Britney Spears Re-records ‘If U Seek Amy’ For Radio Play
Bowing to pressure from radio station programmers here in the US, it is being reported that Britney Spears has been forced to re-record her song If You Seek Amy to make it less controversial for radio play. When sung, the line All of the boys and all of the girls are begging to if you seek Amy sounds like she is saying All of the boys and all of the girls are begging to F.U.C.K. me … which censors are none too pleased about. As a result, Brit reportedly re-recorded the song to leave the K off of the word seek:
Britney Spears has reportedly been forced to rerecord her forthcoming single after radio stations threatened to ban it from play. The controversial ‘If U Seek Amy’, set to be the third single from her Circus LP, contains the chorus “All of the boys and all of the girls are beggin’ to, If You Seek Amy”, which, when sung quickly, sounds like “F.U.C.K me”. Last week, several US radio stations threatened to boycott the song after deeming the lyrics to be too offensive for air. According to The Sun, Spears has since returned to the studio to rerecord the track, removing the “k” from the end of “seek” and renaming the song ‘If U See Amy’. Britney releases her new single ‘Circus’ in the UK on February 18.
Boo! This is kinda ridiculous. While I can appreciate that radio censors are trying to “protect” young listeners from hearing profanity on the radio, I feel it is a but over-the-top to censor the spelling of bad words. If she were actually saying the word FUCK then I can understand the need to censor … but if we’ve decided that we need to censor the spelling of words, then that’s a bit too much of an infringement of free speech I think. I’m not surprised that Britney is deciding to comply with this censorship … but I, for one, think it takes things a bit too far.
[Source]
Tags: 'If U See Amy', 'If U Seek Amy', Britney Spears
RSS
Feedburner
January 20th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
I’m calling bullshit not only because its the sun but there’s no way she re-recorded this song if it were true they would have just edit it
January 20th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Ok, I get it, but it’s stupid. And now the chorus won’t make sense. The whole point is that it’s flirting with the bad word by spelling it out, and if you say, “All of the boys and all of the girls are begging to if you see Amy” it no longer has any meaning. I think she should have either stuck to it and kept it the way it was or chosen another single. The controversy would have carried the song far enough online and on the airwaves that it would still have been successful.
January 20th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
i still dont get the big deal…even if she changes it…its not like the kids havent already heard the real version of it anyway. i personally love the song..it gives me a good giggle lol. its not like shes flat out saying it. censors are going over board these days
January 20th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
@nicole — exactly, it’s ridic
January 20th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Stupid censors really don’t seem to encourage parents to talk to their kids about this stuff. Its not her responsibility or the censors ! Its the parents. Sucks because this is one of the best songs Max Martin has written too.
January 20th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Okay, can someone please explain to me how the American censoring-system actually works, like what is and what isn’t allowed (because as a European/Dutch person I have no idea about this)?
I know this specific post is radio/music-related but especially on television: why is it allowed to kill someone in the most horrible, yet original, way(s) in various crime shows, but it isn’t allowed to say “fuck” or any other word like that? I mean, I would consider showing brutal murder on television a little bit more harmful to young people than the use of the word fuck….or that’s me…yep, that’s probably it.
January 20th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
I’ve never heard the song, so I didn’t realize that it sounded like that! Now I understand when people are like “It’s kind of racy!” and stuff, lol.
January 20th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
I love this song!
This is so stupid!!!! But they played lollipop by lil wayne and that was ok. So dumb!
You can’t even tell thats what she means.
January 20th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
well, they wrote it that way on purpose to try to get one over on the censors and they lost………it is what it is……..I am sure when the song was written they thought they were being clever…….not clever enough…..LOL
January 20th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
In Australia they’ll most likely just bleep out the words or whatever like they did with Alannis Morrisette’s You Oughta Know and any other song with fuck in it. Works for me, I have a nine year old. She knows why they’re bleeping it, but at least she’s not singing the word.
January 20th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
@Laurens –Exactly. The whole TV/radio censorship issue is seriously ridic in the US. Uptight conservatives freaked when Janet Jackson’s nipple was accidentally exposed during the Superbowl a few years ago, and yet it’s perfectly ok to show murder and blood and guts. It took a long time before “ass” and “bitch” were allowed to be spoken on television shows. Yet they bleep out “hole” when used right after “ass.” It really does make no sense. We were a nation founded by prudes hundreds of years ago when protestants wanted to escape religious persecution in Europe, and we’re still feeling the prudishness.
January 20th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Funniest thing is that “all of the boys and all of the girls are begging to F-U-C (a)ME” basically sounds exactly the same and is still a phonetic version of F-U-C-K. Just no K. So ultimately all of these crazy censorship measures really don’t amount to much.
January 20th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
What about the song P.I.M.P.??? :D
January 20th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
I definitely think this song was recorded this way on purpose. lol Catchy tune but my 4 year old daughter would definitely start singing the controversial part before the rest of the song if she hear it on the radio and I would NOT be thrilled about that.
January 20th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
How about she just release a different song? I’m not entirely convinced that If You Seek Amy would be the best choice for her next single. Mannequin, anyone?
