The Devil's Advocate: Imus/Rap industry
 

Well I'm sure by now everyone has read or watched the Imus saga and now, the final outcome which is him being fired from CBS as well. But I wanted to create this thread because I'd like to play DV for a minute and just post a few thoughts I've had, so induldge me. :)

There are tons of very well known rappers/entertainers that use the exact same language as Imus when referring to women, but yet there is no outrage. In fact, they are rewarded with high record sales and endorsement deals. I would say that these types of people are even more damaging to our self esteem than Imus because of their large influence on our your people (shoot, old ones too). Men immulate the language thinking that is how you are supose to refer to women, while young women become immune to it and think its ok.

Should we now shift our focus and outrage from IMUS to the rap industry? If not, why do you consider one situation to be different from the other?

Let's discuss!

HK,

I disagree with your contention that there is “no outrage.” There have been several on-going efforts to blunt, if not eliminate, this element of gantsta rap music.

The late C. Delores Tucker led a national education/boycott effort in the late 90s to confront the issue. Rev. Calvin O. Butts, pastor of Abyssinian Baptist Church in NYC (and KAY member) led, and continues a similar effort on this front. Rev. Al Sharpton, and his National Action Network as recently as last year continued his work on this effort. It was discussed just this morning on Russ Parr show, how Sharpton urged the boycotting of a Tony Neyo, Yayo? (I’m not familiar with him, but drew contextually the fact that he’s a gansta rapper). By the way Sharpton was CRITICIZED on the Parr show for this effort.

That the mainstream media is unaware or not reporting on these efforts does not translate into “no outrage” in the black community. The national media elite, when it comes to the African American community, are always “late” to the party. And then want to walk in like the party didn’t start until they got there. Nor are the media’s hands clean here. Last night, on MSNBC’s Scarborough Country they referenced a New York Times music review (earlier this year, I think?) of some gangsta rap CD, which praised it be for being “a dynamic, gritty, urban call from the streets” or some such language. Yet, today the Times, the nation’s leading newspaper, is in the criticism choir, attempting to demean the Black community for gangsta rap’s rise. What are we to make of this?

While (for some odd reason) our community heavily consume gangsta rap (to our detriment), I’ve seen several reports -- for years -- suggesting that white teenagers are its biggest consumer. Now, since I don’t think it’s a “black” only problem, I’m not about to suggest it’s a white teenage problem either. But I haven’t seen any reporting saying it’s a white teenager problem. Have you?


I’m glad that the mainstream news community, albeit late, has now found its voice in defense of Black womanhood. But I don’t remember viewing/hearing too much reporting on the degradation of Black women in the weeks/months before Imus’s statement last week. Do you? And I wonder if the mainstream media will remain focused in its reporting on this issue after the Imus issue has subsided.


There are lots of aspects to this story and the bigger issue of race in America. But if we’re going to tell the story, then we might as well tell it all.

I don't quite understand when people say there is no outrage. That statement dismisses all the work that black feminist writers, activists, psychologists, and countless others have been doing for years regarding this issue. But in regards to them (Jesse, Al, hip hop artists, and whoever else is angry), yes, I think Black men should be held accountable for the use of this kind of language. However, this is the first time I've seen a White man being held accountable for it. Normally I only see Black men being called out for misogyny.

TonyB beat me to it.

ETA: I would add that the Black male voices were also late to the party.

I think people just have trouble believing that the black community's mainstream leadership has been proactive in this, while they surely are regarding other issues (white on black racist speech).

Question #1: Who are these leaders that your refer to? The people that we see on tv every time there is a need for a soundbite from a black face, or the activists, scholars, preachers, and less well-known community leaders that have been speaking about these issues for years?

Questions #2: Are we to be held responsible for or even to take into consideration people's "disbelief"? Or are those disbelieving folk to be held responsible for not educating themselves, as to how this issue has been and continues to be addressed by leaders on multiple levels in black communities, before proclaiming that nothing has been done?

I think TonyB's comments are right on target. As, of course, this is an issue of the denigration of Black Womanhood, I too am interested to see what happens when the hype about the white man at the center of this discussion fades.

http://imushypocrisy.ytmnd.com/

That is all.

#1, I mean the people in the mainstream. Not the community leaders with limited following. Lets be honest, a lot of you guys on here are among the upper echelon in your communities. Well educated, well off, etc, same as the white people on here. You're much more likely to be in touch with the more subdued, responsible leaders within the black community. However, what I'm talking about are the leaders, like Sharpton and Jackson, who can mobilize large numbers quickly and act as the self-elected representatives of the black community.

#2, When it comes to disbelief, its either accept what people like you assert (those who think there isn't any double standard), or accept what they have seen over the years. Is it really mainstream if people have to "educate" themselves to find out about it?

Applause, Applause.

Michael Jackson is the self-elected "King of Pop Music." So answer me 2 things:

-When's the last time you listened to pop (that is, popular, mainstream) music?

-When's the last time you listened to anything new by Michael Jackson?

