Not a single young person knew the intended meaning: a Vietnamese soldier. Responses from even the most intelligent of the group included "a man who fell in yellow paint," or "a man wearing a yellow mask." Many college students, when asked who the yellow man was, responded with "A yellow man is any kind of communist." Whether they hated communists or simply loved the United States, all young people who participated in the study created a meaning for the lyric that went along with their beliefs. (Nuzum 10) Similarly, in California, probation officers from Orange County asked two professors at California State University to research whether there was a link between heavy metal music and juvenile crime. The professors asked a group of high school students to identify the lyrical themes of their favorite songs. Of the 662 songs the students listed, the students said that only 46 of them were about sex, violence, or Satanism. The professors concluded that the effects of music on young people were insignificant because study participants were unable to express the themes of more than half of their favorite songs. (Nuzum 10) Therefore, putting censorship on music is ineffective because listeners twist the message in their head to form a meaning that matched their perception. (Nuzum 10).
Political authorities in the United States, such as the Supreme Court have publicly stated that using music censorship to control problems is, in essence, "burning down the house to roast a pig." (Nuzum 9) Some evidence exists through studies in a small population of mental institutions that music has a minor effect on a small percentage of emotionally disturbed people. (Nuzum 9) But there is no evidence that music can make an otherwise healthy person commit crimes, destroy other people's property, or, in some views, turn "bad." What the Supreme Court justices meant in their statements was that restricting music from all people is using much too extreme means to solve a problem that only exists in a very small percent of people.