Power to the People and the Concern of Censorship

[mccaboose13]

I’ve seen lots of negative remarks on Instagram and YouTube about the fact that “Woman..” is missing from the new Power to the People box set/album. I’d like to add my two cents and say I don’t believe it is truly censorship on @Sean ‘s part to omit this song. What John and Yoko were saying in that song was that women in our global society are treated like second class citizens, among other citizens who are treated like second class citizens. They had a point and chose a very incendiary word to make their point.

Just because they used the word doesn’t mean it needs saying again. I think Sean recognized this and decided to leave this one out, not because the song isn’t important, but because language like the word they used isn’t needed in the world today. We should be far enough along that we can better express ourselves. At least I hope we are.

Anyways, that’s it. All Power to the Peoples!

 

[ecclesofficial]

Very well said

I think something that can be strangely forgotten is that the song in question is of course still available on all copies of the original (and other remasters) so it’s not as if history is being ‘erased’ - it’s still very easy to find and listen to the song.

 

[mccaboose13]

Very well said

I think something that can be strangely forgotten is that the song in question is of course still available on all copies of the original (and other remasters) so it’s not as if history is being ‘erased’ - it’s still very easy to find and listen to the song.

Thank you friend! Yes, the original song is still very much out there, it's a relic of it's time. The message is relevant but the language, not so much

 

[leadfeather]

Sorry, but to me this is rewriting history. The use of the word was also controversial when Yoko and Jon originally used it. I feel we nowadays spend sometimes more energy on the language than on really solving the problems in actual reality. I would have strongly preferred it to be included with a clear discussion on the messages of the song, why this specific wording is not used anymore and with a call or action to take a positive step.

 

[mccaboose13]

Sorry, but to me this is rewriting history. The use of the word was also controversial when Yoko and Jon originally used it. I feel we nowadays spend sometimes more energy on the language than on really solving the problems in actual reality. I would have strongly preferred it to be included with a clear discussion on the messages of the song, why this specific wording is not used anymore and with a call or action to take a positive step.

I mean the song is still available, just not on this collection. We can expend as much energy as we like but in the end, it’s not there. Sean made a choice and we have to accept that, even if some people don’t agree with it.

 

[beatlesaint]

Ok, John Lennon was as far from a racist as you can get. He always praised black music and said what an influence it was on him for one. Secondly, most importantly he married a Japanese woman....needs no explanation.

But, for worse unfortunately, the world in which we live has changed. Some things that nobody took any notice of for years are suddenly under the spotlight. John & Yoko have explained the song, its meaning and its relevance. Its out there on You Tube and in print. But the people who would be most upset would not even bother reading or listening to any of that. John would be called a racist, the meaning of the song would be totally lost in translation, he would be cancelled, to use the current phrase, the Lennon hate would gain momentum and the backlash would be horrific. Nobody needs that, least of all Sean, Julian and Yoko. The headlines and news bulletins using the "ex Beatle uses N word in song" for a story like the song has just this minute been discovered would be everywhere.....

So what choice did Sean and the Lennon Estate have? Well, they had the choice they've taken in highlighting the live recordings rather than the "Some Time..." album or they had a choice to just kick this release down the road for another few years and see how the land lies then. This is the most obvious case of "whatever you do you can't win" I think they'll ever have to face.

So kudos to Sean for making a decision he probably doesnt agree with totally given its almost like removing a major track from his father's history. If you are reading this Sean you have my respect, you are doing a fantastic job, we all appreciate how much material you give us, the fans. Long may it continue because in the Beatle Universe the Lennon Estate lead the way by a country mile.

 

[mccaboose13]

Also if people don’t like the decision made, they don’t have to buy the box set

 

[ecclesofficial]

Ok, John Lennon was as far from a racist as you can get. He always praised black music and said what an influence it was on him for one. Secondly, most importantly he married a Japanese woman....needs no explanation.

