Unlike Reggie, if I really liked a record as much as he *claims* to like 
Rockstar, I would play the uncut version - fuck the censors!
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:$9XjEWAE8liHFwi$@blueyonder.co.uk...
> Unlike Reggie, if I really liked a record as much as he *claims* to like 
> Rockstar, I would play the uncut version - fuck the censors!

Maybe he likes the tune, rather than the word "asshole"? Just a thought.

    Chris

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 at 22:59:24, Chris Brown  
wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :

>
>"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message
>news:$9XjEWAE8liHFwi$@blueyonder.co.uk...
>> Unlike Reggie, if I really liked a record as much as he *claims* to like
>> Rockstar, I would play the uncut version - fuck the censors!
>
>Maybe he likes the tune, rather than the word "asshole"? Just a thought.
>
But they were censoring for political correctness, not for language. 
No-one is going to start taking drugs *solely* because they heard them 
mentioned on a song, FFS!
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:HLQN5XCakziHFwGA@blueyonder.co.uk...
> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 at 22:59:24, Chris Brown  
> wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :
>
>>
>>"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message
>>news:$9XjEWAE8liHFwi$@blueyonder.co.uk...
>>> Unlike Reggie, if I really liked a record as much as he *claims* to like
>>> Rockstar, I would play the uncut version - fuck the censors!
>>
>>Maybe he likes the tune, rather than the word "asshole"? Just a thought.
>>
> But they were censoring for political correctness, not for language. 
> No-one is going to start taking drugs *solely* because they heard them 
> mentioned on a song, FFS!

No they're not, and indeed a lot of records that allude to drugs are played 
uncut. But if that's what the record company think the radio edit is, that's 
what the radio edit is. Maybe it's all a clever ploy on their part to make 
the record sound more exciting than it actually is.

    Chris

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 at 22:10:28, Chris Brown  
wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :

>>>> Unlike Reggie, if I really liked a record as much as he *claims* to like
>>>> Rockstar, I would play the uncut version - fuck the censors!
>>>
>>>Maybe he likes the tune, rather than the word "asshole"? Just a thought.
>>>
>> But they were censoring for political correctness, not for language.
>> No-one is going to start taking drugs *solely* because they heard them
>> mentioned on a song, FFS!
>
>No they're not, and indeed a lot of records that allude to drugs are played
>uncut. But if that's what the record company think the radio edit is, that's
>what the radio edit is.

I didn't even consider the record company may have sent them an edited 
version themselves. Is that at all likely?

The follow-up question must be : do radio stations play an uncut version 
after 9pm?
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message
news:0MmxYuIF5GjHFw5k@blueyonder.co.uk...
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 at 22:10:28, Chris Brown 
> wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :
>
>>>>> Unlike Reggie, if I really liked a record as much as he *claims* to
>>>>> like
>>>>> Rockstar, I would play the uncut version - fuck the censors!
>>>>
>>>>Maybe he likes the tune, rather than the word "asshole"? Just a thought.
>>>>
>>> But they were censoring for political correctness, not for language.
>>> No-one is going to start taking drugs *solely* because they heard them
>>> mentioned on a song, FFS!
>>
>>No they're not, and indeed a lot of records that allude to drugs are
>>played
>>uncut. But if that's what the record company think the radio edit is,
>>that's
>>what the radio edit is.
>
> I didn't even consider the record company may have sent them an edited
> version themselves. Is that at all likely?

I should imagine it's a virtual certainty: at any rate, it's not an uncommon 
practice and you'll remember that the video is cut to the clean version of 
the song.
This is one reason why editing often seems so inconsistent. Of course, a lot 
of radio edits differ from the originals in other ways than their language, 
which is why they tend to be what gets airplay.

> The follow-up question must be : do radio stations play an uncut version
> after 9pm?

Not necessarily, because radio doesn't have a specific watershed in the way 
that the telly does. And most radio stations use playout systems now.
As for R1, to the best of my knowledge they've never played this after nine 
anyway.

    Chris

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 at 19:02:21, Chris Brown  
wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :
>>>
>>>No they're not, and indeed a lot of records that allude to drugs are
>>>played
>>>uncut. But if that's what the record company think the radio edit is,
>>>that's
>>>what the radio edit is.
>>
>> I didn't even consider the record company may have sent them an edited
>> version themselves. Is that at all likely?
>
>I should imagine it's a virtual certainty: at any rate, it's not an uncommon
>practice and you'll remember that the video is cut to the clean version of
>the song.
>This is one reason why editing often seems so inconsistent. Of course, a lot
>of radio edits differ from the originals in other ways than their language,
>which is why they tend to be what gets airplay.

BTW, finally got the Rockstar CD single today, and it is totally uncut, 
despite being described as the 'radio edit' - which pretty much proves 
that what R1 & others have been playing is *not* the radio edit, but 
their own PC-censored version! :(
>
>> The follow-up question must be : do radio stations play an uncut version
>> after 9pm?
>
>Not necessarily, because radio doesn't have a specific watershed in the way
>that the telly does. And most radio stations use playout systems now.

