Home Videos Photos
Home >> Music Minute, Kanye West, Twitter >> Kanye Censored And Not Happy About It
« Previous
Next »

Kanye Censored And Not Happy About It

10/18/2010 10:20 AM ET | Filed under: Music Minute • Kanye West • Twitter
View Full Post
[Image via: WENN]

Kanye West's new album artwork has been censored, and he doesn't appreciate it AT ALL! West has taken to Twitter to express his disdain for the censorshi… Read more…

kanye west angry about album artwork being banned
Email this  »
See All 61 Comments

No comments to “Kanye Censored And Not Happy About It”



  1. 1

    YE MUST BE ON THAT SHIT CAUSE THAT IS SOME WACKED SHIT! BORDERLINE PORNOGRAPHIC/SATANIC MESS!



  2. 2

    He has a valid point, though I thought he was joking about the cover he posted.



  3. 3

    It isn't pornographic, but it's UGLY. Re-think, Kanye



  4. 4

    Two demons having sex.



  5. 5

    Okay, first of all, that's not a phoenix. Second of all, things area little different from the 70's now, Kanye apparently forgets about those changes, GOOD changes, civil rights changes, technological changes. Third, I would ban that cover just for being hideous, I don't care about the nudity.



  6. 6

    wow if that is his album cover i am deeply concerned.
    It's not offensive, its just plain bad.
    Its 2010 Kanye thats RIGHT - So get with the times and do a cover that doesn't look like it was drawn up by some 4 year old child….



  7. 7

    I don't think it's so much the nudity as the fact that the people are positioned to be having sex.

    Regardless I think that Americans have very neurotic views towards sexuality that seem to only cause them endless problems.

    Canadians and Europeans have much more relaxed views and much less sex-related crime.

  8. buck says – reply to this


    8

    its very simple Kayne…the censors hate black people



  9. 9

    ya know, I think it's self-expression and creativity. it shouldn't be banned. If we can't see or hear certain things, what kind of freedom do we have? Banning shit like this is stupid. Makes me feel like I live in some communistic hell hole.



  10. 10

    Saw the cover. Kanye thinks it is banned because of the black/white/demons sex thing, but it was banned because IT IS UGLY!!! Crappy art.



  11. 11

    That doesn't even COMPARE to Nirvana's coverart. Kanye, it's two demons fucking. Get over yourself! It's art, but should NOT be in view of everyone. Why subject that to people that wouldn't want to see it?



  12. 12

    He is one sick puppy! What a way to try and get attention. Sick, sick, sick.



  13. 13

    This should only be censored becaue it SUCKS!



  14. 14

    no people..its about the image of a white woman sitting on top of a black man. The hidden racism…. if the woman was black and sitting on top of a white male it would have been different…I thought the cover was funny though..pure art..



  15. 15

    I would just ban it b/c its ugly but obviously they have other reasons for banning it. This is just going to give him and his album more attention thanks a lot like we really need to hear kanye rant for the next couple of weeks.



  16. 16

    I would have to say yea that should be banned that's a bit much



  17. 17

    Ummm….NIRVANA's cover WAS CENSORED as well Kanye. KNOW YOU'RE MUSIC FACTS before you reference them Kanye!
    You're cover is not artistic nor is it relevant. You are simply trying to "shock" people and be "original" but its not working. It's ugly and pointless.



  18. 18

    I thought he was so rich he owned his own label? A power artist would have what they want on it…



  19. 19

    Re: buck – WHY DOES EVERYTHING HAVE TO BE RACIAL.. THE COVER IS UGLY..PLAIN & SIMPLE!

  20. Emesa says – reply to this


    20

    looks like a vampire/angel with a dalmatian dog's tail, on top of a werewolf. pssh, Whatever Kanye.



  21. 21

    I heard the cover isn't truly banned - but places like Walmart won't promote it, so he'll sell less records. It's a freaky mess of a cover, anyway.



  22. 22

    I don't find it offensive, I find it ugly LOL

  23. buck says – reply to this


    23

    Re: phineinphilly – yes i agree…tell that to our man Kayne when he stupidly stated "George Bush, he hate blackk people" Kayne is an idiot.



  24. 24

    I'm not sure I think it should have been censored, but they probably did him a favor really - that is probably one of the ugliest covers I've ever seen. He's better than that!

  25. buck says – reply to this


    25

    we also should censor Kayne with his silly half shirt and leather pants that expose the burgandy briefs..not a good look at all.



  26. 26

    sorry kanye, but your a nobody. nirvana was somebody.. and still is very iconic. go under your bed and cry some more!



  27. 27

    nice belly shirt girly boy



  28. 28

    It's a pretty bad album cover, it's ugly and it is kind of pornographic….Nirvana had a naked baby swimming on their cover, not 2 demon people having sex. Also, it's their* album cover, not they. TYVM



  29. 29

    WTF ? Wahh wahh - epic fail



  30. 30

    Here is what we've come to in the US - people getting upset over something STUPID like this and thinking its OKAY to ban it. Censorship IS NOT RIGHT. You don't want to buy it? Don't buy it. You don't want to look at it? Don't look at it.



  31. 31

    Ok, his album cover is NOT Actually CENSORED. Only when a government deems something inappropriate for the people is a "CENSORED". Walmart is a private company, they have the right to decide what to sell, and what not to sell in their stores.

  32. Eris says – reply to this


    32

    For me the cover is just plain creppy and continues to show that Kanye is in some sort of a cult.



  33. 33

    Ugly cover.



