Aram's writing on the ways that society and government uses music as a tool of control made me realize that this is happening more than ever right now. Personally, I think that the way music is ideologically regulated is the most significant in terms of persuading not only consumer behavior but the investments of the industry. These ideological priorities can be seen in the topical consistency of Top 40 music. These chart-toppers are overwhelmingly preaching commercial ideals that are supportive of capitalism. Songs that are covetous and materialistic in nature cause listeners to adopt these ideals, even if subconsciously at the least. And because it seems to be the least risky for music investors, it encourages musicians to make this kind of music in order to gain their favor. This is a form of ideological control in the sense that it prevents the masses from listening to potentially persuasive music that discourages the ideals that keep our society stable.

One interesting example that Aram brought up was the practice of the African colonialists placing certain bans on indigenous music that had potentially subversive meanings. While the regulation did seek to suppress, it was not entirely successful because the secondary meanings were already such a big part of their culture. I wonder if the methods of control would be more powerful in societies where secondary meaning is inherent rather than purposeful and universally recognized. Looking more at topical oppression, the mainstream market will not resist because consumers don't realize the nature of the control.

briana berry