But, for worse unfortunately, the world in which we live has changed. Some things that nobody took any notice of for years are suddenly under the spotlight. John & Yoko have explained the song, its meaning and its relevance. Its out there on You Tube and in print. But the people who would be most upset would not even bother reading or listening to any of that. John would be called a racist, the meaning of the song would be totally lost in translation, he would be cancelled, to use the current phrase, the Lennon hate would gain momentum and the backlash would be horrific. Nobody needs that, least of all Sean, Julian and Yoko. The headlines and news bulletins using the "ex Beatle uses N word in song" for a story like the song has just this minute been discovered would be everywhere.....

So what choice did Sean and the Lennon Estate have? Well, they had the choice they've taken in highlighting the live recordings rather than the "Some Time..." album or they had a choice to just kick this release down the road for another few years and see how the land lies then. This is the most obvious case of "whatever you do you can't win" I think they'll ever have to face.

So kudos to Sean for making a decision he probably doesnt agree with totally given its almost like removing a major track from his father's history. If you are reading this Sean you have my respect, you are doing a fantastic job, we all appreciate how much material you give us, the fans. Long may it continue because in the Beatle Universe the Lennon Estate lead the way by a country mile.

Absolutely. I’ll be happy to be enjoying the well over 100 tracks that are included on this release rather than worrying about just one.

 

[leadfeather]

Ok, John Lennon was as far from a racist as you can get. He always praised black music and said what an influence it was on him for one. Secondly, most importantly he married a Japanese woman....needs no explanation.

But, for worse unfortunately, the world in which we live has changed. Some things that nobody took any notice of for years are suddenly under the spotlight. John & Yoko have explained the song, its meaning and its relevance. Its out there on You Tube and in print. But the people who would be most upset would not even bother reading or listening to any of that. John would be called a racist, the meaning of the song would be totally lost in translation, he would be cancelled, to use the current phrase, the Lennon hate would gain momentum and the backlash would be horrific. Nobody needs that, least of all Sean, Julian and Yoko. The headlines and news bulletins using the "ex Beatle uses N word in song" for a story like the song has just this minute been discovered would be everywhere.....

So what choice did Sean and the Lennon Estate have? Well, they had the choice they've taken in highlighting the live recordings rather than the "Some Time..." album or they had a choice to just kick this release down the road for another few years and see how the land lies then. This is the most obvious case of "whatever you do you can't win" I think they'll ever have to face.

So kudos to Sean for making a decision he probably doesnt agree with totally given its almost like removing a major track from his father's history. If you are reading this Sean you have my respect, you are doing a fantastic job, we all appreciate how much material you give us, the fans. Long may it continue because in the Beatle Universe the Lennon Estate lead the way by a country mile.

I completely understand what you are saying and I also understands Sean's difficult decision. However, we sometimes seem to forget part of the essential spirit that made John (and Yoko) so unique. They often stepped on toes or accepted to be ridiculed if they felt that the message was right. It just makes me sad that words are sometimes give more weight than the actual reality. I feel that words vs actual reality is not always in balance. I know that it is rightfully a sensitive issue and I also agree that whatever decision Sean had taken, people would understandably be upset.

 

[mccaboose13]

We just have to choose our battles. I think Sean choose wisely

 

[Brian Of Nazareth]

I agree with much of what you’re saying, and I think context matters here. If this had been a straight re-release of Some Time in New York City, I’d have wanted the original track listing preserved exactly as it was — warts and all — for historical accuracy. But since this new Power to the People set is more of a “time period” collection rather than a single-album reissue, I don’t think its omission is as significant in this context.

When Woman Is the N****r of the World first came out in 1972, it was hugely controversial — even for John and Yoko. The phrase was originally coined by Yoko in the late ’60s, and they used it deliberately to provoke and spotlight the ways women were treated as second-class citizens worldwide. It was bold, it was uncomfortable, and it forced conversations in a way few mainstream songs ever had. The song even led to John and Yoko being banned from certain radio stations, and John famously defended it on national television, explaining its meaning and intent. Whether people agreed with their choice of language or not, it undeniably had cultural impact in drawing attention to the feminist message they were trying to push into the public consciousness.

