Another Walmart censorship
Serial # 19781010
I received some interesting news from walmart which I think is a
breach of my contentional rights and I think Walmart new policies need
to change. or least be more like a kid about it instead of a political
correct grown up politician. This started about a year ago in my
Walmart I notice more and more of the Joe line started to dwindle and
then 21st century toys disappear completely and this christmas very
few blue box SOTW showed upped. Then the Midge thing was the last
straw. My ladies are into Barbies. So it was hard to find the Pregnant
Midge. for the girls. But mainly upset on the lack of Joes and
accessories on our shelf.
What the letter said from Walmart do to a lot of complaints in our
area about war toys and Pregnant Midge. We deem that in our best
interest not to stock your store with these items do to low selling
prediction.
Man was I fuming low selling prediction my @$$. It like a line of 20
of use waiting like vultures for the next shipment of toys to come in
looking for any 12 " inch action stuff.
Then One day I was in the toy Isle on the hot wheels side I heard a
lady say. I thought I made a complaint about selling war toys here.
I'm going to have a meeting with our Elders. So I walk around just to
see who was saying this and it was a Amish family in the toy isle. I
just shook my head and thought to myself. Oh now I know. Yelp I'm
stuck in the middle of a Amish community and other big religions that
are against certain toys. I mean geeze wiz there are more grossed and
discussing toys then Joe and Barbie on the shelves. I don't see them
being pulled.
I mean Walmart can come up with a better policy like put up a sign
item can be optain the lay away department or make a section in
walmart Do not enter Items in this section may not be approved by some
adults or something. But full censorship of a store base on a group
complaining. Not fair to the rest of us shoppers.
I mean I can see a recall for a safety or defect issue. But once a
big chain store buys from the manufacture and then pulls it after
groups complain about it is to me violating my freedom of choice. I
feel like now I'm being told what I can buy or can not buy. Base where
I live.
If I had the money to sue I would put in one for violation of freedom
of choice. This just my option. I mean I went off on a rant about
exclusive a few years back. How I think only companies should offer
exclusive . Not chain stores. I mean get mad when a year later I see
the same Item show up in a None Logo Store company box. To me that not
a exclusive. when they do that.
Well let me know Sand boxers anybody else having problems with there
stores? Sound Off.
Later
Blade
Support your local scalper shop Ebay.< I been trying to avoid that.
Kevin Coombs
"Serial # 19781010" <linda...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:84854vkluqmkivkmb...@4ax.com...
Gareee
late, and in hitting every damned toy store around, I can only find the
pricier model like 21st century stuff, and regular model kits! There are
virtually no toy tanks anywhere anymore. Very odd indeed!
--
Gareee©
Gareee1...@mchsi.com
Homepage: http://www.fortunecity.com/tattooine/ellison/86/mainframe.htm
Custom figures, wallpapers, 3D and More!
RudyPAN
How do they check out? Do they have wooden credit cards?
Sounds like your problem is a spineless store manager. Maybe you could give
him a stern talking to about how unpatriotic it is to NOT stock military toys
at a time when our country is going to war.
Threaten to call the local media---he'll fold.
Later, Rudy
R. Scott Rogers
> Breaching of "contentional rights" is pretty serious stuff! :)
Don't try to deny the guy his right to be contentious. ;-)
On a less jocular note, people need to grow up a bit about this sort of
thing. A business can sell, or not sell, whatever products it wants. That's
called ... drum roll please ... Freedom.
Furthermore, assuming the original poster is concerned about his
constitutional rights, this is just not an issue. The Constitution
enumerates some rights, yes. But these rights do not limit what individuals
or businesses may do to one another, they limit what the government can do
to individuals (and businesses, in some cases). But even if constitutional
rights regulated private relationships, I defy anyone to show me where the
Constitution gives anyone a right to buy merchandise of one's own choosing
at a retailer. There is no such thing as "freedom of choice" in the
Constitution. (There's no right to vote, either, which might surprise some
people; merely a right not to be excluded from voting, which is a different
thing entirely.)
If a bunch of folks in your area have gotten together and persuaded a
merchant not to sell a given product, you have several options. First, you
can take your business elsewhere. This is also called ... drum roll please
... Freedom. Second, you can try to round up your own posse of concerned
citizens to try to persuade the merchant to reverse his decision. This is
called ... drum roll please ... Freedom. Third, you can start your own
business and sell whatever products you darn well please. This is called ...
drum roll please ... Freedom.
Feel free to start invoking your constitutional rights when the government
starts doing things to you. You know, things like throwing you in jail
without charge or access to a lawyer, or preventing you from publishing your
magazine, or fining you for distributing your own computer programs (all
things the federal government has recently done to people). But until the
government starts messing with you, I will have no patience for whining
about violated rights.
And come on, we're talking the sale of toys here!
Scott
--
R. Scott Rogers
srogers at mindspring.com
Wee Kilts for Wee Heroes
http://srogers.home.mindspring.com/macjoe/macjoe.html
BFergu2422
!!!!!!!, boil that dust speck boil that dust speck , boil , boil , Buck
GI Trekker
How do they check out? Do they have wooden credit cards? >>
Hoo-boy, do they ever. My cousins who live in Maryland enjoy visiting Amish
country at times, and they stopped at a Wal-Mart -- I THINK they said Lancaster
Pennsylvania, and the place had sheltered stalls complete with hay for the
horse-drawn carriages they get around in.
<<Sounds like your problem is a spineless store manager. Maybe you could give
him a stern talking to about how unpatriotic it is to NOT stock military toys
at a time when our country is going to war.
Threaten to call the local media---he'll fold.>>
I like the way you think!
Lava Lamp
flag up on this one. I would have to obviously concede that there are no
jurisprudent issues at stake here. However, it would make life a bit more
pleasant if retailers would 'chill out' a bit (that's legal terminology).
Wal-Mart seems to be rather quick to push its morals and values on us
listless hoards of consumers. I'm not saying they should start selling
inflatable love dolls, porn videos, and crack pipes. I am saying that they
shouldn't be so eager to decide what toy is appropriate, or what Eminem
music CD is too offensive to exist.
Yes, you're right. They can sell, or not sell whatever they want. So, why do
I assert that they owe it to us to be reasonable about shoving their
Midwestern Church-Lady poop down our throats? Because the evil b*stards live
in glass houses, that's why. I've personally known former Wal-Mart
employees, and they say they're treated like crap. I wouldn't be surprised
if they flogged the old Greeter every morning. Also, let's not forget all
the small town local merchants that were driven into poverty because a Super
Store landed in their town. My SLR camera is broken; I guess I should take
it down to the Bob's Camera Shop and have it fixed. Ooops, that's right, Bob
was driven out of business when Wal-Mart hit the town. Instead of fixing
cameras, he is working at the paper mill; and I'm forced to buy a new camera
from Sam Walton. Just one of many retail nightmares quietly brought to you
by the folks with the little yellow smiley face. As you might guess, I was
in the retail world (not cameras) and I have seen the double edged sword.
All I'm saying is that Wal-Mart doesn't need to go overboard.
You mentioned that if folks aren't happy with Wal-Mart that they take their
business elsewhere. Good theory, but not always pragmatic. In my town, there
is a Wal-Mart and that's it. I have to drive for 45 minutes to get to
anything else.
On the up side, when Sam Walton stirs from his grave and declares that a
'knocked up' Barbie isn't fit for consumers; that makes me want one all the
more. In fact, it tends to do great things for the Collector market. I drove
45 minutes to find one.
Lava Lamp
_____________________________
Build a man a fire and he will be warm
for a night; set a man on fire and he will
be warm for the rest of his life. -unk
Ddgaff1132
how bout this. the move the war related items towards hobby and tell the amish
they are museum quality minitures (which i feel most are.) if we forget those
who pay/ paid the ultimate price for freedom we become unworthy of thier
efforts.
