The Devil's Advocate: Imus/Rap industry

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Unfortunately for black women, some of the people who "represent" them have been poor examples.

Not like we need a "representative" or I am thrilled that a white man is typing to me about this, but the people who represent me and many other black women are excellent examples. That's what happens when you don't look to popular media to tell you who voices your concerns.

Originally Posted by shinerbock

See: Cynthia McKinney. I don't know that anyone would consider her a civil rights activist, but I imagine she does in some sense.

I have no idea why McKinney came to your mind as if she's the only black woman you could think of. I guess her stint as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives confused you. She isn't automatically someone for black women to watch just because she's one of many black women in "high places." I don't recall how many, if any, of her civil rights efforts involved both race and gender issues.

[shinerbock]

Hmm, I dunno why she'd come to mind. Perhaps being a vocal congresswoman who was constantly embroiled in high profile racial equality discussions? Perhaps because her father is Billy McKinney? Maybe you're not familiar...

Nobody said there weren't excellent black female leaders, rather, you mentioned that there were negative images of black women, and she's someone who could be tied into such perceptions.

[laylo]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

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.

The discussion is out there, but it is minimal. And the discussion is also out there about hip hop, but there isn't a hot story right now that has everyone talking at the same time. Discussion about Imus will fade quickly as the story gets old, but discussion of offensive hip hop will remain.

Originally Posted by shinerbock

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.

I would argue that most people only paid lipservice to the Imus situation as well. And the number of people who went further is far smaller than the number who have gone further concerning hip hop over the years. But in the case of hip hop there isn't an easy action we can take against it, such as calling an organization and demanding that an employee be fired. For the most part all we can do to combat it is to discuss, write, and teach, and a whole lot of people are doing that.

[Honeykiss1974]

Thanks everyone for sharing their opinion.

I do recognnize that there have been vocal critics to the lyrics of the majority of rap music - and maybe now that we DO have some media attention, more people will support those that are trying to do something about it as opposed to criticizing them for trying to take away their Snoop Dogg.

Like Luv4Denzel stated, I hope this situation mobilizes everyone that is angered at Imus to also look at themselves and the rap music that they "jam" too. Shoot, just this morning my brother was griping by the Imus situation....as I could hear "I Make It Rain" in the background.

Oh yeah, I'm late but great post TonyB.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Nobody said there weren't excellent black female leaders, rather, you mentioned that there were negative images of black women, and she's someone who could be tied into such perceptions.

The negative images that I'm typing about existed for over a century and is manifested in different ways today.

I never saw McKinney as adding to a particular image of black women. Her actions are her own and make herself look a particular way. I guess some people tried to say McKinney adds to the "angry/complaining black woman" stereotype but everything adds to a more general stereotype according to some people.

[Honeykiss1974]

Originally Posted by laylo

But in the case of hip hop there isn't an easy action we can take against it, such as calling an organization and demanding that an employee be fired. For the most part all we can do to combat it is to discuss, write, and teach, and a whole lot of people are doing that.

Where we spend our $$$$$ may do more than we think though. I noticed with Imus, that once his sponsors started pullng from his show, he went from a 2 week suspension, to being booted from MSNBC, to being fired from CBS. FAST.

Money talks. Perhaps if we threatened to stop patronizing those companies that use those rappers that make their money from degrading women(ie Snoop Dogg/ 50 Cent/etc.) as their spokensperson(s) it will cause the same type of chain reaction. Some companies also own music labels that specialize in promoting artist that make this type of music (ex. Sony). Boycotting not only the label but the company itself would definitely get their attention. I'm sure if Sony saw a dip in their playstation, computer, etc. sales (especially during the holiday season), they would take notice.

In short, let's start hitting people in the pocketbook - not only the rappers but those that sponsor and promote it as well.

Disclaimer - when I say "rappers" I only mean those that degrade/humilate women in their lyrics.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by laylo

The discussion is out there, but it is minimal. And the discussion is also out there about hip hop, but there isn't a hot story right now that has everyone talking at the same time. Discussion about Imus will fade quickly as the story gets old, but discussion of offensive hip hop will remain.



