The Evil Corporate Influence on Hip-Hop Myth

Jeff Chang says that the machine is deaf, meaning that the corporations that fund the hip-hop industry don't care what type of content their creative arms cook up. I agree. Companies like Viacom, Clear Channel, and Universal Music Group only care about profit, not artistsic performance.

And that's a good thing. It means artists and the lower level managers can produce and promote whatever they want, as long as it sells. This is also revealing, because despite this freedom of expression, it seems that we still overwhelmingly choose to push violent, misogynistic, and ignorant junk out to the world.

Bump what you heard from our purists. It's not the White guys at the corporations forcing us to sell a certain type of single - it's the movers within hip-hop who are making these decisions.

And let me take Jeff's idea a bit further. I think the audience is deaf to content too. Any song with a good beat, catchy chorus, performed by an artist with a compelling story has a chance to be a pop hit, whether it's about guns or love.

So, please people, let's stop pushing this evil corporation myth. If we have a problem with hip-hop, then we have a problem with ourselves.

Comments

[Andrew]

I think it's funny that rappers always say, "the label wanted 2 radio singles" but they're the same ones who make entire albums that follow the same format. if you're gonna cop-out and say the label made you do it, at least have some consistency and say whatever you want on the other 15 tracks. The real culprits aren't the evil record exec, the president, or even the A&R. The only two people who can be blamed are the MC and the consumer.

[WJC]

"Any song with a good beat, catchy chorus, and from an artists with a compelling story has a chance to be a pop hit, whether it's about guns or love."
-Hashim

Not true, Hashim. Rap for many is about living vicariously, and it's more fun to lose yourself in The Game's world than Common's. It's the same reason action movies typically make more at the box office than romantic comedies.

Violence sells more than love, and there's not necessarily anything wrong with that. Artists can make the music, but the consumer decides its context. And rap, for most, is entertainment, not enlightenment...

"The only two people who can be blamed are the MC and the consumer."
-Andrew

...and no one should be "blamed" for that. The consumer shouldn't have to complain about what he or she likes.

[dj mirateck]

I'll definitely co-sign this, even though less than 10% of "corporate" thugs are minority, and far less are privy to hip hop culture- record label heads included.

Word to Hadji Williams.

[rocka]

So true... Now i wonder what will be the next change, now that corporatwe america isn't feeling hip hop anymore.

[Eric Nord]

Of course, this does not address the issue of diversity. It could also be argued that the winner-take-all, pyramid structure inhibits good music because a mere 20 artists dominate 95% of the airtime on any given day.

We can look back to other times in hip hop and see that many many dope artists were overlooked because they a) weren't signed to a major and b) were ignored/neglected by both fans and the industry. I would guess that major radio stations consistently ignore about 50% of the best artists. Although now it does seem there is a sort of talent drought.

Ultimately, the problem is that we essentially have a pay-to-play system, which has been well documented in the past few years. You can't say it's a "fair" system when stations are being bribed. Even if only 4 or 5 of those 20 spots get "bought"... that's 25% of the airtime.

I agree that the content is not the issue. But the only way to insure a full picture is for radio stations to be more inclusive. I'm not saying they SHOULD be more inclusive. But don't fool yourself into thinking the format of hourly rotation can ever be inclusive and/or thorough.

[Jersey Slugger]

I think that the record labels do have a part to play in all of this and that race and class come into play. Just as with the misogynistic, materialistic rap that's promoted today, alternative or "conscious" rap is on a continuum. Doing too much of that commerical shit will eventually get you lambasted by politicians and civic organizations and whatnot though having music with too much of a political message is also dangerous since the same protests may come forth. In the end, I think that many more of the "corporate thugs" that run the rap industry are much more comfortable dealing with a song like 50 Cent's "In Da Club" being pushed on a mainstream, teenage/young adult, White audience than a song like Dead Prez's "They Schools". The problem with this is that as you'll see, from Dead Prez or any other "conscious" rapper or group, the majority of the people who are at the shows and buy the records are still White. This negates the argument that materialistic rap is more commercially viable. I guarantee that if someone like Immortal Technique had the same marketing budget as Lil Jon we would see something remarkable happen.