PS. maybe hasbro could make Amish Joe. if you want accessories, build them
yourself.
Kevin Coombs
"Ddgaff1132" <ddgaf...@wmconnect.com> wrote in message
news:20030206200717...@mb-fr.wmconnect.com...
DN961
you call an amish man with his hand up a horses behind ? ..........[drum roll
please]
...........a mechanic. lololololololol
sorry but i love that joke ..........dan
p.s. just trying to lighten up the situation
RMoore456
>merchant not to sell a given product, you have several options.
Then where do they get the right to force their opinion on the masses? Drum
roll please.....They should use their Freedom and not patronize the business.
If that is not feasible then they should use their Freedom not to enter those
sections of the store that they find offensive!
Ray
Busman
Wal-Mart general manager and she was absolutely horrible on her employees.
Had the attitude that she could always find another one if you don't like it
and was frequently doing just that. Seems to have worked as she got
promoted. Unbelieveable. I'd rather have my toenails ripped out than go
shopping at the local
Wal-Marts. Good news is that in DFW, Texas, you do have a choice.
Andy
"Lava Lamp" <laval...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:BiD0a.3273$1q2.3...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Serial # 19781010
Sorry I started such a Flame war. But I just fume when I see some my
fellow Sand boxers find there 12" Action Men. and I set 100 miles from
the nearest Target or Kmart or a Good Wal Mart and I'm stuck with A
Redneck one. One quoted open a store. I do have partnership with a Toy
collector store here. But the problem is in Whole sell Like I said in
the beginning of the new year I can't compete with chain stores cause
I can't send 1000 units or buy that much stock in or out. I cater to
what I can get at good price and offer the same. In today world if you
don't belong to a big chain not in a Union or what ever might as well
join the Unemployment line and or either draw some Government
benefits. Sorry But that how I see Our Furangie society. I mean These
are toys. I mean get flamed when some seen a vintage G.I. Joe blown
apart. But in my days Joe was cheap and most of that old film. Thank
goodness for Dollar store Knock off Figures. Make good stand in for
Joes. Like I said I'm 43 Native American Not a U.S. person but I tend
to class myself as a earthling. OOps there I go Scotty beam me up. No
pun intended Scott. Just I feel and still A'm in a technical sense a
P.O.W. to the government and now big business just adds to it.
Man I miss the good old days of toys that use to mame hurt and down
right dangerous to play with. remember the Johnny 7 in 1 now I
terrorized my sister with those heavy red bullets. Left good welts. I
was glad Joe came out. and other Action FIgures. hated those plastic
cars and Indians and cowboys. And Ken.
But I draw the line when a chain sell the same Item down the road or
pull a Item cause a few find it wrong. and my local store won't carry
it cause of a prediction in sells. Sorry again to bring it up.
Just I like my Action figures. I got 2 acres cover in them old new
mangle burnt destroyed. some in mint. But a group of us love to play
our 1 six scale ware games. So yes a few joes bite the dust. But it
fun and keep me young. So I got restock all the time.
Later
Blade
Rkmskm
"Don't Drink or Drive"
(thank you thank you, I'm here all week)
Nathan
DaWerewolf
down our throats? They offend ME! PC shit has gone way too far in this country.
Bob Travis
Well, Busman, this thread is an excellent argument for Kazaa and MP3s
and I will tell you why.
I have been reading lately that most Kazaa users download MP3s because
they just want to get to listen to some new music that their radio
doesn't play. MP3 users actually boost the sell of regular CDs.
I like that reasoning and tonight I set to prove them right. I went to
my local Wal-Mart to buy every Eminem CD they had. Guess what? They
didn't have any!!! I asked if they were sold out and they said, no, we
just don't carry Eminem. I couldn't believe it. Afterall they had
Dirrty by Christina Aguilera where, in her video, you can see her dry
humping in a thong all over the stage, but no Eminem. They did have
the 8 mile soundtrack but on the cover it said "edited." In other
words, not the real thing, so my visit to Wal-Mart tonight was a major
disappointment.
To mourn the "loss" I went home and downloaded every Eminem song AND
video I could find. I am just writing this in hopes Eminem will read
it and get all over Wal-Mart's ass because they could have made a
bunch of sales tonight if they weren't so anti-first amendment. If I
want censorship in the arts I will move to a country that like to
censor their people (probably Iraq), bit I live here because I
appreciate my freedom.
So, Slim, if you don't want me to keep using Kazaa and keep using MP3s
then places like Wal-Mart need to get with the Program. People don't
need places like Wal-Mart looking after their interests when they can
do that perfectly well themselves (unless they choose not to do so).
Bob Travis
Parsippany, NJ 07054
J. Steven York
>"Busman" <theb...@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<b1v4c1$emj$1...@slb4.atl.mindspring.net>...
>I have been reading lately that most Kazaa users download MP3s because
>they just want to get to listen to some new music that their radio
>doesn't play. MP3 users actually boost the sell of regular CDs.
Sales of CDs are down 9% last year. If MP3s promote CD sales, then
they're doing a terrible job of it.
>
>I like that reasoning and tonight I set to prove them right. I went to
>my local Wal-Mart to buy every Eminem CD they had. Guess what? They
>didn't have any!!! I asked if they were sold out and they said, no, we
>just don't carry Eminem. I couldn't believe it. Afterall they had
>Dirrty by Christina Aguilera where, in her video, you can see her dry
>humping in a thong all over the stage, but no Eminem. They did have
>the 8 mile soundtrack but on the cover it said "edited." In other
>words, not the real thing, so my visit to Wal-Mart tonight was a major
>disappointment.
You wanted to buy a CD by a foul-mouthed rapper, so you want to a
retailer notorious for their conservative policies and with a history
of censoring even the albums they do carry? Did you go there looking
for Playboy and some XXX videos too?
>
>To mourn the "loss" I went home and downloaded every Eminem song AND
>video I could find. I am just writing this in hopes Eminem will read
>it and get all over Wal-Mart's ass because they could have made a
>bunch of sales tonight if they weren't so anti-first amendment. If I
>want censorship in the arts I will move to a country that like to
>censor their people (probably Iraq), bit I live here because I
>appreciate my freedom.
So you punished the record company and the artist on the logic that
they would somehow CHOOSE not to be in the nation's largest retailer
if they somehow had a choice on it? If somebody deserves to be
punished here, it's Wal-Mart. Companies have no direct control over
who will carry their product. By that logic, you're also justified
going out and stealing a bunch of Dragon soldiers, because Wal-Mart
doesn't carry those either.
>
>So, Slim, if you don't want me to keep using Kazaa and keep using MP3s
>then places like Wal-Mart need to get with the Program. People don't
>need places like Wal-Mart looking after their interests when they can
>do that perfectly well themselves (unless they choose not to do so).
I agree with you about Wal-Mart, and that certainly justifies your
buying your music elsewhere. It isn't like there aren't alternatives
(Amazon or other on-line retailers if nothing else). But Wal-Mart
makes a great excuse for stealing, so hey, they've served their
purpose.
I'm no fan of the music industry, and I think they set themselves up
for the MP3 fall, but nobody should delude themselves about what
they're doing when the download copyright protected music without
paying for it.
>
>Bob Travis
>Parsippany, NJ 07054
J. Steven York - "Bolo, Old Guard," "Bolo, Cold Steel" (Now available from Baen Books)
"Star Trek SCE, Enigma Ship" -
http://www.psiphi.org/cgi/upc-db/XSCE000020.html
VintageGIJoes
Haha, there was no "loss" here! Once you get your driver's license you will be
thanking WM for saving you some money you can use for gas. I am wondering, if
you searched out the "Dirrrty" CD, why didn't you buy it when there was nothing
else you wanted? It certainly would have sufficed in your desire for some
low-end, vulgar entertainment, no?
