By Jess Santacroce
Music Writer, Phoenix Radio 

Over the past several days, several musicians, including Jazz group The Cookers and folk singer-songwriter Kristy Lee have canceled performances at the Kennedy Center in protest of the December 18 announcement that it would now be officially named the “Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts.” Many of the musicians released individual press statements, but the consensus seems to be that they find it inappropriate and alarming that a President would rename the national arts center after himself, and they believe that this move is just one in a series of acts indicating that Trump intends to take over the center and only allow art that reflects his own beliefs to be performed. The musicians who have canceled performances at the Kennedy Center so far are engaged in an effective form of protest with their music, but refusing to perform in a venue that no longer represents freedom of expression is just one way artists use their music and other art to protest, even though it may not be immediately classified as a protest by others, or in some cases, even thought of that way by the artists themselves. 

Refusing to serve as a consultant or advisor for any organization or venue that does not allow artists to freely express themselves

As news spread of musicians backing away from the Kennedy Center due to the name change, some national news reports incorrectly announced that someone named “Renee Flaming” had resigned her advisory role in protest of Trump adding his name to the arts center. There is no musician named “Renee Flaming,” but the writers of these articles probably heard that opera soprano Renee Fleming had resigned from an advisory role in protest of Trump renaming the center after himself. While Fleming did indeed resign from an advisory role in deliberate protest of the actions of Donald Trump, she acted long before the name change. Fleming’s decision to step down was reported in the magazine “Opera Wire” in an article written by Francisco Salazar on February 12, 2025. According to the article, Fleming resigned in response to the action that would allow Trump to push through the name change ten months later, his becoming Chair of the Board and appointing people who would do whatever he wished. 

Choosing themes that promote a worldview or message in opposition to something the artist sees around them

Protest music itself falls into this category, but music does not have to be created in direct opposition to a specific person, occurrence, or issue to serve as a form of protest. Writing, recording, and performing music offering a worldview different than the prevailing culture can also serve as a way to protest what the artist sees as flaws in the culture.

Christian contemporary music is perhaps the most well-known example. While modern secular pop music tends to promote glorifying oneself, focusing on a person’s own wants and needs and image, Christian pop is characterized by a focus on the glory and the will of Jesus.

Secular pop songs about achieving goals and getting what you need and want in life tend to follow a similar theme to Katy Perry’s 2013 hit “Roar,” with lyrics centering around personal power and achievement. Contrast that with “The Lord Will Provide” by Passion and Landon Wolfe, featuring the line, “everything I need, my father has it.” 

Boycotting products or services from companies or individuals they do not agree with in the process of creating and/or promoting their art

This form of protest is always deliberate, and it is often mocked, mainly because people who choose it so often go about it in an ineffective or even counterproductive way. Rapper Kid Rock co-owns a bar in Nashville. He uses his image as a musician to promote the bar, and the bar to promote his image in music, as the place is called “Kid Rock’s Big <expletive> Honky Tonk and Steakhouse.”

In 2023, Kid Rock wanted to protest what he saw as Budweiser’s support of the transgender community when the company briefly worked with a transgender content creator. In protest, Kid Rock posted a video of himself shooting bottles of the company’s product. Unfortunately, he had to first purchase the items, meaning all he did was waste his own money. Lending even less credibility to his boycott, multiple news outlets investigated and found Budweiser products still being served at the bar Kid Rock uses to promote his music, even during the supposed “boycott.”

Had he quietly removed the company’s products from the shelves of the business intertwined with his music career, refused any sponsorships from them, declined to have their products available at any shows he performed, and posted a video simply urging fans not to purchase from them, he would have had a genuine example of this type of protest.

Actions taken by fans of these and other artists who use their art practice to speak out vary. Some choose to separate the artist from the art, and continue to enjoy the person’s work, regardless of their level of agreement with the artist’s actions or beliefs.  Others choose to act in agreement with their favorite artists. Some fans respond by boycotting or protesting artists whose messages they disagree with.  For others, it depends on the artist and the issue. Just as each artist has a choice in what they promote, protest, or express through and with their art, the choice of how to respond belongs to each fan.