  34. 34

    Re: theresalongo – No, love. It(the album cover) is OFFENSIVE! You don't just put a picture of someone having sex with what looks like some kind of "animal". Also, Kanye is not down with God. He is down with satan and we all need to pray for him and the other celebrities!



  35. 35

    I'm more offended of how shit the cover is.



  36. 36

    Lame ass ugly



  37. 37

    um….kanye just compared himself to nirvana…and i just vomited.



  38. 38

    Seriously?! That's the most retarded cover I've ever seen - glad we don't have to look at it in stores!



  39. 39

    First of all let me say that is the most hideous cover I have laid eyes upon for quite some time. However; I don't think it should be censored because art should NEVER be censored. That being said I can understand why stores like Wal-Mart would never sell that, because it's a PORN cover!



  40. 40

    I love Kanye and love that there is freedom of expression and press in our country, but I'm sorry that's just not very good. It looks like a disturbed little kid created that.



  41. 41

    WTF.Does this douche ever stop with the fucking whining?I swear if I see his miserable,pouting mug one more time I'm going to throw a brick through my monitor.Asshole!



  42. 42

    Though I can see why it would be banned, I don't have a problem with it. But I would think that in most places around the world that would be alright, I mean they could cover it over in shops with a plastic warning sheet or something.
    If parents didn't like the cover they could just download the album for their kids anyway. I've seen far worse covers and the people that have a big problem with it should take a step back and wonder about what their priorities are and what they should be.



  43. 43

    Re: sen10rita – pffft satan would blatantly throw better launch parties for cds than god would.



  44. 44

    Re: Carlo_B – i agree.
    i don't find the cover offensive at all, i find it ugly and kind of funny. people always say "don't judge a book by it's cover" and i say "don't judge the cd by it's cover". if the songs are good, they're gonna be good no matter what cover the album has. i don't think it should be banned, it's 2010 you know? plus, kids shouldn't even be at the "rap" section of walmart, they should be at the kids section. and older kids have playboy magazines hidden under their mattresses, i'm sure they'll be fine with kanye's album cover.



  45. 45

    i like it.



  46. 46

    I love it! He shouldn't change it! He couldn't be more on point with the message of that piece of art… (All you need to do is read most of the earlier comments above this one.) I don't like Kayne, but he's an artist. He's just holding up a mirror, that's us, guys, trust me!



  47. 47

    lol



  48. 48

    He does have a point…thought it's ugly as hell.



  49. 49

    Yeah I have to agree with these comments. First, its just ugly. Come up with something better. Second, Nirvana had a swimming baby not two demons having sex. Third, UGLY.



  50. 50

    Who buys CDs anymore anyway? Does Wal-Mart even sell CDs? My local stores have like 10 current CD titles in stock. As for the cover just put a sticker over it on the plastic wrapper or make an alternate cover on the back of the booklet to display in stores. That way the consumer can decide which side to look at after they buy it. I agree the cover is ugly.



  51. 51

    PLEASE put his ego in a capsule, and shoot it off into space, so we won't have to deal with it anymore. This ass thinks he'll replace Michael Jackson, as the
    new king of pop. He's schlock, boring, unattractive, phoney.
    Delusions of great talent- he's SO overated……in his OWN mind !!!



  52. 52

    For a self proclaimed musical genius, he's not that bright. Since when do they allow sex acts posted everywhere?



  53. 53

    OMG! that dumb, bitch of a man. I swear, all these pop stars today are asshats. Did he just compare that shit to Nirvana's coverart? Nirvana had a freaking naked baby with his weiner floating about, WOW! They show shit like that on tv for pamper commercials. Two distorted creatures, nude, looking as though they are simulating a sexual act can NOT compare. Kanye West needs to SHUT his fucking mouth for all eternity!



  54. 54

    American pop culture is all about the TnA and yet is soooooo prudish at the same time about sexuality…it's a cartoon butt for crying out loud! Publish a thousand pics of Amber Rose's bubble butt hanging out for the world to see but not a cartoon butt of a cartoon character.



  55. 55

    Re: kle_sam – This is a good point. A lot of sex crime in America probably due to the way they handle it on TV and media, so wreckless. I've been overseas it is much more relaxed than here in US. Women are disrespected more here than overseas. I was treated like a queen there. Here, called names and degraded. Lovely.



  56. 56

    Nirvana actually had issues with their album art for In Utero, and it WAS censored when the CD was first released but then it was changed back to the original artwork later on…. but anyway im glad they censored it .. im not by any means offended by it but Kanye West can and should find something better to put on the cover of his album….



  57. 57

    its not censored, it is just not being promoted at a private company WALMART…ok big difference. they will not promote it because it shows a sex act, obviously, not for racist or nude reasons.
    and besides if the government came in and blew tons of money trying to force walmart TO SELL IT, everyone would be complaining so
    at least get the facts right next time
    FURTHERMORE nirvana's cover was not sold at some places and caused LOTS of controversy



  58. 58

    well kanye knows how to get people talking love him or hate him but at the end of the day his name is in your mouth and mind
    personally i dont find it offensive but if walmart banned it so damn what his fans will still buy it and if the music is good on the cd i will to
    don't wanna hear no bleeped out words anyway



  59. 59

    Re: trinigirl123 – yes, i agree … this depicts demonic sex … but this is where Kanye is at, so it figures. Can you say Illuminati-puppet-boy?



  60. 60

    I don't see the big deal. He should not be censored for having that picture.
    Although for the good of man kind, he should pick another piece of …"art".. because that was really really ugly. Really. Oh, and also, it offended my sense of estethics.



  61. 61

    The didn't so much censor it, as pull it for costs — they realized they'd need to include a magnifying glass for anyone to see his shrunken walnut of a dick.