Research on relations between art and politics has its tradition. However, it mainly refers to literature, whose part, as far as its authors’ intentions are concerned, is of a political character, in a lesser degree – of a picture. Sound, especially if it is not linked to a text and/or a picture, is considerably more seldom analyzed from the point of view of its importance in politics. As long as a word and a picture happen to convey unequivocal political meaning, qualifi ed as such by most recipients, sound cannot be obviously considered a political message. It is questionable whether music can convey any meaning in whatever sense. If one can manage to suppress this doubt, it will result in a question how to construe the senses conveyed through the medium of melodic – rhythmic structures. However, the findings in the field of widely understood humanities affirm that music serves as a creator’s message directed to both individual and collective receivers. Political science studies often bring up a matter of communication between authorities and the subjects (in authoritarian regimes), and also between representatives of a nation or people claiming their role and electorate (in democratic regimes). At the end of the 1960s, American and Canadian scientists made room for music, one of the most widespread communicators, i. a. in political sphere. At that time, interdisciplinary teams including American sociologists, political scientists, culture and media experts undertook multi – faceted research, focused mainly on popular music.