Works referenced:

Salazar, F. (2025). Following Trump takeover, Renee Fleming resigns from Kennedy Center. Opera Wire website. Following Trump Takeover, Renée Fleming Resigns From Kennedy Center - OperaWire OperaWire
December 30, 2025

 By Jess Santacroce
Music Writer, 95 5 The Heat 

The cancellation of the late-night tv show “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” brought censorship to the news and to social media and all its memes. On September 17, 2025, Kimmel spoke out against the behavior of President Donald Trump following the murder of right-wing content creator and non-profit owner Charlie Kirk. Kimmel’s remarks suggested that Trump’s mourning for Kirk may be insincere, as he was able to shift his focus to the ballroom he’s designing remarkably quickly following Kirk’s passing.
Although not cited as a reason for the show’s cancellation, country singer Margo Price has since become famous as the last musician to play on the show prior to the cancellation, and was reported to have said she was glad she “got the last word” with an anti-fascist song.
Those who support the removal of Kimmel’s show from the air argue that the decision was made by a private corporation, and was not in fact censorship. Others note that the cancellation happened due to pressure from the Trump administration, amounting to government censorship. But what exactly is “censorship?” We all think we know the answer, but there is a lot of misunderstanding surrounding the term, the first amendment, and the concept of “free speech.”
Myth: The first amendment means you get to say anything you want anywhere you want without any unwanted results.

Reality: The first amendment protects you from punishment by the government for what you say, not from the consequences of your actions.
Shortly before the Kimmel cancellation, various content creators on YouTube covered stories of people who were shocked to find themselves fired because of things they posted on TikTok. Most of them did not understand that you could be fired from a job for what you say and do on the air, including the internet, and thought that their firing amounted to censorship. These were not cases of censorship, regardless of how professionally embarrassing they may have been for the person who was fired for their content. Censorship, or denial of your right to free speech ,occurs when the government jails you, fines you, or denies you permits, licenses, or other services because of what you said. None of the people fired for their TikToks were going to jail, paying any fines, or being denied any government services because of their content. As far as the law was concerned, they were still completely free to say whatever they wanted. Their employers had just decided they were not welcome to say it while working for them. This was not censorship, simply the consequences of the individuals’ actions.
In the Kimmel case, Price was definitely not censored in any way. Her song was not cited as a reason for the show’s cancellation. Had ABC independently decided that Kimmel was not welcome to criticize Trump’s reaction to Kirk’s murder on their platform, he would also have experienced no censorship, just the consequences of his actions. Kimmel would have been completely free to go find another network or another platform and say whatever he wanted to say. However, the show’s cancellation is likely due to pressure from Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr.. As the chairman of a portion of the government, Carr would be able to exert influence and pressure to prevent Kimmel from saying what he said no matter where Kimmel went by denying licensing to anyone who would host him. When the government decides that you must be prevented from saying whatever it is that you said, that is censorship.
Myth: People who respond to your social media comments by telling you that you are misinformed, asking you to stop harassing or trolling, or threatening to delete and block you are denying your first amendment right to free speech.
Reality: Musicians monitoring their fan pages and other page managers and owners are not agents of the government, they are private citizens deciding what they will and will now allow in private space.
Several musicians have made statements about both Charlie Kirk’s murder and Jimmy Kimmel’s cancellation, and as is the case when statements are made on social media, the posts get widely mixed reactions, some of which may be distasteful to the original poster. Many choose to deal with these unwanted comments by removing them from their page, or even blocking the person who posted them. A musician or other social media account owner deleting your comments and blocking you from their page is not censoring you. That person does not have the power to put you in jail, make you pay a fine, haul you off to a re-education camp, or deny you licensing or other benefits that you could not get someplace else. A fan who is deleted and blocked from a musician’s page still has the option of going on to another artist’s page and saying the same thing, posting the same thing on their own page, or walking around chanting whatever it was they said out loud if they choose to do so.
This still holds true if a lot of people join in on the calls for you to stop posting whatever it is you’re posting on the page in question. This is not censorship. The page owner is doing the same thing a homeowner or renter is doing when they inform someone that promoting social, political, or spiritual beliefs they do not agree with is unwelcome in their home. All those other people are simply stating that if you came over to their real or virtual “house,” you would not be welcome to talk like that there either. You can still say what you said on your own page, or on another page that welcomes sentiments like yours.
Myth: Criticizing someone who experienced violence is a call to violence, and therefore not protected speech under the first amendment.
Reality: The use of violence as a reaction to anything anyone says violates criminal law and is never justified. Criticizing things that person said before the act of violence was done against them does not in any way suggest there should be an exception to the law.
As arguments about Kimmel rage on over the internet and in other public space, additional people, including some musicians, are further taking sides in an argument over whether or not it is acceptable to criticize Kirk’s words in the wake of his murder. Those who argue that it is not link criticism of Kirk with support or even celebration of what happened to him to end his life. Others point out that their criticism is directed at content Kirk himself created and posted, and has nothing to do with the way that his life ended.
Murder is illegal in the United States. It is also in violation of the teachings of Christianity and nearly every other spiritual or religious belief system. What happened to Charlie Kirk should not have happened to him, and should never happen to anyone. This does not change the fact that his YouTube channel alone is full of content that a lot of Americans, and a lot of Christians, point out is not in line with the law or with the teachings of Jesus. Pointing this out does not mean a person is in any way mocking his murder or denying the impact he had on those who loved him. They are simply doing what Kirk is often celebrated for, arguing against a point someone else made.
On September 22, 2025, multiple news outlets announced that Jimmy Kimmel would return to the air on September 23, 2025. While this instance of censorship was quickly corrected, members of both sides of the political spectrum have noted that it sets a dangerous precedent for comedians, other spoken word artists, and everyone else in the arts and beyond.
Disagreement is not censorship. Criticizing someone is not censorship. Private citizens and private entities refusing to allow content on their privately owned space is not censorship. However, any form of pressure, punishment, or threats from anyone acting as an agent of the government in response to what someone says is censorship, a violation of the first amendment of the United States Constitution, and the denial of the right to free speech.