Also, I am still unable to make the connection between the First Amendment and
WM's right to sell only what they choose to sell. I could understand if WM had
some power to prohibit an artist from excercising their own free speech, but to
choose not to sell their "art" is no violation of the First Amendment. Also,
BTW, it is NOT WM that "edits" vulgar works in order to carry them, it is the
RECORD COMPANY and/or the ARTIST who do that in order to MAKE MORE MONEY.
I am no big fan of WM, but not for this reason, which I think is silly
actually. So buy your vulgar music somewhere else. Big deal.
Aron
Jkpoulos7
>they would somehow CHOOSE not to be in the nation's largest retailer
>if they somehow had a choice on it
I punish m&M and the sleazebzgs that pay for his foul mouth by not buying,
listening or downloading (dont want a virus like m&M corrupting my computer).
If I sold records I'd have no rap section either (except for real old school-
ala "the rappin duke")
RudyPAN
>they're doing a terrible job of it.
There are surveys that show that people who download MP3s are much more likely
to buy CDs than those who don't. Essentially, that means that a sizable number
of MP3 users are just sampling what's out there, the way they used to do when
radio used to actually play music, and not just blathering fools and the same
four songs over and over.
Obviously, others aren't. There are folks who'll download whatever they can
get their hands on. But those are people who wouldn't buy that music in the
first place.
The reason the music industry is in a slump right now is because music today,
sucks, in general. There is good stuff out there, but it's deemed "not
commercial" and banished from the ever-shrinking playlists of radio and music
television outlets.
Seriously, what was the last "Must hear" album that you can remember? There
used to be several each year.
Music-sharing services are a decent, but small way to replace the lack of radio
exposure for new artists. The downside is that some listeners will be
perfectly happy with their MP3s and won't buy any music. This was also true of
free-form FM radio--yet that(coupled with disco music on AM) sparked a long
sustained boom period in the 70s.
I remember campaigns to ban or tax home-taping back in the 80s. This is a
scapegoat that the industry drags out as an excuse everytime they lose touch
with the music-buying public. The slump is getting worse, but not due to
file-sharing.
As fewer and fewer companies control more and more of the record labels and
radio stations, the music slump is fated to continue. Eventually radio will
devolve into a totally useless medium--replaced by home stereos for music, the
internet for immediate news, and television for local information. All it has
going for it is portability. In the end, radio will probably consist entirely
of extreme politics, fart jokes, and traffic reports.
What this means is that nobody really gets the chance to hear new music.
Exposure is so valuable that music acts are falling all over themselves to get
any network television spots that they can---from Leno and Letterman to the
Today Show and Saturday Night Live. An appearence on any of those shows
usually results in a sales boost of several thousand units--sometimes tens of
thousands. And that proves that peopel will go out and buy music IF they're
made aware of it.
And the recent album by rapper and alledged musician 50 Cent is a case where
the release date was moved up as a result of internet leaks, and his album set
a record for first-week sales by a new artist. All his exposure was from MP3s.
So you can see that file-shariing doesn't necessarily cannibalize sales.
Meanwhile, you have Wal Mart demonstrating what happens when one retailer gains
too much market share in an industry. Wal Mart has every right to sell or not
to sell whatever music they wish. However, by low-balling the prices and
running other music stores out of business, they've cornered the market in many
areas.
In approximately 30% of the country, Wal Mart is the only source for current CD
releases within a 30-minute drive. They also refuse to carry some artists and
demand that edited versions are provided by others. That means that 30% of the
country only has access to edited versions of some albums, and an act that gets
banned from Wal Mart doesn't have access to the entire country in terms of
in-store sales.
This is bothersome not because of Wal Mart banning Ememin. It's a concern
because Wal Mart has banned artists in the past for political reasons, and is
likely to do so again in the future. Ask that notorious gangsta-rapper,
Sheryl Crow.
The only response to this is: don't buy CDs at Wal Mart. Go anywhere else and
buy them. If you don't have an option locally, order online.
The lesson to be learned here is that this could happen to the toy industry.
Wal Mart is already the number one retailer of toys in this country. What
would happen to our hobby if they decided that war toys should be banned
nationwide? As this thread demonstrated, they've already done so in some
areas. This is why Formative doesn't go near any potentially risky figures
like Nazis. It wouldn't take a lot to trigger Wal Mart pulling the plug on
entire toy lines or genres.
I know of proposed toy lines that were cancelled because Wal Mart chose not to
order them for whatever reason. That's how much clout they have in the toy
industry.
There is a way to protect the hobby against such a nasty scenario. Support
other toy stores in your area, especially overpriced locally-owned ones. I'm
not saying you should boycott Wal Mart--that'd be foolish. But it's not a bad
idea once in a while to spread your purchases around just to help keep
competition alive.
And the main reason for keeping competiton alive---in the 30% of the country
where Wal Mart is the only music retailer, prices are 20% higher than they are
in the rest of the country. Unless you want to see the price of Joes go up,
you might want to do whatever you can to make sure Wal Mart doesn't become a
monopoly.
Later, Rudy
One more point on Wal Mart's hypocrisy--while they actively screen and ban
movies and CDs for content--they don't bother screening any of the discount CDs
or DVDs that they get when they run a competitor out of business. I've seen
hardcore rap albums--uncensored versions--and "hard R" rated movies dumped in
giant bins in the front of their stores for prices low enough for a small child
to afford. So while you can't go into Wal Mart and buy Marilyn Manson or
Emenim, sometimes you can stroll up to the front of the store and find albums
by Ol Dirty Bastard or the DVD of "I Spit On Your Grave" for less than five
bucks.
Stargdodz
the music industry and its sheer greed and reneged promises. Many years ago I
worked part-time for a major east coast "record" chain (now defunct) and I
bought many LPs and CDs. Back then "the industry" assured the consumers that
when CD sales eclipsed LP sales that prices would drop (prices were around
$11.99 to 15.99). They quickly eclipsed the sagging album sales. Next we were
told they would level out when they surpassed cassette sales. Within two years
that happened. Prices remained high. Here it is now 15 + years later and prices
never dipped and I can barely catch a new release CD for under $13.99 much less
touch a non-sale, non-blockbuster, out of the gate, CD for less that $17.99!!!!
However, I CAN catch an intro DVD of a mega-million dollar widescreen and/or
modified, 2 extra hours of bonus features, alternate ending, multple language
soundtracks, contemporary "gen-you-wine" Hollywood movie from about $14.99 to
$19.99. Huh??? I don't want to hear any doubletalk about production costs. The
latest "fill-in-the-blanks" artist's studio, production, advertising,
recording, etc. costs were more than those of "Spider-Man" or "Attack of the
Clones"??? Hell, I used to buy Laser Discs and their prices were more in line
than CD's and they were definitely in a quasi-elitist, limited, collector's
realm. Between 1990 and 1996 I bought well over a 1000 CDs. Since '96 my
collection has swelled by exactly 119 CDs. Bit of a drop-off, huh?
Poor music + high costs = highly diminished sales. I'm exteremely selective
now. At least in the old days of affordable LPs I would dabble and check out
new, marginal or experimental artists. At these prices who can afford to give
the ecclectic artist a whirl??? I have never downloaded an MP3 file and don't
really care to. I don't condone music pirating, but I do see why some people
may feel "cheated" by the music industry. As Chris Rock said, "I'm not saying
what he did was right... but I understand!!" Rant, off. JOEWORF
GI Trekker
Wal-Mart's ass because they could have made a bunch of sales tonight if they
weren't so anti-first amendment.>>
This is like saying that Wal-Mart has a constitutional mandate to carry every
bit of music, every printed word, no matter how offensive or profane, that
comes out. They don't. They're a BUSINESS, and they're in business to make
money.