January 20th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
Not seeing what is wrong with the radio play of this song says a lot about the morals of the people who feel that way. Is it a wonder why the dislike of the ultra right of gays and their culture is spreading toward the center.
January 20th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
@Jackie- if you think about it…it’s a smart to have if you seek amy as the next single. its the most talked about song off the cd & has caught the most buzz – alot more then Mannequin has.
January 20th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
I think it’s brills! And I listened to the song several times since the CD came out, and I didn’t pick up on it till now, now that people are talking about it. Maybe I’m slow, but I don’t think little kids hearing it will figure it out. And if kids can figure it out, than it’s not the first time they’ve heard that word, so what’s the big deal.
January 20th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
I think it’s stupid to get so riled up about a song in which she doesn’t actually say anything bad. But I expect that kind of silliness from radio stations. I remember when one of the radio stations in Chicago would announce the “Thong Song”, but they’d edit out the thong in the chorus. I also remember how the Disney version of “Genie in a Bottle” used to change the lyric “Gotta rub me the right way baby” to “Gotta treat me the right way baby” as though 12 year old me didn’t know what the real lyrics were lol.
January 20th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Just to clarify my earlier statement…I’m not endorsing using excessive swear words on radio and/or television either. What I was trying to say that one should put everything into perspective and if one feels like banning swear words then certain other elements, e.g. violence, should join that ban…if only for consistency with ‘protecting the younger demographic’ from this (before a certain time at least).
January 20th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
censorship is fucking stupid. we’re one really uptight country.
January 20th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Trent I totally agree with you!
January 20th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Umm we can give free condoms away to promote safe sex at Plan Parenthood, but Britney can’t say “If You Seek Amy”? What the fuck?
January 20th, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Wow. I didn’t get it at first until I had to read the lines “If you seek Amy” over and over. Now that I finally understand.. I think it’s ridiculous.
January 20th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
i hate censorship. I thought this song was so brilliant. So tongue in cheek. And now it doesn’t make sense.
January 20th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
I was sure that they wrote this song to be “tongue-in-cheek” and get one over the censors, but I was extremely surprised that they picked this song to be her 3rd single!
I mean, it’s cute and all, but it’s definitely not the 3rd best song from her CD!!
January 20th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
I agree with you Selina. IMHO the only thing the song had going for it was the “tongue-in-cheek” chorus and now not only does it not make sense but it isn’t even very catchy and definitely not the next best song on the cd. Amnesia is still my favorite (I know, I know, it’s just a bonus track) and Unusual You is really good too!
January 20th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Um, who listens to radio anymore? So does it really matter?
January 20th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
This is old hash.She stole this idea from a Canadian Band called April Wine who had North American success in the 70’s and 80’s. The song was Called “If You See Kay”(Tell her that I want her) It got A.M. airplay until the lyrics were realized and now it is only played on F.M.
January 20th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Boo is right! That was a cool effin song just the way it was…you could sing it around your mother and grandmother and they never would have caught on.
January 20th, 2009 at 7:29 pm
if she had to re-record, she didnt actually re-record from scratch.
studio recordings are not single takes, they are tons of parts put together, if they had to go thru and cut out all the word “seek” its easy, just redo that one line and substitute it in.
January 20th, 2009 at 8:34 pm
I agree, I think it’s ridiculous to censor a song because the words sound like something else. Clearly the words as written aren’t even profanity so what’s the big deal. I dj at a skating rink and I can tell you that kids know the words to the cd version of songs and don’t really care what’s being said as long as the song has a good beat or the chorus is a catchy one. It amazes me that she has to do this.
January 20th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
@ your destiny
i seriously doubt britney stole the idea from an irrelevant canadian band who were supposedly “successful” before she was even born. what you meant to say is that the idea has been done before.
January 20th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
@Kelly and some others….there’s a big difference between kids hearing swearing (which most probably do) and actually singing the words to a song. I”m no prude at all, but I don’t think it’s funny when my kid sings suggestive lyrics in songs. Thankfully we have Triple J for that and we don’t have to listen to it on mainstream radio.
January 20th, 2009 at 11:46 pm
I actually agree with this, for all she is spelling it in a cutesy way she is definitely swearing in this song. The sentence doesn’t make sense grammatically, so there’s no other way to interpret it. And since you cant “read” the way she is spelling it when you hear it on the radio, it leaves no doubt as to what she is saying.
January 21st, 2009 at 5:45 am
This is silly i agree, people need to pull there heads out there ASSES there are bigger issues going on in the world. Censorship sucks and hopefully now that we have a new president things will change and maybe freedom of speech and artistic expression will be okay again
January 21st, 2009 at 8:18 am
@Jennie- you think Obama is going to make it so people can swear on the radio?
January 21st, 2009 at 10:27 am
Geez, a bit over the top with the censorship there, im pretty sure ive heard worse songs on the radio where they get all extra graphic and stuff. Arent there more important things to worry about these days?? And pretty sure nobody really listens to the radio anymore, so whatev’s
January 21st, 2009 at 11:02 am
So lemme get this straight – it’s okay for the guy in Saving Abel to sing about someone going down on him, but Britney can’t allude to a word that not everyone will even get?