I rest my case.

If you rest your case, then you lose on the merits. Completely irrelevant.

You are just completely missing the point that just because Al Sharpton does this or that, doesn't mean 98% of the Black community (or the earth in general) gives a crap because he and/or the media have deemed him a "spokesman."

Uh, thats not even a point that needs making. I've said numerous times through this whole ordeal that I realize Sharpton and Co. don't represent all black people. However, he does mobilize them with ease, and he is a mainstream leader. I agree that the media aids him, but I simply think it would be false to say Sharpton and Jackson aren't extremely influential leaders within the black community.

I have no clue who these folks are that Sharpton "mobilized". :confused: The majority of African Americans that I know would actually prefer if Sharpton and Jackson stepped back sometimes instead of constantly leading the world to believe that they are "champions of all causes related to Black people".

As been mentioned, various individuals and groups have been vocal and outspoken about the language and images in rap music. But news channels don't care about that fight, they simply call up the two Black people they have on speed-dial, Sharpton and Jackson.

ETA: I don't know how "influential" they are either...

By mobilize, I mean at the snap of his fingers he can get a lot of black people supporting his side. Its been shown time and time again.

Honestly, do you really think there is a substantial portion of the black population willing to take a stand against rap music? If so, where is it? Frankly, I don't think there should be a stand against it, but this is a double standard discussion. I think people should be able to say what they want for the most part. I think the natural repercussions are generally sufficient.

the fact of the matter remains that there HAS BEEN outrage, see TonyB's post above.

Earlier this week on the Today Show, Meridith V. barely gave Dr. Tatum an opportunity to cite the times our community (and Spelman women in particluar) have stood up to bring attention to this problem, and try to find solutions.

Just because mainstream media has overlooked it, doesn't mean the Black Community hasn't made efforts to counter negative messages in "hip hop."

That's it right there! I have always heard about the plight of removing the screwed images and language in hip-hop about blacks period.

There has been outrage, nobody debated that. What we're saying is that there is a double standard on how it occurs, how intense it is, and how much of the population it includes.

If the mainstream media overlooked it, its probably not mainstream. Now thats probably partially the fault of the media itself, but I simply have seen no evidence that it exists on the scale that it does when it comes to things like the Imus situation.

sorry you've missed the memo. but now that everyone is aware that we (general black people) don't think its cool when ANYONE uses this language, lets keep the ball rolling instead of pointing fingers and questioning the legitimacy of this movement. :)

There's a difference between "not thinking its cool" and demanding someone be fired. I'm not pointing fingers at all. I think Imus should stay on the air, and I think rappers should say what they want. But this topic came up, and I'm commenting on it.

i think there is great similarity between demanding someone be fired and say, demanding BET remove "Uncut" from its programming.

Other initiatives include Essence Magazine's Take Back the Music campaign.

It is to be expected that the response to a one-time statement or outburst is going to be different from the response to music by hundreds of artsists continuously playing 24-7 on thousands of radio stations all over the world. I don't think that shows that the anger is less intense or on a smaller scale.

I'm not sure it would conclusively show that either, but I do think the anger is on a smaller scale and generally less intense. Actually, I think it makes sense that it would be, because I think black people are likely personally impacted less when they take action to get someone like Imus fired.

I didn't see protests outside BET regarding "Uncut". If I wanted things like Uncut off the air, I'd agree, its a step in the right direction, but I still think its quite distinct from situations like the Imus one. Goes back to intensity. Also, that music is still out there, being played all the time, listened to by tons of people (whites too, I know). The images are gone (to a degree), but the message is clearly still out there. Is there a large scale movement to get all the offensive rap off the airwaves?

Once again, I don't want all offensive rap music off the air, just like I don't want offensive people like Imus off the air.

I don't think he should have lost his job. I don't like what he said but I think his apology was sufficient. I'm tired of living in the midst of "this language" everyday and I'm now getting to the point that I am immune to it. This should not be!! The bigger fight has not been fought on the scale that it should be. And I think it's time that we make it our business to address it. Good links worth reading:

http://www.kansascity.com/182/story/66339.html

http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/20...oker-t-and-xm/

I guess it is difficult for me to carry on a conversation with someone who is clearly not educated about the black community. Those "subdued" leaders that you reference are the ones that have the real mobilizing power within our communities. Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright is given more credence that Al Sharpton by most of the people that I know ("educated" or "uneducated," rich or poor)--but you probably don't have any idea who that is.

Go and talk to some black people (interesting proposition hunh). Ask them who their leaders are, who mobilizes them to action--better yet, listen too what the black people who post here are saying--and then reevaluate your notion of black community leadership, because it is wrong.

But I guess we probably can't tell you that because our experience doesn't mean anything in the face of your "supposed" empirical evidence.

BRAVO, Soror Little32!

Your defensiveness is likely indicative of your lack of objectivity in this matter. I never claimed to be as in touch with the black community as someone like you would be, as a member. However, as an outsider, I also have no personal interest in protecting the image of the community (I also don't have much interest in seeing it damaged, either).