Bottom line, they have EVERY RIGHT to decide what to carry or not carry in
their stores. You don't like it, go elsewhere, but don't whine about it.
Wal-Mart has made the decision, whether you agree with it or not, NOT to carry
music that carries profane lyrics. Personally, I applaud that decision. I don't
need to hear that kind of language and content, and it bothers me greatly when
I'm walking outside and some idiot drives by blasting this filth full blast out
of his car's stereo speakers. I've seen morons do this in parking lots to
stores like Toys "R" Us, giving the children going through the parking lot a
WONDERFUL language lesson.
Leviathan
> Wal-Mart has made the decision, whether you agree with it or not, NOT to carry
> music that carries profane lyrics.
They've also made a decision that they won't carry movies with certain themes
unless they're edited to Wal-Mart's standards. a friend of mine bought the video of
"Philadelphia there, and when he watched it, discovered that Tom Hanks wasn't gay,
Antonio Banderas was just a pal of his, and he apparently got AIDS from a toilet
seat, or a door-knob or something, because he wasn't doing that nasty homo stuff,
nosiree.
You may applaud that kind of decision, but I find it loathsome.
--
Jonathan Andrew Sheen
http://www.leviathanstudios.com
Leviathan of the GEI (Detached.)
jsh...@leviathanstudios.com
"What'dya expect? I'm a New Yorker!"
-Anonymous New York Firefighter, 9/12/01
DaWerewolf
Michael Theroff
Wal-Mart not wanting to sell profane music and/or films, and apparently
it's part of their family store image; however, Wal-Mart is in no
position to behave as if they're above such things, considering how
their employees are treated and how they kill small business. It pisses
me off listening to clueless shills like Paul Harvey talk about how
wonderful WM is, when they're doing more to hurt working people (by
hiking prices once the competition is dead, fighting labor, or keeping
wages low, f.ex.) than any other company in America. They might not
want to frighten away grannies w/ Eminem CDs, but their entire operation
is profane, IMO. That "Bring it home to the USA" stuff is pure garbage,
as I'm sure you all know.
BTW, I personally dislike Eminem because of what he says, rather than
how he goes about saying it. He's a sawed-off fruit. If you guys hate
him, that's cool; I'm just saying Wal-Mart's doing it to placate their
target customer (uneducated, with no regard for quality over pricing
[look at their electronics, f.ex.]), not because of any moral obligation
they feel they have to society. They couldn't care less about such
things.
Jkpoulos7
>hiking prices once the competition is dead, fighting labor, or keeping
>wages low, f.ex.) than any other company in America.
No one has to work for WM. I have only seen WM prices go down never up. Plus
any place you can have your car serviced, get a mullet, go food shopping, and
buy a rifle is truly a gift from the Almighty.
Kevin Coombs
it's a privately-held business. They can sell what they want at the price
they want. We either buy or don't buy there.
The equation really is just that simple.
"Michael Theroff" <Torgo...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:24134-3E5...@storefull-2298.public.lawson.webtv.net...
Tom M.
>>Sales of CDs are down 9% last year. If MP3s promote CD sales, then
>>they're doing a terrible job of it.
>
>There are surveys that show that people who download MP3s are much more likely
>to buy CDs than those who don't. Essentially, that means that a sizable number
>of MP3 users are just sampling what's out there, the way they used to do when
>radio used to actually play music, and not just blathering fools and the same
>four songs over and over.
I agree with that. I've bought probably five times more CDs due to my
exposure to an MP3 than CDs that I "just decided to buy".
I would imagine that a lot more people who do the MP3-only route
probably wouldn't buy the CD anyway (i.e., copy someone elses, etc.).
Just to stay on topic, I seldom search for CDs at Walmart. They have
a good selection of Joes (seasonally), though. They used to carry the
"censored" version of CDs. I guess they don't do that anymore, eh?
Tom M.
Frank May
be sold. People forget that private companies can do whatever they like.
Scarlet Otter
M.) wrote:
>
>I agree with that. I've bought probably five times more CDs due to my
>exposure to an MP3 than CDs that I "just decided to buy".
>
>I would imagine that a lot more people who do the MP3-only route
>probably wouldn't buy the CD anyway (i.e., copy someone elses, etc.).
>
>Just to stay on topic, I seldom search for CDs at Walmart. They have
>a good selection of Joes (seasonally), though. They used to carry the
>"censored" version of CDs. I guess they don't do that anymore, eh?
I always go the used route, and buy my music (whether on CD, cassette,
vinyl, or 8-Track) at thrift stores myself. I'd rather pay anywhere
from 25 cents to $2.00 for a used album (any of the afore-mentioned
formats) than pay full price for a new CD. Same goes for video games
and movies as well. :D
-- Otter
Michael Theroff
>I have only seen WM prices go down never
>up.
It invariably happens in smaller towns, once the local Mom & Pop stores
are killed off. Then, those same people that gave WM that ability get a
royal screwing. Like I said, it doesn't happen where they have
reasonable competition.
>Plus any place you can have your car
>serviced, get a mullet, go food shopping, and
>buy a rifle is truly a gift from the Almighty.
Dude, that's funny enough to be a sig! Classic!
Michael Theroff
Don't get me wrong, Frank--I wasn't defending Eminem at all, and I agree
Wal-Mart can and should do what they like concerning their business, so
long as it's legal. Legal and ethical aren't the same, however, and I
just wanted to point out that in many ways Wal-Mart is far more damaging
to this nation than a twerp like Eminem, who has almost hit his
15-minute mark.
Promoting foreign-made products as Domestic is wrong in my eyes, as is
getting rid of every meatcutter in the company, because a handful of
shops wanted labor representation. They were only making about
literally half of what their peers working for other chains made, but
Wal-Mart canned them to keep prices down and passed the savings on to
the consumer. A lot of those guys can't afford new school clothes for
their kids, but as long as we get our cheap Doritos and Quaker State and
Tylenol, America will push it to the back of their minds and keep
filling up their shopping carts. I go there myself, every now and then,
but I don't think I'm "bringing it home to the USA" by doing it. Lord
knows they sure as hell don't, regardless of the image they're always
pushing.
And I'll shut up about it, now. Continue with the Eminem assault--I was
enjoying that part!
Kennedy
> One more point on Wal Mart's hypocrisy--while they actively screen and
> ban movies and CDs for content--they don't bother screening any of the
> discount CDs or DVDs that they get when they run a competitor out of
> business. I've seen hardcore rap albums--uncensored versions--and "hard
> R" rated movies dumped in giant bins in the front of their stores for
> prices low enough for a small child to afford. So while you can't go
> into Wal Mart and buy Marilyn Manson or Emenim, sometimes you can stroll
> up to the front of the store and find albums by Ol Dirty Bastard or the
> DVD of "I Spit On Your Grave" for less than five bucks.
I'm just surprised you know who Ol Dirty Bastard is!
:D
Kennedy
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service New Rate! $9.95/Month 50GB
RudyPAN
While I generally don't care much for rap, I do occasionally enjoy the music
and zany exploits of the Wu Tang Clan. My tastes in music are all over the
board.
Here's another funny Wal Mart movie story---you can now go up to the giant bin
in the front of many of their stores and buy a movie called "Hi Mom". It's an
early Brian DePalma effort(1970) with Robert DeNiro as wannabee pornographer
who becomes affiliated with a radical political group so that he can blow up
the building housing a girl that he got pregnant. Real wholesome family stuff.
It's over-the-top 60s leftover satire, but if it were a current movie, Wal
Mart would never consider carrying it.