 By Jess Santacroce
Music Writer, 95.5 The Heat, Phoenix Radio
​
Near the end of April, the Kennedy Center quietly announced that all LGBTQ Pride events would be canceled or moved to other venues. Officially, the decision is not related to censorship, but this shift in programming does come on the heels of President Trump’s takeover of the Kennedy Center. Earlier this year, in February, a show at the Art Museum of the Americas featuring Caribbean and African artists was among the first to be shut down as funding was cut under Trump’s anti-diversity, equity, and inclusion executive orders. Current policies put the arts at risk, including music. Searching for ways to combat current and future efforts to shut down the arts through censorship only generates multiple pages hosted by organizations and activists urging us to “speak up”...and usually donate to their organization. But how can we really use our voices, and the many other avenues available for self-expression these days...to fight censorship in music and other art?

Practice your own art

Once a novel or short story is written and shared in any form, whether that be through a commercial publisher, small press publication, self-publication, or just passing it around unpublished, it is out there to be read. Paintings and drawings and sculptures cannot be unseen once they are created and seen, and music can be played and sung, whether it is funded or even legally allowed or not.
If you produce any type of art, keep going. Create your art and share it in whatever way you decide is best for your art, no matter what might be going on with policies and funding. Now might even be the time for you to address issues of censorship, authoritarianism, disregard for the foreigner, disdain for the poor, and other problems that seem to have gained new life over the past one hundred or so days.
You never know when your work might be exactly what someone needs to keep going, or when it might give someone else an idea that changes their life or the life of yet another person.
One such opportunity for young Utica artists is the “Juneteenth” celebration scheduled for June 19, 2025 at the Utica City Hall. Share your art in support of this important national holiday by reaching out to local event sponsor “For the Good, Inc.” at “[email protected]” Be sure to include “Juneteenth performance” in your subject line and address your message to T.K. Howard, Sr.

Support local artists, venues, and organizations

Every “speak out” page ending with a link to give money to some national or regional non-profit organization or the other grows tiresome pretty quickly. While many of these organizations are no doubt doing real work to fight censorship, many likely aren’t doing much except collecting your money and paying their CEOs a corporate salary. Sorting through them all and finding out which ones are truly worthwhile recipients can amount to a whole project by itself.
Supporting individual artists, local organizations, and venues in your community that support the arts and artists is a much more effective tactic. While there is nothing wrong with seeing your favorite nationally or internationally known band on tour or taking a special trip to see somebody at Madison Square Garden or Red Rocks, remember that most of these large scale events involve corporate sponsorship. While this can be beneficial in that it allows more people to experience the work, it carries with it the risk of corporate influence on the event. If an artist takes a large sum of money from a corporation to perform onstage each night, they’re not likely to risk losing that by performing work that goes against that corporation’s values or interests.
Small neighborhood venues and organizations are much more likely to truly be places where artists can say whatever they feel called to say without interference.

Research carefully before you vote or support political candidates
​
Trump’s far-fight censorship is the censorship making the news right now, but at least in the United States, both sides of the political spectrum have been and can continue to be guilty of trying to censor messages they disagree with. And if censorship is wrong, then it’s wrong when those you agree with much of the rest of the time do it too. While both sides can engage in “cancel culture,” the practice of ruining someone’s career and even their entire life for producing content somebody deems “offensive,” in any way has largely been perpetrated by the political left. Do a little digging into past speeches, writings, and legislation to learn whether or not someone has championed this practice before making the decision to vote for them.
Fighting efforts to censor the arts can be especially difficult when the project is something you find distasteful, or something that conveys messages you disagree with, but this is the time that it is most important.
No matter what happens, keep staying informed. Keep enjoying your local arts scene. And always keep creating your art.