This...
"Go and talk to some black people (interesting proposition hunh)."

...was evidence enough for me. A lack in civility certainly doesn't aid your message.

As for Jeremiah Wright and mobilizing power, where is the mobilization? Once again, we're talking about large scale action in the mainstream. He obviously has a following among the educated and the faithful, but I don't see what your point is. I don't see him creating a whirlwind over the playing of rap music over the airways. I don't see the protests, so show me. Where is the intensity, after all thats what we're talking about.

For the 2409758th time, nobody is saying theres not some rebellion/action/whatever inside the black community, what I'm saying is that there isn't the fervor or the large scale outrage you see with the Imus or the Duke situation.

haha, never ceases to amaze.

Exactly. You can't see my point, mostly because you don't want to, and so I am done with you in regards to this matter.

Same can be said about you.

I see your point, I disagree with it. You apparently have a severe problem with someone opposing your viewpoints, and so it isn't surprising that you're "done with [me]." Thanks for the conversation.

That I never cease to amaze? Kind words, thank you.

If you want to take it that way but you're smart (and ignorant) enough to know it wasn't a compliment.

I don't really know where ignorance ties in...but sure, I know it wasn't a compliment. If you want reassurance that your insult got through, yes, I'm well aware that was your mission. Hopefully that'll put your mind at ease.

I wouldn't judge thge reality of how people feel by news coverage, which is meant to be sensational and attention-grabbing. I doubt that any Black scholars will be writing books about racism and outrageous radio personalities or psycho comedians, but many books have addressed misogyny and hypermasculinity in hip hop. Black people in the various communities I interact with regularly did not spend much time talking about Imus in our homes and with our friends (It was more just "Have you heard..."), but I've spent hours in heated conversations about misogyny and hypermasculinity in hip hop with Black people in all socio-economic situations.

I also don't advocate censorship, but people who do surely recognize that getting all offensive rap off the airwaves is not a realistic endeavor, especially considering the enormous amount of money made by it, mostly off of White youth.

I do think that Black men are generally less angry about misogyny than they are about racism, but I think that is to be expected. Unfortunately Black male voices are often seen as the only (important) Black voices.

I agree with this. I don't judge on entirely on media coverage. But lets be honest. I can say "you know, most people I know could give a damn about Anna Nicole", but people still do care, the discussion is out there. Thats why I say its tough for yall (and me, in other matters) to say that our surroundings and are feelings are reflective of society at large.

Also, regarding rap censorship, I agree, I don't want to change it. Now, if its BET Uncut at 3pm on weekdays, sure, that should probably be altered. Also, the content of rap as a whole generally conflicts with what I would believe in, but still, I don't feel that warrants it being taken out of the public arena. However, I don't feel that just because of its popularity there shouldn't be a level of outrage. I do agree, its not that feasible, but I don't think that removes it from the valid comparison category. I don't think the reason for a lack of protest regarding rap is the fact that its not feasible to get rid of it. I think that may impact some people's decisions, but I think there are more pervasive factors. I simply think that people aren't as offended by rap, and therefore less action is taken. The question then becomes, why aren't they as offended? I think there are many people who would give lipservice, saying sure, it offends me, but thats where the protest ends. I think this contrasts greatly with the Duke or Imus situation, wherein lies the double standard, at least from my perspective.

Sorry if thats not overly intelligible, stream of consciousness, if you will.

Shinerbock, it wasn't intended to be an insult. It was more of a statement. It never ceases to amaze me that when black people on GC get upset or heated about something in the black community, you always find the time to come into our respective forums and comment with a conservative tone and overview. I called you ignorant because obviously you have had a sheltered life and thus, have a limited view and perspective. I called you smart because you do make valid points from time to time.

Listen, you can insult me if you'd like. I don't think you're a person to do that nor do I think it was your intention to. However, it doesn't bother me, so don't feel I was attempting to make you feel bad for stating what you did.

Hey, if you would prefer to argue this amongst yourselves, I'd be happy to leave you to it. I've made similar disclaimers in the past.

Your assertion of ignorance is correct to a degree. I don't understand what its like to be black, just as you're likely ignorant on my feelings (and of other white people) when it comes to racial discussions and the perception of a double standard. I haven't lived a sheltered life, however. Also, my viewpoint is limited, like is yours. However, I'm able to see many sides of an issue, the fact that I take a position doesn't indicate that I'm close minded. It indicates that I'm highly opinionated.

Simply because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm not considering your viewpoint. It means I like mine better.

I only insult when it is warranted. This isn't the case.

Besides everyone is entitled to an opinion on GC (unless you're a troll). Healthy dialogue, frank and honest conversations with open-minded people are good. Conversations with sexist, egotistical, lying, hypocritical bigots are not. So, let's keep the conversation moving! (Sorry for the hijack!!)

Well I'm egotistical, but I don't think that should keep the conversation from going forth.