I am so over the FCC.
January 21st, 2009 at 11:37 am
She does not have to change a thing. Pop radio could just do us a favor and not play the single in the first place. Either way it’s fine with me. Are we now going to have to listen to that stupid queen screaming “DON”T CENSOR BRITNEY! LEAVE HER ALONE!”? LOL. I know you love her Trent but really now. No one is making Brit do anything. Not to mention all the great publicity this story as brought to her. None of this seems fishy? Really? No, fo realz. None? OK. ;)
January 21st, 2009 at 2:05 pm
I am generally against censorship, but I think it is total bullshit that brittney and her people tried to pull this.
It isnt “tongue in cheek” they recorded a song wherre she spells the word fuck then titled it to try and get by the censors “all the boys and all the girls are begging to f u c k me” makes sense as a sentence/lyric “all of the boys and all the girls are begging to if you seek amy” is complete jibberish she just spelled fuck and thought nobody would care.
People may not like FCC censorship but the regulations are set by lawmakers we voted into office. Stations have the right to broadcast it uncensored but will have to pay fines, like comedy central does when they let south park say shit
January 21st, 2009 at 9:02 pm
While I agree that the FCC is making a mountain out of a mole hill, I must say that this really doesn’t have anything to do with artistic expression. No one is saying she can’t record and sell this song. They are just prohibiting it from being played on public radio. Playboy is artistic expression also, but you’re not going to see it in your average middle school library. That being said, I love the song, and yes, there are worse things to listen to on the radio. But I also agree with Samy210, no one listens to the radio anymore anyway.
January 21st, 2009 at 10:38 pm
People who think this song is brilliant are rather retarded.
Oh, it’s code for a curse word. Wow!! How 3rd grade. Just like the rest of Britney’s crap songs.
January 22nd, 2009 at 5:43 am
Why censor her crap? Kneegars can call women Ho’s and Bitches, why can’t she say FUCK?
January 22nd, 2009 at 6:33 am
@ not so much, No i dont think he will, what i meant is that for the past 8 years the people in charge have been on a moral high horse example: the janet Jackson super bowl incident and all the indeceny stuff that followed. I think that they went way overboard with trying to shift focus from the war and bad economy to “christian values” when their should be a seperation of church and state and considering we have freedom of religion in this country not everyone has the same beliefs. I do hope the obama admin focuses on whats important getting the economy back and track and ending the prob in iraq that have been going on for way to long…. and btw I havent heard britneys song, but i dont like our rights being taken away we should be progressing as a society not regressing. ok end of long rant
January 23rd, 2009 at 1:31 am
Theres no way this can be true. First of all, they play freakin lollipop on the radio. Second of all, they played fergies don’t funk with my heart. And you could hardly tell she was saying funk. So theres no way they would try and censor a song that has an underlying meaning to spell out a bad word. I call this whole controversy over it BS, they’ll play the song how it is.
January 23rd, 2009 at 7:19 am
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THEY HAVE PROBLEM ABOUT LISTENING THINGS, I HEARD 100 OF TIMES THE SONG, AND IT DOESNT SOUND LIKE SHE`S SAYING THAT. STUPID RADIO & PEOPLE. FUCK YOU STUPID RADIO. THEY WANT TO GIVE PUBLICITY TO THEIR STUPID RADIO
January 23rd, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Any way you look at this if its a marketing ploy, a supposed artistic expression (weak, weak, weak), or general manipulation to get into the news, there is a real thread of DESPERATION here to be relevant and important. Anyone who cares about this is a willing victim and participant of these desperate measures. Feel like somebody’s fool and tool today? You are welcome to it as are the other sheep.
January 24th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
This is crazy to me. I’m normally the type of person who actually listens to the lyrics of a song. And Amy is one of my favorites. When I first listened to it, I heard a song about a girl who placed a bi ad in a paper as Amy. She then goes to a club and pretends she’s there with everyone else looking for the infamous Amy. Then after she’s had her fun laughing at everyone for being there she asks if someone can take her home as she’s laughing.
I only actually heard what everyone was talking about after reading a ton of sites and relistening to the song a few times. And if it took me a while to figure it out, I doubt kids will. Seeing that they only want to dance to it anyways. From my understanding of the song, I personally don’t think she meant to add that as a side giggle for herself or to start a controversy. All of this is because she chose the name Amy. If it was another name they couldn’t make a big deal about it. so in short, I nor anyone else would have noticed it. The “Big Wigs” are only making kids go out and try to listen to it by banning it. Cause you can hear it anywhere online if you don’t have the CD. Try and ban it off the whole internet!! IDIOTS!!
January 24th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
[...] was really an old-timey instructional on how to find a long lost girl named Amy. As it turns out, parents’ groups and radio stations discovered that that’s not what the song is about at … In fact, if you say the song’s title out loud a little faster, it’s almost as if it [...]