It’s also worth remembering the social backdrop when John wrote Power to the People in early 1971. The Vietnam War was still raging, anti-war protests were at their peak, civil rights struggles were ongoing in the US, and women’s liberation was gaining momentum. John had moved from purely personal songwriting into openly political work — aligning himself with radical causes, appearing at rallies, and using his platform to challenge government policy and social inequality. Songs like Power to the People, Give Peace a Chance, and later Woman Is the N****r of the World were part of that same activist streak, aimed at sparking debate and energising change.

Fast-forward to today, and we’re in a very different social and media climate. Sean was in a no-win situation here — damned if he did, damned if he didn’t. Include the track and risk backlash over the language; leave it out and face criticism for “censorship.” Either way, it’s a tough call for the Lennon Estate, and I think this decision was made with the broader purpose of the set in mind rather than to erase history.

All Power to the People indeed.

 

[Skylar Moody]

I agree with much of what you’re saying, and I think context matters here. If this had been a straight re-release of Some Time in New York City, I’d have wanted the original track listing preserved exactly as it was — warts and all — for historical accuracy. But since this new Power to the People set is more of a “time period” collection rather than a single-album reissue, I don’t think its omission is as significant in this context.

When Woman Is the N****r of the World first came out in 1972, it was hugely controversial — even for John and Yoko. The phrase was originally coined by Yoko in the late ’60s, and they used it deliberately to provoke and spotlight the ways women were treated as second-class citizens worldwide. It was bold, it was uncomfortable, and it forced conversations in a way few mainstream songs ever had. The song even led to John and Yoko being banned from certain radio stations, and John famously defended it on national television, explaining its meaning and intent. Whether people agreed with their choice of language or not, it undeniably had cultural impact in drawing attention to the feminist message they were trying to push into the public consciousness.

It’s also worth remembering the social backdrop when John wrote Power to the People in early 1971. The Vietnam War was still raging, anti-war protests were at their peak, civil rights struggles were ongoing in the US, and women’s liberation was gaining momentum. John had moved from purely personal songwriting into openly political work — aligning himself with radical causes, appearing at rallies, and using his platform to challenge government policy and social inequality. Songs like Power to the People, Give Peace a Chance, and later Woman Is the N****r of the World were part of that same activist streak, aimed at sparking debate and energising change.

Fast-forward to today, and we’re in a very different social and media climate. Sean was in a no-win situation here — damned if he did, damned if he didn’t. Include the track and risk backlash over the language; leave it out and face criticism for “censorship.” Either way, it’s a tough call for the Lennon Estate, and I think this decision was made with the broader purpose of the set in mind rather than to erase history.

All Power to the People indeed.

Agree 100%! No matter what the Lennon team, Beatles team, etc. tries to push out, there’s always going to be those that find a way to be miserable. I was wondering the same about the song, how they would navigate the controversy. But in context, yes, this is NOT just the re-release of Sometime in New York City. It involves the concerts, all the short audio clips we heard throughout the movie, everything! The album played a huge part in that, but the main focus was the era itself, which extends far beyond one album. So to leave one song out, even two, wouldn’t be a major issue.

If the song had been included, you’d have people trying to cancel a dead musician who can’t elaborate on his work, or his son who is trying to keep the beat going and encourage a new generation of fans to do the same. Now without it, people are pulling the “erasing history” card.

I don’t agree with the word choice, it’s always been a tough listen for me. But I understand why it was done! Even trying to explain why that word was chosen has gotten me in hot water with fans believing I’m “defending a racist”, which we know he isn’t. At the end of the day, cancel culture is way too powerful. That’s the downside to social media, along with spreading false narratives and taking moments like this out of context.

Definitely a tough call, but history isn’t being erased. The album is still here. The performances, interviews, etc. are still here. Everything is free to search and learn about as you please. There are so many factors that go into a release, its marketing, etc. that many fail to recognize. No one is trying to forget what was created, but rather focus on what reflects this era best (and as @Good Dog Nigel pointed out, the quality and availability of different recordings.)

Peace and love ya’ll, I’m glad we’re able to speak maturely on this!

 

[beatlesaint]

At the end of the day, cancel culture is way too powerful. That’s the downside to social media, along with spreading false narratives and taking moments like this out of context.

