So I'm a pretty big music fan. A lot of the artists I like, though, are individuals who don't really match up with my morals and beliefs. Furthermore, some of them are or have been accused or even convicted of some pretty bad stuff. I've wondered for a long time to what extent I should let artists personal lives influence whether or not I listen to their music, buy their albums and whatnot.

The Michael Jackson trial is going on now, and if he is indeed guilty of the charges against him, then he's committed some pretty morally reprehensible acts. If that is so, does that mean that I shouldn't continue to listen to and enjoy his music because I know who it's coming from and what he has done. On the one hand, as long as he's not advocationg abuse of children in his music, perhaps his art and his personal acts are two different things that can be separated. On the other hand, doesn't doing so imply that I'm, to some extent at least, giving him a pass, saying that it doesn't really matter to me what he's done as long as he makes good albums?

I mean, if say Britney Spears went on a racist tirade or something like that, then I would guess that there would be a huge moral outrage and listening to or playing her music would become taboo (though Eminem has largely remained unscathed after an old tape of him making racist comments was produced, but that's a different topic). But hasn't an artist who's committed murder or child molestation done a worse thing than that, and shouldn't there be an even stronger reaction against them? (note-I'm not a big Britney fan, though I do like a couple of her songs, but thought she might be a good example. And I am still a fan of some of Eminem's stuff, despite having BIG problems with a lot of the stuff he says, including unease over the racial comments)

Another question is, if you should let an artist's personal behavior effect how you react to them, how far should you go? Should you only shun artists who commit murder or assault women or children? What about physical abuse against spouses or girlfriends? What about acts that don't directly harm others, like drug use? Should those things matter or not to the fan? How about acts that the artist may have done in the past (drug dealing, robberies, etc, as many, many rappers claim to have committed) but has claimed to put behind him/her? Or what about acts that are alleged but not proven in a court of law? To what extent should artists get the benefit of the doubt from fans (I think for instance of R.Kelly, who has not as of yet been convicted of the child pornography charges against him but who according to people who have seen the videotape have little or no doubt it is him)? I've thought about these questions on and off for a while and have come to different conclusions in individual cases. For instance, I have continued to give Michael Jackson the benefit of the doubt while waiting for the evidence to come out but I tend to avoid listening to R.Kelly's music once the extent of the evidence against him became known. I don't know if either of these reactions, or those I've had with other artists, are legitimate or not, and I may change my mind about them. Any ideas?