Later, Rudy
RudyPAN
>>up.
>
>It invariably happens in smaller towns, once the local Mom & Pop stores
>are killed off. Then, those same people that gave WM that ability get a
>royal screwing. Like I said, it doesn't happen where they have
>reasonable competition.
I've seen it happen first-hand here in WV. In Ripley, a small town about forty
miles from Charleston, the first Wal Mart in West Virginia opened in the late
80s. By the late 90s, there were no other retailers in Ripley. Now, if I'm
passing through, I'll stop there to see what toys they have, and I've found
that their prices are 20% to 50% higher than they are for the same items here
in Charleston. Their SOTW guys are all $9.99, for example.
Later, Rudy
DaWerewolf
most of us say we dont shop there or do so infrequently) the PEOPLE are
responsible for the growth of this behemoth...all wanting cheaper prices (who
doesnt) but at the expense of the rest of the retail world. I wonder how those
folks in West Virginia feel about WM now.
J. Steven York
>>Sales of CDs are down 9% last year. If MP3s promote CD sales, then
>>they're doing a terrible job of it.
>
>There are surveys that show that people who download MP3s are much more likely
>to buy CDs than those who don't. Essentially, that means that a sizable number
>of MP3 users are just sampling what's out there, the way they used to do when
>radio used to actually play music, and not just blathering fools and the same
>four songs over and over.
Assuming it's accurate, that statistic spins both ways. It also means
that the people who buy the most CD are the ones downloading MP3s, and
if they're buying FEWER CDs than they would otherwise, then there's a
big part of your sales slump.
>
>Obviously, others aren't. There are folks who'll download whatever they can
>get their hands on. But those are people who wouldn't buy that music in the
>first place.
>
>The reason the music industry is in a slump right now is because music today,
>sucks, in general. There is good stuff out there, but it's deemed "not
>commercial" and banished from the ever-shrinking playlists of radio and music
>television outlets.
>
>Seriously, what was the last "Must hear" album that you can remember? There
>used to be several each year.
Well, the music industries problems are complex, and lack of
promotional venues is part of it. Remember when MTV used to have
music on it? But there are plenty of other factors, not the least of
which being the time people spend on game consoles and wandering
around with Gameboy. MP3s are not all to blame. I just think they're
a factor.
Let's face it, the music industry was fat and greedy, and set
themselves up for a fall. If CDs had been priced reasonably (they
should have been far CHEAPER than cassettes and LPs soon after their
introduction, but instead they were used as an excuse to jack the
prices through the roof). Then, when MP3s started to catch on, they
took a "nuke them all" approach instead of trying to find a way to
co-exist and use the new medium.
Like home taping, MP3s should be allowed within reason, but copyright
theft on too grand a scale is ultimately bad for everybody. When
there's no incentive to pay for copyrighted material, then there's
ultimately little incentive for people to create or distribute
copyrighted material. If "information wants to be free" then you have
to accept that "all your Joes want to be mine."
>Meanwhile, you have Wal Mart demonstrating what happens when one retailer gains
>too much market share in an industry. Wal Mart has every right to sell or not
>to sell whatever music they wish. However, by low-balling the prices and
>running other music stores out of business, they've cornered the market in many
>areas.
>
>In approximately 30% of the country, Wal Mart is the only source for current CD
>releases within a 30-minute drive. They also refuse to carry some artists and
>demand that edited versions are provided by others. That means that 30% of the
>country only has access to edited versions of some albums, and an act that gets
>banned from Wal Mart doesn't have access to the entire country in terms of
>in-store sales.
I agree with you there, and I don't have a lot of retail CD options
where I live either. Wal-Mart is a prime example of how the "free
market" can turn out to be less free than you think.
>
>This is bothersome not because of Wal Mart banning Ememin. It's a concern
>because Wal Mart has banned artists in the past for political reasons, and is
>likely to do so again in the future. Ask that notorious gangsta-rapper,
>Sheryl Crow.
>
>The only response to this is: don't buy CDs at Wal Mart. Go anywhere else and
>buy them. If you don't have an option locally, order online.
Agree again.
>
>The lesson to be learned here is that this could happen to the toy industry.
>Wal Mart is already the number one retailer of toys in this country. What
>would happen to our hobby if they decided that war toys should be banned
>nationwide? As this thread demonstrated, they've already done so in some
>areas. This is why Formative doesn't go near any potentially risky figures
>like Nazis. It wouldn't take a lot to trigger Wal Mart pulling the plug on
>entire toy lines or genres.
I think you could argue that they already have. They have such a
large share of the toy market that if Wal-Mart doesn't order, there
isn't much incentive to produce.
They're also dangerous to us because they put small companies that
sell to them at risk. A traditional way for them to operate is to
place huge orders with a company, make the company dependent on those
orders, then put the screws to them to cut prices. The company either
has to survive without Wal-Mart, fold, or bleed themselves dry to make
the price cuts and ultimately fold anyway. Wal-Mart then moves on to
another company for similar product. In the 12" world, they can't
have helped with Lanard or 21st's troubles, and I worry that the SOTW
line could be next.
>
>There is a way to protect the hobby against such a nasty scenario. Support
>other toy stores in your area, especially overpriced locally-owned ones. I'm
>not saying you should boycott Wal Mart--that'd be foolish. But it's not a bad
>idea once in a while to spread your purchases around just to help keep
>competition alive.
What other toy stores? Like CDs, for much of the country there are
few, if any, alternatives. Where there are, most of them are other
major chains like Target, Toys R Us, or K-Mart.
RudyPAN
>folks in West Virginia feel about WM now.
Well, the folks who used to own their own stores have to work for Wal Mart now
for less money, or move away. Does wonders for morale and customer service.
Later, Rudy
DaWerewolf
Later, Rudy
>>
something to think about for all consumers next time they shop there
(exclusively.) The short term savings may result in a monopoly and higher
prices down the road. However, most shoppers dont give a rats ass about other
people or what may happen a few years down the road to THEM, as long as they
save a buck or two right NOW.
RudyPAN
>that the people who buy the most CD are the ones downloading MP3s, and
>if they're buying FEWER CDs than they would otherwise, then there's a
>big part of your sales slump.
Interviews with the people doing this (spot interviews--they don't actually ask
every single person) reveal that there's a great number of music lovers who
want to buy new music, and have turned to MP3s so that they can be exposed to
more of it. There is no evidence that MP3s are cannibalizing sales of CDs.
All the data so far points to the opposite.
That's not to say that there aren't piracy issues out there, but those aren't
generally the MP3 folks doing that.
Back in the 80s, the record labels made the same argument that home-taping was
killing the music industry, but when they paid for market studies, they found
that most of the people who were taping at home were spending more money on
records than people who didn't. They were just making their own "mix tapes".
Music lovers will migrate to new technologies to get their music fix.
What the music industry ought to be doing is paying for label-sponsored "artist
pages" that would have one or two sample tracks available for download for
free. This would take the place of the single, which the music industry
killed off in one of their stupidest moves ever. Apparently, they'd rather
NOT make money selling singles for a reasonable price than go through the
trouble of selling something with a low profit margin---even though they're
proven to drive album sales. And if they'd come up with a reasonable
subscription plan, they could even make money on it. I pay five bucks or more
for magazines that have CD samplers with 20 songs or less on them. I'd pay
five bucks for a subscription to a site that would let me download a set number
of songs each month. If the record labels will allow their music to be used
in magazine samplers, why won't they use the same approach to MP3s. I think
some of them even PAY to get on those sample CDs.
>Well, the music industries problems are complex, and lack of
>promotional venues is part of it. Remember when MTV used to have
>music on it? But there are plenty of other factors, not the least of
>which being the time people spend on game consoles and wandering
>around with Gameboy. MP3s are not all to blame. I just think they're
>a factor.