Thankyou Skylar, that’s exactly what I wish I’d added to my post

 

[ecclesofficial]

Fast-forward to today, and we’re in a very different social and media climate. Sean was in a no-win situation here — damned if he did, damned if he didn’t. Include the track and risk backlash over the language; leave it out and face criticism for “censorship.” Either way, it’s a tough call for the Lennon Estate, and I think this decision was made with the broader purpose of the set in mind rather than to erase history.

Think this is a really good point - and I have to say I find the use of the word “censorship” by these detractors a bit funny, as if the John Lennon Estate are shutting down anyone who talks about the song (the song that is, you know, available everywhere else still!). The fact that we’re able to have this dialogue about it on the official forums surely removes any validity to calling this “censorship”.

 

[Mariana Fraga]

People who are affirming that there is a censorship going on have no idea what a censorship actually is. The song is out there, anyone can listen to it on their favorite streaming platform as many times as they wish, under John’s official channels. What is happening here is that they preferred not to remix it or, let’s say, “celebrate” the song the way they are doing to the other amazing tracks they gave a six year attention to, understandably so. That’s it. People also seem to forget that everything, literally everything about John is about evolving. Sadly he is not here, hasn’t been here for almost five decades to keep evolving and becoming a greater human being, but it’s heart warming to see that his legacy is still evolving, now in the hands of people who don’t just close their eyes to John&Yoko’s missteps, who manage everything carefully, listening to what needs to be listened, learned and addressed.

Being disappointed that one of your favorite songs is not there is ok, now not understanding why it is not there is just a dangerous lack of empathy and social understanding.

 

[mccaboose13]

I’m glad I’ve been able to use my voice to help talk through such a complicated thing. To echo @Skylar Moody I’m glad we’ve been able to keep it mature and civil!

 

[johnispookie]

Agree 100%! No matter what the Lennon team, Beatles team, etc. tries to push out, there’s always going to be those that find a way to be miserable. I was wondering the same about the song, how they would navigate the controversy. But in context, yes, this is NOT just the re-release of Sometime in New York City. It involves the concerts, all the short audio clips we heard throughout the movie, everything! The album played a huge part in that, but the main focus was the era itself, which extends far beyond one album. So to leave one song out, even two, wouldn’t be a major issue.

If the song had been included, you’d have people trying to cancel a dead musician who can’t elaborate on his work, or his son who is trying to keep the beat going and encourage a new generation of fans to do the same. Now without it, people are pulling the “erasing history” card.

I don’t agree with the word choice, it’s always been a tough listen for me. But I understand why it was done! Even trying to explain why that word was chosen has gotten me in hot water with fans believing I’m “defending a racist”, which we know he isn’t. At the end of the day, cancel culture is way too powerful. That’s the downside to social media, along with spreading false narratives and taking moments like this out of context.

Definitely a tough call, but history isn’t being erased. The album is still here. The performances, interviews, etc. are still here. Everything is free to search and learn about as you please. There are so many factors that go into a release, its marketing, etc. that many fail to recognize. No one is trying to forget what was created, but rather what reflects this era best (and as @Good Dog Nigel pointed out, the quality and availability of different recordings.)

Peace and love ya’ll, I’m glad we’re able to speak maturely on this!

Well said Skylar

 

[nutopia999]

 

[Good Dog Nigel]

View attachment 3460

Calm down, dear. No-one's touched this album. It's not had anything deleted. You can still get it on vinyl, CD, downloads and streaming.

 

[steffieweffie]

Sorry, but to me this is rewriting history. The use of the word was also controversial when Yoko and Jon originally used it. I feel we nowadays spend sometimes more energy on the language than on really solving the problems in actual reality. I would have strongly preferred it to be included with a clear discussion on the messages of the song, why this specific wording is not used anymore and with a call or action to take a positive step.

It’s not rewriting history. That would be removing the song everywhere. You have to grow with the times and respect that the word is not ok to say, even with the message John was saying. I respect Sean and the estates decision not to include it. People are aware of the message of the song and it will not be forgotten in history.