I don't know what that is.
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:bcb6MxAyRkjHFwcT@blueyonder.co.uk...
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 at 19:02:21, Chris Brown  
> wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :
>>>>
>>>>No they're not, and indeed a lot of records that allude to drugs are
>>>>played
>>>>uncut. But if that's what the record company think the radio edit is,
>>>>that's
>>>>what the radio edit is.
>>>
>>> I didn't even consider the record company may have sent them an edited
>>> version themselves. Is that at all likely?
>>
>>I should imagine it's a virtual certainty: at any rate, it's not an 
>>uncommon
>>practice and you'll remember that the video is cut to the clean version of
>>the song.
>>This is one reason why editing often seems so inconsistent. Of course, a 
>>lot
>>of radio edits differ from the originals in other ways than their 
>>language,
>>which is why they tend to be what gets airplay.
>
> BTW, finally got the Rockstar CD single today, and it is totally uncut, 
> despite being described as the 'radio edit' - which pretty much proves 
> that what R1 & others have been playing is *not* the radio edit, but their 
> own PC-censored version! :(

Of course, there could be more than one radio edit.

>>> The follow-up question must be : do radio stations play an uncut version
>>> after 9pm?
>>
>>Not necessarily, because radio doesn't have a specific watershed in the 
>>way
>>that the telly does. And most radio stations use playout systems now.
>
> I don't know what that is.

It means that rather than playing tracks from CD or whatever, the music is 
loaded into computers and simply played when triggered (in the case of some 
low-budget commercial stations, the entire output can be automated, 
especially in off-peak hours). One effect of this is that each track is 
loaded into the system once and then it's the same version every time unless 
somebody changes it.

    Chris

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 at 22:50:31, Chris Brown  
wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :
>>
>> BTW, finally got the Rockstar CD single today, and it is totally uncut,
>> despite being described as the 'radio edit' - which pretty much proves
>> that what R1 & others have been playing is *not* the radio edit, but their
>> own PC-censored version! :(
>
>Of course, there could be more than one radio edit.

You're not trying to defend PC censorship, are you? :)

>>>And most radio stations use playout systems now.
>>
>> I don't know what that is.
>
>It means that rather than playing tracks from CD or whatever, the music is
>loaded into computers and simply played when triggered (in the case of some
>low-budget commercial stations, the entire output can be automated,
>especially in off-peak hours).

Well, DJ drivel often sounds randomly generated, that's for sure. :)

> One effect of this is that each track is
>loaded into the system once and then it's the same version every time unless
>somebody changes it.

Cue the hackers... :)
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:Q5voFYHhgwjHFw+f@blueyonder.co.uk...
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 at 22:50:31, Chris Brown  
> wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :
>>>
>>> BTW, finally got the Rockstar CD single today, and it is totally uncut,
>>> despite being described as the 'radio edit' - which pretty much proves
>>> that what R1 & others have been playing is *not* the radio edit, but 
>>> their
>>> own PC-censored version! :(
>>
>>Of course, there could be more than one radio edit.
>
> You're not trying to defend PC censorship, are you? :)

Not necessarily, but it certainly does happen that labels produce multiple 
edits. 'This Ain't A Scene It's An Arms Race' by Fall Out Boy is one example 
of that.
Neither is it at all unknown for a physical to list a radio edit but play 
the album version - I've been caught out by that sort of thing before now.

>>>>And most radio stations use playout systems now.
>>>
>>> I don't know what that is.
>>
>>It means that rather than playing tracks from CD or whatever, the music is
>>loaded into computers and simply played when triggered (in the case of 
>>some
>>low-budget commercial stations, the entire output can be automated,
>>especially in off-peak hours).
>
> Well, DJ drivel often sounds randomly generated, that's for sure. :)

A lot of them just use pre-recorded announcements. Which can mean a lot of 
crashed vocals and stuff.

    Chris

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 at 21:48:00, Chris Brown  
wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :
>>
>> You're not trying to defend PC censorship, are you? :)
>
>Not necessarily, but it certainly does happen that labels produce multiple
>edits. 'This Ain't A Scene It's An Arms Race' by Fall Out Boy is one example
>of that.

Good example - I don't like the song much, but I like even less that 
'God-damned' is regularly censored from it.
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett

"Paul Hyett"  wrote in message 
news:aMC6YPEJfFkHFw1X@blueyonder.co.uk...
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 at 21:48:00, Chris Brown  
> wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :
>>>
>>> You're not trying to defend PC censorship, are you? :)
>>
>>Not necessarily, but it certainly does happen that labels produce multiple
>>edits. 'This Ain't A Scene It's An Arms Race' by Fall Out Boy is one 
>>example
>>of that.
>
> Good example - I don't like the song much, but I like even less that 
> 'God-damned' is regularly censored from it.

But not everyone plays that edit (R1 don't, Virgin I think do). I believe it 
was created for the US market.

    Chris

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 at 19:32:54, Chris Brown  
wrote in uk.media.radio.bbc-r1 :
>>>
>>>Not necessarily, but it certainly does happen that labels produce multiple
>>>edits. 'This Ain't A Scene It's An Arms Race' by Fall Out Boy is one
>>>example
>>>of that.
>>
>> Good example - I don't like the song much, but I like even less that
>> 'God-damned' is regularly censored from it.
>
>But not everyone plays that edit (R1 don't, Virgin I think do). I believe it
>was created for the US market.

Colour me surprised. :)
-- 
Paul 'Charts Fan' Hyett