I would argue that most people only paid lipservice to the Imus situation as well. And the number of people who went further is far smaller than the number who have gone further concerning hip hop over the years. But in the case of hip hop there isn't an easy action we can take against it, such as calling an organization and demanding that an employee be fired. For the most part all we can do to combat it is to discuss, write, and teach, and a whole lot of people are doing that.

As much as I'd like to think this is true, I really think we're overestimating Americans. I agree that the majority of people in the Imus situation didn't take their protest to the next level, but then, they didn't have time to. I wonder what would have happened in a more prolonged situation involving extended protests, boycotts, etc. I don't think it would have been a situation where a majority of people are doing it, but I still think it would be of a higher intensity than other things we're discussing.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by Honeykiss1974

Where we spend our $$$$$ may do more than we think though. I noticed with Imus, that once his sponsors started pullng from his show, he went from a 2 week suspension, to being booted from MSNBC, to being fired from CBS. FAST.

Money talks. Perhaps if we threatened to stop patronizing those companies that use those rappers that make their money from degrading women(ie Snoop Dogg/ 50 Cent/etc.) as their spokensperson(s) it will cause the same type of chain reaction. Some companies also own music labels that specialize in promoting artist that make this type of music (ex. Sony). Boycotting not only the label but the company itself would definitely get their attention. I'm sure if Sony saw a dip in their playstation, computer, etc. sales (especially during the holiday season), they would take notice.

In short, let's start hitting people in the pocketbook - not only the rappers but those that sponsor and promote it as well.

Disclaimer - when I say "rappers" I only mean those that degrade/humilate women in their lyrics.

A thing about the money situation, I think its somewhat of a cop out for the groups that fired Imus. Imus made MSNBC and CBS money, and the pulling out of sponsors probably wouldn't have overshadowed that. I think money is a perfectly acceptable reason to fire someone, but in this case I think the sponsor pull out simply gave the conglomerates another excuse to give in to public pressure. Whats weird is that from what I've heard on MSNBC, they're taking the slant that it didn't have that much to do with the sponsors. If I were doing their PR, I'd probably blame the sponsor pull out fully. Of course, some Americans probably think firing someone for financial reasons is a poor excuse, while I think its probably the best excuse.

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by Little32

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.

You answered your own question while asking it.
Just who gets the face and/or air time?
Who do the politicians try to get close to?
And who gets time with the politicians?

[Lady of Pearl]

Forty years ago, Imus' remarks would not have been tolerated on national tv ; given the fact that our country was in the midst of the civil rights era. Also strong censorship and something known as the FCC wold not have allowed it to happen. So, have we digressed in the name of Free Speech? I don't care who makes denigrating remarks about Black women-Imus or the rappers, or the Boys on the Block, or construction workers. Harrassment and derogatory remarks about women is wrong. We need to look closely at what drives this misogynistic spirit in our country and seriously do some reeducating to all.

[laylo]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

As much as I'd like to think this is true, I really think we're overestimating Americans. I agree that the majority of people in the Imus situation didn't take their protest to the next level, but then, they didn't have time to. I wonder what would have happened in a more prolonged situation involving extended protests, boycotts, etc. I don't think it would have been a situation where a majority of people are doing it, but I still think it would be of a higher intensity than other things we're discussing.

While protesting involves anger, I don't think writing, discussing, and teaching involve less. Every time I've participated in these kinds of activities concerning hip hop, it was more intense for me than any issue I've actually protested. And regardless, it can only be called a double standard if those who protested Imus were doing nothing on the hip hop front. But the fact is there isn't anything more they can do because there is no step they can take that would prevent offensive rap from being produced and played.

[delph998]

Originally Posted by luv4denzel

I have to say that as an African-American woman, Imus' comments on the air were insulting, degrading, ignorant, and uncalled for. His apology (IMO) wasn't sincere. The fact remains that he called a group of women a bunch of whores. Insult to injury--"nappy-headed hos". He knew when he made that comment that he was as wrong as two left shoes. I say that so-called apology wasn't sincere because he wasn't apologizing for what he said. He did that to save face, and probably because the big wigs who pay him $8 million a year told him to "just say you're sorry, and they'll forget the whole thing in a couple of days." Would he have apologized if he had made such comments in the privacy of his home as opposed to on the air? Probably not.

