Hip Hop. Today there's a definite feel that the culture is under
seige. In wake of the Don Imus controversy, Hip Hop has been left
holding the proverbial bag. But long before the racist rants of former
alcohlic shock jocks, Hip Hop has been debating within itself. The
call for reform in both content, art and image has been made by
activists inside the culture, who challenge not only artists but the
powerful corporate industry that manipulates, controls, promotes and
profit from them. The idea of "Fairness" often permeates these
discussions, and so is the theme of this blog, and this post.
There is an on-going discussion on the state of Hip Hop throughout
America, and perhaps beyond. From large broadcast media to print
journalism to online message boards, it is a hot topic. There are
closed-door sessions with "rap moguls" being held; and civil rights
groups are set to announce planned movements. Everyone seems to
have an opinion on the issue. A few even go further, and offer
solutions. As a member of the loosely defined "Hip Hop Generation,
" who was notthere for its earliest days but lived through many of
the formative years, including the now nostalgic "Golden Age," I
suppose like everyone else I have a right—perhaps a
responsibility—to offer my own thoughts.
The problem with past "outsider" attempts at addressing issues of sex
and violence in Hip Hop is that they were often carried out as
"scorched Earth" policies. "Wars on gangsta rap" usually came across
as "Wars on Hip Hop." Little attempt was made to differentiate
between the many sub-genres of the culture, which span the
ideological and artistic spectrum. Emcees were "culturally profiled"
under one disparaging umbrella. And elements of Hip Hop that are
almost divorced from emceeing, much less "gangsta rap,"—scratch DJs,
breakdancers, graffiti artists—found themselves having to make
explanations for artists and lyrics to which they bear no direct
responsibility. Scant attention is paid to the fact that activists within
the culture have long sought reform and perhaps should be consulted
before these larger "movements" begin. There is a natural suspicion
among the Hip Hop community about such "movements" when the only
time the media—including the black afrostocracy and punditocracy—
places a spotlight on the culture, is to connect it with crime, deviant
behavior or the wayward racist rants of former alcoholic shock jocks.
After all, this criticism of Hip Hop isn't new. When "gangsta rap" wasn't
the culprit, it was political rap—that was "too black" or "too threatening.
" Before that it was the clothing—"too baggy, too colorful, too
flamboyant." Or it's the hairstyles. Or it's the dancing. Or it lacks
intellectualism. Or the beats are too simple. Or the music isn't "really"
music. The list can go on, most of it trivial, much of it distorted or
one-dimensional and some of it outright false. Since its inception
Hip Hop has existed somewhere between the excitedly exotic (a world
of entertaining blacks and Latins) and dangerously ominous for
mainstream cultural and social critics. It exists under a near continuous
state of "siege," with a never-ending and never-satisfied corps of
detractors. I think perhaps, there is another way.
What follows is a modest idea. I call it modest with a touch of
sarcasm, because while it is simple in its general layout, it is
ambitious in scale. The idea cannot be called new or unique or
groundbreaking. To paraphrase Chuck D, "it's a thought that's been
thought before." In fact, it is gleaned from long established
movements, writings on topics relating to Hip Hop, documentaries
and more, including the following: ESSENCE Magazine's Take Back the
Music Campaign; the youth movement Black Girls Rock; the activist
film Turn Off Channel Zero Campaign; Byron Hurt's documentary
Beyond Beats and Rhymes; the well-established activist e-zine and
valued online Hip Hop source DaveyD.com, the powerful musings of
Chuck D and many more. I only restate these thoughts because there
seems to be momentum at present. And I think those within Hip Hop
should be out in front leading, not being told where to go and what
to do. The idea is not without its imperfections, some of which I
explore. Neither is the idea thoroughly written out in detail on the
scale of a social manifesto, a social movement or legally binding
contract. Nor is it some stroke of genius. Rather it's a pragmatic
suggestion for a way to move forward, beyond the "blame Hip Hop
first" crowd, and the "we have to defend our culture" siege-mentality
these ceaseless attacks induce. The idea itself consists of three basic
elements under one heading:
A Fairness Doctrine for Hip Hop
Element 1: Fairness and equity regarding adult entertainment. A rule
should be implemented requiring that sexually explicit, graphically
violent or other adult-themed Hip Hop not be marketed as the
mainstream face of the culture. Hip Hop that engages in gratuitous
imagery, excessive profanity and contains adult content intended for a
mature audience should either (a) be limited to prime time or after
hours radio and television or (b) be restricted to select cable
channels that do not cater to mainstream entertainment. This is
nothing different than what is already in place for other genres of
music, television shows or movies. On MTV, so-called "Death Metal" was
long relegated mostly to late night. On television, more adult-themed
crime dramas appear during prime time; the more explicit or graphic
(i.e., The Sopranos or Deadwood) exist on premium cable channels and
are shown primarily at night. Movies receive ratings that are directly
tied to their level of adult content. Imagine if the media industry
pushed violent shows like HBOs ROME, and sexually explicit movies that
now appear on late night Cinemax, as the everyday face of morning,
daytime and early evening mainstream television. This would distort
the image of mainstream programming. Yet this is precisely what
happens with Hip Hop, as the corporate industry pushes one face—filled
with sex and violence—as the mainstream norm of the music. By not
requiring the same rules be followed with regards to Hip Hop, the
media industry is allowed to distort the image of the entire culture,
pushing black sex and violence for profit.
Element 2: Fairness and equity that displays Hip Hop's diversity. A
rule should be implemented requiring that the full diversity of Hip
Hop—in topics, styles and gender—be given equal radio and television
airplay. Driven by profit rather than art, the media industry pushes
financially viable themes of sex and violence that conform to widely
held stereotypes. This creates the impression that Hip Hop has no
other face other than the one that is marketed. There is undoubtedly
different music out there. A glance at online sites for "Underground"
Hip Hop or Indie Hip Hop, or even cable channels like VH1-Soul, offer
another world of black cultural expression. Yet much of this is put
under the heading of "alternative," while "thug" rap is marketed near
singly as the universal black norm. We need to demand that
broadcasters and the music industry allow for a diversity of voices
and imagery on a level of fairness and equity given to other genres of
entertainment.
Element 3: Fairness and equity in media depictions and coverage of
Hip Hop. More voices need to demand that the mainstream media
portray a more encompassing image of Hip Hop. In journalism Hip
Hop is portrayed overwhelmingly as negative, usually covered during
an incidence of crime or altercation with law enforcement. In television
shows or movies, this association of Hip Hop with criminal activity is
near constant, along with themes of gang-relatedness,
anti-intellectualism and other socially "deviant" depictions. By focusing
on one image of Hip Hop, notably lyrics which indulge in graphic
violence and gratuitous sex, the various media outlets defame a global
culture and contribute to misconceptions of Hip Hop. Furthermore, this
allows for Hip Hop to be used unfairly as a scapegoat for numerous
incidents, and perpetuates racial and cultural bias. Hip Hop should be
afforded balanced coverage, highlighting everything from charity events
to activism, as is received by other genres of entertainment.
There. That's it. That's the idea. It's that simple. Of course it
needs more than this. Because regardless of how simple it looks on the
surface, it has far-reaching implications.
Save Internet Radio!
Souvenir