I think as a factor, they sell more CDs than they cause not to be sold.
But we can't blame video games--that's the toy industry and comic book
companies' excuse.
>Let's face it, the music industry was fat and greedy, and set
>themselves up for a fall. If CDs had been priced reasonably (they
>should have been far CHEAPER than cassettes and LPs soon after their
>introduction, but instead they were used as an excuse to jack the
>prices through the roof). Then, when MP3s started to catch on, they
>took a "nuke them all" approach instead of trying to find a way to
>co-exist and use the new medium.
Exactly. CD's cost less to make than the Jewel Boxes that they come in do.
What's even worse in terms of the record label's greed was that, until the mid
nineties, they only paid artists half the royalties on a CD that they did for
an album or cassette. Their excuse was that they had to pay for developing the
new technology. All forensic accounting has shown that the industry had
completely paid for all the research and development and most of the new
equipment by the year 1986.
>Like home taping, MP3s should be allowed within reason, but copyright
>theft on too grand a scale is ultimately bad for everybody. When
>there's no incentive to pay for copyrighted material, then there's
>ultimately little incentive for people to create or distribute
>copyrighted material. If "information wants to be free" then you have
>to accept that "all your Joes want to be mine."
True, but it shouldn't be a copyright issue. CDs should have enough extra
value included in the package to make it worthwhile for somebody to buy
them--lyric sheets, band photos, passwords to online sites, stuff like that.
MP3s present a tremendous promotional opportunity--one that could take the
place of the previously-mentioned single. Can you imagine how successful a
"countdown' show could be if it featured the top ten songs downloaded in a
week?
>I think you could argue that they already have. They have such a
>large share of the toy market that if Wal-Mart doesn't order, there
>isn't much incentive to produce.
There's an article in this week's Brandweek Magazine about "10 ways to ruin a
toy line". One of them is "piss off Wal Mart".
>They're also dangerous to us because they put small companies that
>sell to them at risk. A traditional way for them to operate is to
>place huge orders with a company, make the company dependent on those
>orders, then put the screws to them to cut prices. The company either
>has to survive without Wal-Mart, fold, or bleed themselves dry to make
>the price cuts and ultimately fold anyway. Wal-Mart then moves on to
>another company for similar product. In the 12" world, they can't
>have helped with Lanard or 21st's troubles, and I worry that the SOTW
>line could be next.
They'll never get to SOTW that way. They just won't do business in that
dangerous a manner. But what you said about Wal Mart also applies anecdotally
to Kay Bee and the Playing Mantis Captain Action revival. Once Kay Bee forced
the price down, PM had to let all retailers cut the price, and then the line
had no hope of turning a profit.
>What other toy stores? Like CDs, for much of the country there are
>few, if any, alternatives. Where there are, most of them are other
>major chains like Target, Toys R Us, or K-Mart.
There are still independent toy stores, but they're disappearing fast! It
can't hurt to bite the bullet, if you can afford to, and go in and spend ten
dollars too much for a GI Joe once or twice a year. The problem is that for
most of these guys, going through third-party distributors, their wholesale
price can be higher than Wal Mart's retail price.
I count myself lucky that I live in a commercial market big enough to support
Wal Mart, K Mart, Target, TRU, and various discount merchants. I can drive an
hour in almost any direction and find myself in a town that only has Wal Mart.
They're the biggest private employer in the state. And that keeps them from
being investigated for unfair business practices.
Later, Rudy
Leviathan
> you can buy Philadelphia with a gay Hanks at another store. whats the big deal?
The big deal is that Hanks' character being gay, and having a a love-life, and
losing a significant other, are all parts of the heart and sould of the story.
Look at it this way: Imagine Sam Walton had been a pacifist and gun-control
advocate, firmly dedicated to the proposition that firearms, those who own them,
and any display of them, all are evil and corrupting. So when you buy, say, "The
Dirty Dozen" at Wal-Mart, you get a version with all the guns cut out. Would that
be okay with you?
And the even bigger deal is that Wal-Mart doesn't tell you it's selling a
bowdlerized version, so if you haven't already seen it, you don't know.
RudyPAN
>bowdlerized version, so if you haven't already seen it, you don't know.
Wait a minute!
You mean that thing about "Philadelphia" wasn't a joke?
Later, Rudy
I was sure it was just a joke.
Jkpoulos7
>and
>losing a significant other, are all parts of the heart and sould of the
>story.
I'd cut that out too.
>So when you buy, say, "The
>Dirty Dozen" at Wal-Mart, you get a version with all the guns cut out. Would
>that
>be okay with you?
I'd buy it elsewhere and not patronize WM at all.
David
> Well, the music industries problems are complex, and lack of
> promotional venues is part of it. Remember when MTV used to have
> music on it? But there are plenty of other factors, not the least of
> which being the time people spend on game consoles and wandering
> around with Gameboy. MP3s are not all to blame. I just think they're
> a factor.
>
commericials in between.
Leviathan
RudyPAN wrote:
No joke, Rudy. I've boycotted Wal-Mart for movies and music ever since.
Leviathan
> >The big deal is that Hanks' character being gay, and having a a love-life,
> >and losing a significant other, are all parts of the heart and soul of the
> >story.
>
> I'd cut that out too.
And if you were Jonathan Demme, that would be of interest. But as hes the
director and it's his film, so what?
> >So when you buy, say, "The Dirty Dozen" at Wal-Mart, you get a version with
> >all the guns cut out. Would that be okay with you?
>
> I'd buy it elsewhere and not patronize WM at all.
So, does the artist have no right to have his work presented as he intended?
Where do you draw the line?
Suppose I sell the "Harry Potter" movies, altered so that all the magic comes
from, uh, the Seventh-Day-Adventists' view of God? Is that okay? Suppose I add
scenes that the powers are from the Devil? None of those were what JK Rowling had
to say.
If Wal-Mart has a problem showing a gay character, that's fine. It's bigotry, and
it's disgusting, but it's their right. The solution: Don't sell "Philadelphia."
Morally and ethically, though, there's no justification for a company that both
refuses to acknowledge a gay character, but will milk him for cash.
Bck2DFtr
>bowdlerized version, so if you haven't already seen it, you don't know.
ACK!!! Does that mean the movie "Windtalkers" I bought is a butchered version
from say Best Buy or Target? If so, how can I tell? Please tell me this ain't
so. Thanks.
Jkpoulos7
>and
>it's disgusting, but it's their right.
A family based business should do what it can to prevent youngsters from being
brainwashed into the cult of "alternative" lifestyles.
>And if you were Jonathan Demme, that would be of interest. But as hes the
>director and it's his film, so what?
>
>
Philadelphia was simply a propaganda piece to make an aberant lifestyle with
deadly consequences appear normal. Then the film criticizes Hanks' firm for
terminating him because of the health risks to other employees and the fact
that an employee feels to meet a moral standard.
the ARROW
"Jkpoulos7" <jkpo...@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20030224201744...@mb-cp.news.cs.com...
Where'd ya get yer information laddie??
Lyndon Larouche??
Homosexuality is no more an abberant or consequentially deadly lifestyle
that one lived by a black kid in any inner city neighbourhood.
Far more kids have died from gang violence than have gays from AIDS.
(And AIDS has devastated primarily hetero-sexual societies in Africa--go
figure)
There is far more wide-reaching immoral behaviour ( theft) in corporate
America than there is in the homosexual community--but is glossed over
because its just "business", right??
Face facts, the world is bigger and far more diverse than your perceptions
of it.
That means tolerance--not acceptance, but tolerance.
There's things you won't like and things you will. You cannot have one over
the other.
Its the same for everyone.
Philidephia is a story about an injustice done, but its a story first.