[obifromsouthlondon]

rocka corporate will always feel anything as long as it brings in the greens. I used to be idealistic about these thing till i discovered C.R.E.A.M

[csection]

Word Up Jersey Slugger, to say that corporation don't care what is being created as long as it sells is true, but the reason we hate the machine is because a lot of those lower level managers and artists are only doing what they think the corporation wants them to do. the worst fate in hip hop is falling off in a bad way, so staying on top is staying in the money that the labels are throwing at the artists to succeed, and by that rationale the "violent, misogynistic, and ignorant junk" gets play. get immortal technique playing 20 times a day on Hot97, then we'll see whats up

[Eric Nord]

Let's face it, hip hop has become focused on selling macho-ness. It is now an alpha male enterprise. "Conscious" isn't macho.

Compare rap with rock. Rock has its fair share of macho-ness. But it has a place for non-macho stuff too. In the rock market, there is audience for both macho and sensitive (often combined) and even artsy. But in the rap world, it's pretty much 99% macho.

Whites have always been the primary consumer of Black music, but I think the relationship has changed. Black men are now free to make macho music and white people will buy it. We can go into the reasons for that, but that's a side discussion.

Back in the 1960s, there was simply a much bigger audience for non-macho music. And also I think black men were also more receptive to non-macho music. I mean, how many old school artists are like "Yo, I love the new beats... but can't take these aggressive (read: macho) lyrics."

In short, I think there is an attempt to equate black maleness with being insanely macho and I think black people and white people buy into without realizing what a bunch of idiots they are. Green Day might call them American Idiots. On that note... how the eff did white people become the most prominent voice of political consciousness?????????

[bomani]

strong post, pimp.

[IB]

"Ultimately, the problem is that we essentially have a pay-to-play system, which has been well documented in the past few years. You can't say it's a "fair" system when stations are being bribed. Even if only 4 or 5 of those 20 spots get "bought"... that's 25% of the airtime."

In other words, radio is driven be sales

[hadji williams]

Well, I guess if Jeff Chang says it, then it's gospel so forget everybody else. And let's not have the facts get in the way of anything like the truth.

Look, I like Jeff and i like his writing, for whatever that's worth, but make no mistake--corporate folks are a lot of things–greedy, manipulative, flawed, just, unjust, well-meaning, ill-informed, stressed out, out-of-touch,etc.

In short, they're human. And as human beings, they do allow their very human biases to get in the way of business decisions.

and anyone who believes the very real myth that ethnic stereotypes have been foisted on the masses by scheming ethnic artists while cost-conscious business folks and i-just-buy-what-you-say-is-real consumers follow is sadly mistaken.

I don't run a label. i don't spit 16s. I run with people who run those people. And trust me, those folks ain't no joke. They really do have biases and they will sacrifice money for beliefs. They do see people of color as things. they do value certain consumer groups over others. And ethnic culture is a commodity to them.

but what do i know? I only spent 15 years in the corporate world helping build some of the biggest brands in the world from the inside.

I didn't jump on here to scream nihilism or victimhood or to sell anything or tell everyone that i know more than they do. i just like the site and felt like chiming in.

And everyone's entitled to their beliefs and opinions, but make no mistake on this last point:

THE HUSTLE or whatever you wanna call it is counting on your denial way more than you think. it was just a movie but Kaiser Soze was right about the devil's key strategy.

Long as the sheep believe they've got horns, they're easy to sheer.

one.

[Hashim]

thanks for dropping knowledge, Hadji.

[g money]

yo hip hop is life and sometimes not .people like some great artist like common or scareface talk about life and real stuff u dont be seein women up in they bed like the game and 50 cent.