Views » May 22, 2007
Blaming Hip-Hop for Imus
Instead of blaming rappers for vulgarity, social resources should be channeled to combat the conditions that create those lyrics
We must remember that the urge to censor is an authoritarian impluse. As Russell Simmons pointed out, we have to let rappers reflect what they see.
Perhaps it was inevitable that discussions provoked by the words “nappy-headed hos” would come around to rap music and the culture of hip-hop. After all, hip-hop has taken the rap for just about every social ill: misogyny, gun violence, rampant materialism, anti-Semitism, gang warfare, even the decline of the NBA. Yes, to some extent, the insulting remarks of radio shock-jock Don Imus (who called the Rutgers University women’s basketball team “nappy-headed hos,” for which he’s been fired and subsequently sued) were drawn from a rhetorical subculture influenced by certain strands of rap music. But to focus on hip-hop as the instigator of our coarsening culture is a grievous misdiagnosis.
Hip-hop, at its best, reflects, distills, amplifies, deconstructs and re-contextualizes the social realities that are its raw material. The product of this creation then is reincorporated into that reality. Born in the ghettoes of New York City in the disjuncture between the hopes of the civil rights promise and the harsh realities of economic disinvestment, hip-hop’s founding spirit expresses an insurgent rejection of business as usual.
Nevertheless, big business saw great profits in its growing popularity. Large record companies absorbed the independent labels and accelerated hip-hop’s profit potential. These companies changed the marketing emphasis from creativity to profitability, which shifted the focus to the more sensationalistic aspects of the genre rather than its politically charged or artistically challenging expressions.
Thus, sensationalized tales of drug dealing, sex seeking and gun play (by groups like Oscar winner Three 6 Mafia) find more corporate support than political rappers like Dead Prez or adventurous groups like the Perceptionists. This disproportionate emphasis on pathology has distorted hip-hop’s public face.
Thus, when Imus’ defenders blamed hip-hop for providing their man the vocabulary for his insult, many agreed. Oprah Winfrey’s entire response to the Imus affair was a two-segment “town hall” meeting on the state of hip-hop.
Even the Rev. Al Sharpton, president of the National Action Network and leader of the campaign demanding Imus be fired, has linked arms with those protesting demeaning lyrics in hip-hop. On May 3, Sharpton led marches on the corporate offices of Sony-BMG, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group’s to protest their promotion of demeaning rap lyrics.
“This is not about censorship–it is about standards,” Sharpton told the crowd at the march’s conclusion. “There’s a standard that says Ice-T can’t rap against police. There’s a standard that says you can’t rap about gays, and you shouldn’t. They had standards against Michael Jackson saying things anti-Semitic. Where is the standard against ‘nigger,’ ‘ho’ and ‘bitches’?” Sharpton is a long-time critic of what he considers degrading rap lyrics, but the momentum of the Imus controversy obliged him to raise his voice on the issue.
Others also have been forced to take action in the wake of the shock-jock’s fall. The Hip-Hop Summit Action Network (HHSAN), led by former Def Jam Records CEO Russell Simmons and former NAACP Executive Director Benjamin Chavis, has announced a new campaign urging radio stations and other media not to air the words “bitch,” “ho” and “nigger.”
Chavis noted that the HHSAN directive is not for rappers to stop using the words. “We don’t want to violate the First Amendment Rights to free speech,” Chavis told the National Newspaper Publishers Association. But other crusaders are not that fastidious. They want to force rappers to stop saying things they do not like. Like their fellow citizens, African Americans have to be reminded that the urge to censor is an authoritarian impulse.
One of the most salient aspects of both the Communist Soviets and Nazi Germans was their demand for artistic conformity. Of course, that should not deter the African-American community from agitating for respectful media depictions, for more responsibility from artists, or for holding record companies accountable for violating community standards.
Yet Russell Simmons, who sometimes seems in thrall to corporate interests, was on target when he told Oprah that we have to let rappers reflect what they see. “People who are angry … and come from tremendous struggle; they have poetic license, and when they say things that offend you, you have to talk about the conditions that create those kinds of lyrics.”
In a black America that is largely fatherless, resource-starved mothers may come across as promiscuous gold-diggers to their proud but clueless sons, who may turn into rappers and tell their tales. We might better channel social resources if we listened more attentively to those tales. Granted, too many performers are “false flagging” their woes for profit, but there’s still plenty of wheat amidst the chaff.
ABOUT THIS AUTHOR
Salim Muwakkil is a senior editor of In These Times, where he has worked since 1983. He is the host of "The Salim Muwakkil" show on WVON, Chicago's historic black radio station, and he wrote the text for the book HAROLD: Photographs from the Harold Washington Years.

SAVE 53% OFF
Reader Comments
“Even the Rev. Al Sharpton”
*Even* him? Wasn’t Al Sharpton the man who “stood up” for Tawana Brawly? Isn’t he the man who condemned the Duke Lacrosse players for “raping” the poor misunderstood stripper? Does he really have *any* credibility left at all?
It is far past the time where “disadvantaged blacks” are worth discussing. Rather we should discuss “disadvantaged people”, regardless of color, to see what we as a society can do to better help those who fall into this *economic* group. (OJ being a great example of how guilty people, black or white, can walk away from their crimes scotfree, provided they are rich. Justice is color blind, but remains acutely dependent on economic status.)
Posted by wolf on May 22, 2007 at 7:17 AM
What a cop-out.
Posted by whattheheck on May 22, 2007 at 12:49 PM
whattheheck and wolf (you guys are still here?):
I don’t think it’s a cop-out at all to give black Americans a unique place in our history. Furthermore, it’s folly to lump all black Americans into the same level of experience. Mr. Muwakkil comes from one foreign to those street dwellers who produce the majority of hip-hop, yet holds the interesting perspective of one who has lived through some of the last worst moments of institutionalized US racial policy.
I think his perspective holds more weight than your own, based on his relevant experience and his informed study. Is it not easy to pass judgment on cultural expressions which have no effect on you or your life, rather than see hip-hop - and the use of internally offensive language - as a double-standard or playing the race card?
Neither of your arguments hold logical water: not wolf’s convenient socioeconomic ‘equality’ nor whattheheck’s random dismal of Russell Simmons’s comment about artistic license. I think it would be just as ridiculous to consider Joseph Conrad as racist for ‘Heart of Darkness’. Imus, on the other hand, continued a ‘wink-wink’ culture within white male power structures, which allows them to be seemingly egalitarian, while harboring racist stereotypes.
To paraphrase Chris Rock: I ain’t saying he should have been fired, but I understand…
Posted by rocco on May 22, 2007 at 5:43 PM
Rocco,
Posted by whattheheck on May 23, 2007 at 5:45 AM
“Thus, when Imus
Posted by Kuya on May 24, 2007 at 1:30 AM
extended discussion >>>Continued...
Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 7 posts.