The moral issues are for you and I to sort out in our daily lives--if
someone is stupid enough to left a movie sway their worldview then they
deserve the life it leads for them.
Stamping your feet and yelling at it all won't make it go away--time to face
the reality of modern society.
By far, most of the gays I've ever met or worked alongside have been staunch
consevrative-types and the homophobes more likely to be skirting the extreme
Left.
It takes all kinds.
To relate this to the Walmart issue, permissiveness is a personal choice. If
something offends you it up to you to make the call as to whether or not it
has traffic in your life. You as a persona have complete contol over this.
To quote from somewhere else:" Who is standing guard at the doorway of YOUR
mind??"
If someone else is doing that then you given up far more by letting then do
so than the supposed immoral ideal ever could. Walmart should either carry
the product as was originally intended to be sold or not carry it at all.
What might be good for corporate bottom-lines is not good for cultural or
societal mores.
90% of all fiction serves as propaganda.......and 99% of all cinema.
Your jaw would drop if you heard what some of your favourite movies were
REALLY about.
--Ken
J. Steven York
cutting into ALL other forms of entertainment, music, books, movies,
TV, comics, across-the-board. The reason isn't that they're sucking
up entertainment dollars, so much as they suck up entertainment TIME.
People have only so many hours a week to recreate, and games are
addictive and cost effective. And yeah, they probably cut into toy
and hobby sales too, for adults and kids. That's a broad societal
shift, akin to what happened when TV came in, and we're just going to
have to adjust to the new order.
On 24 Feb 2003 22:16:30 GMT, rud...@aol.com (RudyPAN) wrote:
>But we can't blame video games--that's the toy industry and comic book
>companies' excuse.
J. Steven York - "Bolo, Old Guard," "Bolo, Cold Steel" (Now available from Baen Books)
R. Scott Rogers
Actually, once Wally has come to town and destroyed all of the small shops
that used to provide working wages to their employees, realistically a fair
number of people often DO have to work for Wal-Mart.
A store can carry or not carry whatever products it wants and I'll defend
its right to do so. But when you treat your employees badly, you have just
crossed the line into immoral behavior. Employees are people, they are not
commodities or statistics. There are right ways and wrong ways to treat
human beings, and I've heard a number of stories that suggest to me that
Wal-Mart is all too willing to treat its people quite badly when it is more
convenient to do so.
Since I don't particularly need a mullet, bad groceries, or a rifle, I'm
happy to stay away from Wally's for amoral reasons of simple consumer
choice. But it is legitimate to judge a business by how it treats its
employees. There are moral duties higher than maximizing shareholder return.
Just as you wouldn't vote for a neighbor who was a bad citizen in a school
board election, it is legitimate to not patronize a business that is a bad
citizen. Ultimately the health of your community ought to be more important
than the profits of this or that company.
Of course, the choice to ignore that sort of thing is legitimate too, but I
don't think that criticizing others for putting moral values above simple
profit is a good argument.
Regards,
Scott
--
R. Scott Rogers
srogers at mindspring.com
Wee Kilts for Wee Heroes
http://srogers.home.mindspring.com/macjoe/macjoe.html
J. Steven York
>>Like home taping, MP3s should be allowed within reason, but copyright
>>theft on too grand a scale is ultimately bad for everybody. When
>>there's no incentive to pay for copyrighted material, then there's
>>ultimately little incentive for people to create or distribute
>>copyrighted material. If "information wants to be free" then you have
>>to accept that "all your Joes want to be mine."
>True, but it shouldn't be a copyright issue. CDs should have enough extra
>value included in the package to make it worthwhile for somebody to buy
>them--lyric sheets, band photos, passwords to online sites, stuff like that.
Well, that's the marketing trick. But one implication of the success
of MP3s it that people don't want to PAY for a big package, no matter
what's in it. Audio DVDs with lots of extra content may do that, but
the format has to support the extra features naturally and portablity.
I've got loads of "enhanced" CDs I've never played with, simply
because the installing the software is often asking for trouble, and I
don't listen to music on my PC unless I'm already doing something else
with the machine.
Anyway, the evidence of the MP3 model is that people want to skim the
one or two songs they like, and can the rest. I can't blame them for
that, but it makes is VERY hard to run an industry. Not every song
can be great, and something has to subsidize production of the Really
Good Stuff. Of course, somebody was making money in the days of 45s,
so it IS possible. Big adjustment for the industry.
Bob Travis
> <<I am just writing this in hopes Eminem will read it and get all over
> Wal-Mart's ass because they could have made a bunch of sales tonight if they
> weren't so anti-first amendment.>>
>
> This is like saying that Wal-Mart has a constitutional mandate to carry every
> bit of music, every printed word, no matter how offensive or profane, that
> comes out. They don't. They're a BUSINESS, and they're in business to make
> money.
>
> Bottom line, they have EVERY RIGHT to decide what to carry or not carry in
> their stores. You don't like it, go elsewhere, but don't whine about it.
>
> Wal-Mart has made the decision, whether you agree with it or not, NOT to carry
> music that carries profane lyrics. Personally, I applaud that decision. I don't
> need to hear that kind of language and content, and it bothers me greatly when
> I'm walking outside and some idiot drives by blasting this filth full blast out
> of his car's stereo speakers. I've seen morons do this in parking lots to
> stores like Toys "R" Us, giving the children going through the parking lot a
> WONDERFUL language lesson.
Well I agree they have the right to carry what they choose. What I
disagree with mainly is selling edited music. If Wal-Mart won't sell a
product as it was intended to be sold they shouldn't sell it at all. I
don't think products should be tampered with to suit Wal-Mart's taste.
They should sell "as is" or not sell at all. Similarly radio should
play "as is" or not play at all. I am so often amazed at how much
better songs sound without a lot of periods of silence where you know
words belong. The funny thing is sometimes the words are not even bad
words. You can hear the word "bitch" on a dozen TV shows per day
during hours when little kids are not asleep, so why do they take that
word out of Pink's song, "Just Like a Pill," tell me?
BTW I now want to thank Wal-Mart for not carrying Eminem. I burned his
latest to a CD and listened to it a half dozen times, then I concluded
that had I bought it at Wal-Mart I would have wanted my money back ---
and they don't give refunds on CDs. So that is the nice thing about
home-burned CDs. When you decide you don't like them anymore you can
toss them and you're only out the dime you paid for the blank CD-R.
Bob
RudyPAN
>because the installing the software is often asking for trouble, and I
>don't listen to music on my PC unless I'm already doing something else
Enhanced CDs are a gimmick that I'd like to see the record industry abandon.
Whenever I get an enhanced CD now, I rip the audio off and burn a CD without
the enhanced crap so that I can listen while I write.
When I was talking about extras, I meant other elements of the packaging,
extra info in the booklet, and stuff like that.
>Anyway, the evidence of the MP3 model is that people want to skim the
>one or two songs they like, and can the rest.
True, but that was also true of singles. Now that the music industry has
killed them off, they've discovered that the promotional advantages of that
"skimming" far outweighed the cannibalization of album sales that they were
concerned about.
>Of course, somebody was making money in the days of 45s,
>so it IS possible. Big adjustment for the industry.
It is very possible. They just aren't trying to find a workable solution.
later, Rudy
RudyPAN
Jeez. I'm tempted to buy that six-dollar copy of "I spit on your grave" now,
just to see if they found some way to clean it up.
Later, Rudy
RudyPAN
>disagree with mainly is selling edited music. If Wal-Mart won't sell a
>product as it was intended to be sold they shouldn't sell it at all.
You do realize that Wal Mart doesn't edit the albums themselves, don't you?
The edited versions are provided by the record labels with the artist's
permission.
