regard. In fact, denoting which albums contain profanity or references to violence may even trigger the psychological “forbidden fruit effect” for consumers. Artists themselves might see the label as a legitimizing factor that solidifies their position as a “real” musician.
The “Parental Advisory” sticker greatly affects the manner in which musicians create their music. Artists must attempt to exercise their creative freedom while simultaneously catering to the discretion of an arbitrary authority, the RIAA. It is also worth noting which artists in particular are being targeted. Although the PMRC had rock music in mind when they went to the senate in 1985, rap has come to dominate American music since the 90s. A small percentage of rock albums are marked with the “Parental Advisory” sticker, whereas over half of rap albums have the label. This raises an important question: does the RIAA simply target whatever the popular music of the era is, or is there an ulterior goal of targeting specific genres, like rap, that are heavily influenced by Black artists? And the sticker is only the most immediate sign of the RIAA’s intervention with musicians’ work. They can go so far as to change musicians’ lyrics, and even remove entire songs from albums.
As we move into an age in which freedom of speech is constantly being redefined and examined, it is important to consider freedom of expression in the arts and who, if anyone, has the right to censor albums. As the sales of physical albums drop in favor of streaming services, it could be asked whether the “Parental Advisory” sticker even matters anymore. It does, and not simply because digital versions of songs can also be labeled explicit. While it might seem inconsequential to remove a curse word here or there, censorship threatens the integrity of a musician's artistic expression. More concerning than potentially offensive language is the fact that there exists a money-hungry, removed power with the ability to alter the words of an artist. Artists’ prevailing commitment to free expression through edgy lyrics and album art that would probably make Tipper Gore and the PMRC run for the hills proves that despite the creation of the “Parental Advisory” sticker, the PMRC did not truly win. Music will always be an art form that tests the boundaries of social norms.
Edited by Maia Driggers, editor of Music History
Cover art by Wyatt Warren