I don't think that firing him is going to be productive at all. When this first popped off, CBS had no intentions of firing Imus. They decided to 'suspend' him for a couple of weeks. This so-called suspension wasn't scheduled to begin until next week. Right there, you can clearly see how serious they were taking this. The decision to fire Imus (and we all know this) had nothing to do with morals or the people of CBS being equally outraged by Imus' remarks. That was BUSINESS decision. When the big time sponsors decided to jump from the sinking ship of Imus, CBS saw rivers of money sailing away from them. There are many people out there now doing a happy dance that Imus is gone, but not me. I'm shaking my head. Where was all this outrage when Nelly was sliding a credit card through a sista's behind, and when another rapper claimed he had "hos in different area codes"? Imus made those remarks because that's how he felt. I'm sure he thought he'd dodge the bullet of outrage from our community with that half-assed apology, but he was sadly mistaken. If I'm being devil's advocate here, I have to say that I honestly don't believe that anything will change. There will still be rap songs with sistas being degraded and disrespected. There will still be half-naked women dancing and shaking in the videos with money being thrown at them as if they're exotic dancers in men's clubs. And while I applaud all the efforts made to make these artists accountable for the lyrics of their songs, there hasn't been much progress in that area. I believe in free speech, but I don't believe you have to say and promote degrading things about women to validate yourself as an artist. I could almost be happy about this Imus firing thing if I honestly thought that something productive would come of it. This is NOT a victory.

If I'm being honest here, I have to say that I am guilty of nodding my head or tapping my feet to the beat of a rap song in which we as African-American women are degraded, disrespected, and insulted. In light of this Imus situation, I took a long look at myself. I went through my extensive collection of music to take stock of how much money I've put into patronizing (and therefore supporting)music that has a tendency to degrade, insult, and disrespect me. I've helped these artists get homes, cars, jewelry, and the stamp of approval to continue to say the things they say, and now I'm insulted because a white man said it? I have to clean house--starting with my own. While I've stopped watching those videos years ago, I cannot continue to support artists who degrade, insult and disrespect us--AND I WON'T. I am raising two boys. If I'm nodding my head to that mess, what message do I send to my sons about women? I am a woman, in every sense of the word: intelligent, strong, spiritual, confident, and much more--and I don't need hip-hop artists to validate that. The music industry is BIG BUSINESS. If we want these artists whose music we listen to and purchase, our children look up to (and some aspire to be like) to stop these kinds of lyrics, we'll have to pull a Proctor and Gamble, a GM, or a Sprint-Nextel. Their lack of financial backing got Imus off the air. If we all stopped buying and listening to this stuff, it's possible we could do the same damage. But like my Mama used to say: "Wishing don't make it so."

This was so well said and I concur 150%. It's time for us to stop listening to music because of the beat and stop supporting these artists that degrade US on a consistent basis. That includes songs like "Shake Your Money Maker" to "Some Cut," to songs that make reference to a woman "giving good brain like she graduated from a good school." Our children, young children are listening to these songs.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by laylo

While protesting involves anger, I don't think writing, discussing, and teaching involve less. Every time I've participated in these kinds of activities concerning hip hop, it was more intense for me than any issue I've actually protested. And regardless, it can only be called a double standard if those who protested Imus were doing nothing on the hip hop front. But the fact is there isn't anything more they can do because there is no step they can take that would prevent offensive rap from being produced and played.

No, it can still be a double standard. The steps people chose to take regarding Imus involved protests, threatening boycotts, etc... I don't see decisive action like that on rap music. Sermons and scholarly writings are no doubt important, but I don't see that they represent a similar intensity. I'm not doubting your personal intensity about the issue, but I still don't see the "outrage", if you will, when it comes to rap and other issues.

I think its understandable that people not go protest rap music, there are bigger concerns to address. I think the same applies to Imus, yet it nevertheless consumed some people's lives (and the country) for at least a few days. Again, I don't think the possibility that an effective protest against rap would be unrealistic is the reason for a difference in actions.

[shinerbock]

"Shake Your Money Maker" by the Black Crowes? I hope not, I like that song.

[delph998]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

"Shake Your Money Maker" by the Black Crowes? I hope not, I like that song.

No! "Shake Your Money Maker" by Ludacris. We're talking about hip hop/rap here.