A very good article, Wendy Francis.

People are not born with moral values. Throughout the ages, young people have been instructed by storytellers, holy men, religious leaders, family, role models, and wise old people, on the standards of behaviour which the young would need to become valued members of society.

Today's mass media is not just a means of entertainment, it is now so influential, that it is displacing the traditional institutions that have long defined and transmitted the culture of a people which is a guide to the young of what constitutes acceptable behaviour.

Children today are living in a paradoxical world where what constitutes acceptable behaviour is subject to double standards. Parents, teachers, religious leaders and community leaders strive to instil in the young, virtues such as respect for others, respect for authority, personnel responsibility, self control, and moral boundaries. And then along comes the entertainment media which not only blurs the edges, it openly denigrates them as "uncool", and it encourages anti social behaviour.

Either our society disapproves of violence towards women, drug taking behaviour, violence as a first resort in solving personnel problems, and criminal behaviour, or we approve of it.

If we disapprove of it, why do we tolerate the entertainment media's constant endorsement of these concepts? If we as a society can understand that cigarette advertising will encourage significant numbers of children to smoke, and if approve of our legislators banning cigarette advertising, how is it that we can not see that allowing the entertainment media to constantly glamourise drug taking behaviour and violence, amounts to exactly the same thing?

Rap music in particular is noted for its promotion of anti social values, and the target audience for the product is exactly the sort of emotionally immature, violent, socially inept, and not real bright young males that are the biggest problem to society. They are also the ones who have the most difficulty in attracting a female.

Allowing the entertainment media to instruct these young men in attitudes conducive to violence towards females is not a very bright thing for any society to do.

"What sort of society is it wherewe do not allow advertisements showing a person smoking a cigarette and yet it is permissible to portray explicit sexual advertising to children that objectifies women, sending messages that contribute to eating disorders, depression and self-harm?"

Well said.

Similarly, I cannot believe that people are hauled over the coals for possessing marijuana (Joel Madden from The Voice), as if this were the most heinous of crimes, yet society condones individuals viewing the most vile pornography on the grounds that we can’t tell people what they can and can’t do in their own home.

interestingly, when this hit the press a couple of weeks ago and the petition was first started, I tweeted the petition. Within five minutes I was attacked by a female "fan" of the thing performing at the hotel. Her view-"you are a racist". I wonder what her response would have been had she been the victim of another male "fan" of this thing acting out after the concert?

The article exhibits a confusion between the right of free speech and protection of people from sexual or other kinds of assault. Quite simply, in a free society one can say almost anything one wants to, but one cannot do almost anything one wants to.

In the article: "... Eatons Hill hotel hosted US Hip Hop entertainer, Tyler the Creator, whose lyrics include,“Rape a pregnant * and tell my friends I had a threesome. You got a * death wish? I'm a genie, it'll get done”."

The words above are objectionable and loathsome, but that by itself is no reason to ban them. Other people may find my words objecting to banning speech objectionable and loathsome. When the 'Index Purgatorius', the list of books banned by the Catholic church was operative, most of the works listed were what the church found objectionable as it questioned doctrine. Actual pornography is ephemeral.

In the article: "There was wide-spread, justifiable shock and outrage recently at the alleged assault by Nigella Lawson's husband, Charles Saatchi, as we viewed in many forms of media, from many angles,photos of him mistreating her and grabbing her a restaurant."

The behaviour described above is criminal. It should not be allowed and should be prosecuted where it occurs.

If you want a free society you have to allow people to say what some find objectionable as long as it doesn't present a clear and present danger.

I live near the performance venue and stayed away. I think that was all that was necessary.

Why oh why does everyone think they have a right to control society and tell everyone how to think.

Why do 99% of people think their attitudes and assumptions are 100% correct and accurately reflect the "values of our society"?

Why are we all such good people, so much better drivers then average, so much more attractive and more intelligent then average etc

Why are our personal morals always so correct and the morals of "those people over there" so corrupted.

To protect our mental health apparently - http://www.livescience.com/26914-why-we-are-all-above-average.html

I wish people would concentrate more on protecting their mental health in private.

I have the impression that incitement to violence has long been considered a criminal offence. I don't understand why that law doesn't apply in this instance. Can someone please enlighten me.