While I don't buy CDs from Wal Mart, I also don't like to support artists who
will allow their work to be butchered just to sell a few more units.
>You can hear the word "bitch" on a dozen TV shows per day
>during hours when little kids are not asleep, so why do they take that
>word out of Pink's song, "Just Like a Pill," tell me?
In the UK, when Pink performed that song on "Top of the Pops", they bleeped out
the words "pill" and "morphine". Part of their "don't say the words and then
nobody will find out about them" anti-drug program.
>BTW I now want to thank Wal-Mart for not carrying Eminem. I burned his
>latest to a CD and listened to it a half dozen times, then I concluded
>that had I bought it at Wal-Mart I would have wanted my money back
They do sell the edited versions of his albums in my area. Don't know who'd
buy 'em.
Later, Rudy
Jkpoulos7
>that one lived by a black kid in any inner city neighbourhood.
>Far more kids have died from gang violence than have gays from AIDS.
Those kids bring it on themselves- I see it every day. No parenting , no
education, no God.
>(And AIDS has devastated primarily hetero-sexual societies in Africa--go
>figure)
You cn't compare third world peoples to Europeans and their descendents.
VintageGIJoes
>disagree with mainly is selling edited music. If Wal-Mart won't sell a
>product as it was intended to be sold they shouldn't sell it at all. I
>don't think products should be tampered with to suit Wal-Mart's taste.
It's the RECORD COMPANY that edits them, not WalMart.
Aron
Kennedy
I miss the old MTV, where they showed lots of videos. That was pretty much
how my music horizon got expanded; the local stations just don't play the
same range of stuff.
Kennedy
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service New Rate! $9.95/Month 50GB
Frank May
different from regular TV stations cleaning up movies with nudity & foul
language. HBO & other premium movie channels show them as intended. I
suppose if one objects to WM's actions, one wouldn't watch a
CBS/ABC/NBC, etc., aired version of an R rated movie that's been edited
from the stock version on HBO or the like. Boycott them too?
DaWerewolf
<<They do sell the edited versions of his albums in my area. Don't know who'd
buy 'em. >>
Thats the part thats hard for me to fathom. The thugs who listen to Eminem and
the rest of that gangsta/thug/toughguy/lowlife/quasi criminal crap (gee, guess
it shows i dont care for rap, huh?) dont want edited "music" (ha ha), they want
to hear all the beevis and Butthead naughty words and revel in the "message."
Who in the hell buys edited thug-music? Underaged thug wanna-be's that arent
allowed by their parents to listen to it until they are old enough to be real
thugs?
RudyPAN
This one gets a special sandbox prize for being the most subtle racist comment
ever in the sandbox.
Don't get your robe too close the cross, buddy. Wouldn't want to see you burn
up.
Later, Rudy
Tony L. Tillman
CREATIVE DIVERSIONS
Vehicles and Accessories for the 1/6th Scale Fighting Man.
Visit our website at: http://creative-diversions.com/
And while there, visit the Lone Star Scale Raiders Photo Archive.
RudyPAN
>different from regular TV stations cleaning up movies with nudity & foul
>language.
It's really only a problem in those areas where Wal Mart has a monopoly on
music sales. And even then, they're within their rights not to sell something
that they find objectionable. The concern is that they aren't consisitent, and
only seem to care about such matters to pay lip service to their more
conservative customers, who might otherwise be offended by some of Wal Mart's
more underhanded business dealings.
Like the time they brought in a ton of quilts that were made in China, and
called them "Cabin Creek Quilts" even though that's a trademark of a small
quilting company that sells limited edition quilts sewn by coal miner widows
here in WV. Wal Mart got nailed in court for that one, but for every one
time they get sued, they manage to run another twently US manufacturers out of
business.
> I
>suppose if one objects to WM's actions, one wouldn't watch a
>CBS/ABC/NBC, etc., aired version of an R rated movie that's been edited
>from the stock version on HBO or the like.
I never watch edited movies on TV. I don't appreciate other people deciding
what I can or can't "handle". So I only watch movies on premium cable, or I
rent or buy them. I know a lot of folks who feel the same way. That's why
feature films don't get nearly as many prime-time network slots as they used
to. Who wants to watch a sliced-up movie.
Note that whenever a network presents an unedited movie, their ratings
skyrocket--like when NBC showed "Schindler's List" uncut, or the first dozen or
so times that TNN ran "The Godfather" uncut.
Later, Rudy
RudyPAN
>how my music horizon got expanded; the local stations just don't play the
>same range of stuff.
And THAT is why the music industry is in a slump. One company owns almost half
the radio stations in the country, and they have a playlist of thirty songs.
There are no regional hits any more, just blanderized pap programmed by
people who care more about promoting the concerts that their booking division
puts on than they do about breaking new artists.
Later, Rudy
Leviathan
RudyPAN wrote:
> The edited versions are provided by the record labels with the artist's
> permission.
I question that "With the artist's permission" part.Labels can force a lot down
artist's throats.
RudyPAN
>down
>artist's throats.
I should have said "consent", and sometimes that consent is given as part of
the standard contract before they even record an album. But there have been
cases of artists refusing to make changes or provide edited versions of their
stuff.
Of course, the folks we've been discussing here have no such artistic quibbles.
Later, Rudy
Jkpoulos7
>quibbles.
>
M&M et al with their 4th grade educations are in it for the money plain and
simple,
the ARROW
> >Homosexuality is no more an abberant or consequentially deadly lifestyle
> >that one lived by a black kid in any inner city neighbourhood.
> >Far more kids have died from gang violence than have gays from AIDS.
>
> Those kids bring it on themselves- I see it every day. No parenting , no
> education, no God.
Then why are you here?
WHY THE HELL ARE YOU HERE............when there are worthwhile kids who need
foster parents, Big Brothers, teachers, mentors, guide leaders,
scout-masters, and people of faith to lead them to God????? ;-)
Why are you here wasting your time and their valuable lives playing and
yapping on the internet about fool toys--there's LIVES and SOULS to be
saved.
Do you not care??
Have you chosen to shirk the divine duty He has lain before you?
If you can see an injustice, you are behooven to raise voice and deed
against it, are you not?
Or do you chose to just callously flaunt their misfortune to further a petty
arguement?
Your are wasting time here--there's WORK to be done. :-)
>
> >(And AIDS has devastated primarily hetero-sexual societies in Africa--go
> >figure)
>
> You cn't compare third world peoples to Europeans and their descendents.
>
>
Yes I can, and I have.
The only thing that seperates a Third World nation from the rest of the
world is time.........something that scares the livin' beegeezus outa
ceratin kinds of people.
The consoling thought in all this is that sometime in YOUR lifetime they
could well become world powers to contend with--that lil' thing called
progress can do that, y'know.
--Ken
Getysbug
>the radio stations in the country, and they have a playlist of thirty songs.
The company that owns the other half must own the ones around here, because
their playlists are about 10 songs, and every other song is either one of three
"Pink Floyd" songs, or one of four "Led Zepplin" songs.
I don't even know if any of the local stations play the newer music, if they
do, I've never heard it. Only "classic rock" with limited playlists or (C)rap
stations around here. About the only station with any kind of variety is the
Country music station.
In fact, one station (WAQY) is known by wags as the "Pink Floyd" station, as
you are guarenteed to hear "Money" at least once an hour.
John
Stargdodz
I hardly think this is a first by this "individual". The idiotic remarks made
about scavenging shuttle parts and his even earlier remarks calling for
detention camps for "certain types" of visitors (a remark which went pretty
much unchallenged, BTW) earned him troll status and ignore status on my part. I
suspect he'd blindly walk into the fire because his hood was on backwards.
JoeWorf
force
"Getysbug" <gety...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030225190857...@mb-cv.aol.com...