Today I learned of a new hashtag going around, #BanGene. I assume it is on account of the whole Robin Williams thing, and Genes words about depressed people beforehand.
First of all, Gene made his comments BEFOREHAND. He did not make the comments after the suicide of Robin Williams, it was sometime before. Within the month, but before none the less.
I do not agree with Gene’s statement, especially the whole telling people on the side of a building to jump bit. It was a statement made out of an obvious ignorance to depression. Though he is one of the most famous people that I have heard show this ignorance, it is more common then you think.
As for the #BanGene thing, just stop it.
I learned of it after 2 radio stations in Winnipeg pulled all Kiss songs from their playlist rotation recently.
I do not agree with this, for 2 reasons.
One, because there is more to Kiss then just Gene Simmons. He may be the most well known and the loudest voice of the group, but he is but one voice. Though I have not heard of reactions of the others, my guess is that they would be just as mortified with being falsely associated with the comments (VIA Kiss), as we are with hearing them.
And the other reason, was the reactionary nature of the hashtag (as with the nature of 95% of other things that “shock” and “enrage” the social media warriors of the world).
Besides punishing the other members of Kiss for simply being in a band with Gene, the whole concept is moot anyway, because of the nature of how social media boycotts work. Wait awhile, and we will have all forgotten the incident.
Though the music bans are relevant now, will people still remember why they wanted Kiss banned, 6 months from now?
Without using Google, Does anyone remember why any of the following got social-media wide negative attention:
– The Hawthorn police department in California
– Dr Phil
And for the Canadians in particular:
– Home depot
– Calgary Co-oP
If you need to use google to refresh yourself of any of the references, then you will understand why I question the permanent nature of the banning of an artist, in response to a situation that is completely reactionary, and possibly even out of context.