Ask And You Shall Receive: Sharpton Goes After Abusive Music

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 05:30 PM
link   
CSIFan, I think you missed this post.
www.abovepolitics.com...

Somehow it got sandwiched between 2 of yours that seem to be the same...

Anyway, I address this supposed "new" move of Sharpton (it has nothing to do with rap lyrics, but assault on a 14-year-old BY a rapper - that's very different) and secondly, I'm not saying the big wigs should get off free, I'm just saying the rappers themselves shouldn't get off Scot free either in your little "clean up the airwaves" campaign.

ps. I sent you a U2U

[edit on 13-4-2007 by Benevolent Heretic]




posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I agree that if someone is going after the industry, the top dogs should be held accountable also. I'm just saying that if you're going after rap lyrics, the rappers themselves, the manufacturers of the lyrics, need to fit in there somewhere, too. They seem to be getting a free ride here.


In many cases the Rappers do not write their own lyrics. The "product" created, and presented for public consumption, by a large company like Vivendi will be a product that has contributions from different departments. For Rap music production, there is an extensive concentration on: the "beat" which can cost anywhere under a $million dollars, the lyrics which may cost too, stylists, and the presentation. There are staffs of people who write the concept for a music video, and lots of staff who create all the finished products, as in any industry.

I don't have to tell you who makes the most money, the artist or the company...when MSM blasts the artists, guys like Zach Horowitz laugh all the way to the bank!



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I'm not saying the big wigs should get off free, I'm just saying the rappers themselves shouldn't get off Scot free either in your little "clean up the airwaves" campaign.

Oh, now it's my little campaign...ok.

Well, if it were up to me, I'd lock up all the Vivendi people involved in the exploitation of unfortunate young people (and those unfortunates include the artists AND the young people worldwide that this filth has been exposed to).

I'd put them in a cell, along with the real characters that their "creative people" have fantasized to life...

You know, these people can create any image they want, and with big money, they make it all appear real... and acceptable to our children.

In the jail, I'd have them beaten every day for creating an industry that makes nice kids aspire to grow up to be Rappers, changing the way they dress and talk.

And, I'd throw away the key on guys like Zach Horowitz and the rest of the lousy music producers destroying children worldwide!

That would leave the field wide open for companies who produce music that is respectful to all cultures. The guys who get no airplay because they don't say nasty stuff...it would be their time...time to make good music. Go Mos Def! Go Common!

But that's only if I had my 'druthers...



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 06:50 PM
link   
That's nice to see a step taken to protect women from the degradation that's heaped on them daily by the corporate version of hiphop and rap. It's good to remember that before the product was capitalized on by the media moguls it had a more politically oriented tone, rather than just churning out ideals of helpless alienation transformed into hostility against the frail sex.

Or pedestalizing a violent ideal in order to provide disenfranchised youth with a good criminal role model.

But I have to say, no matter what they churn out - thongs in size 6x, or songs singing the praises of violence, or commercials and movies that have fully developed male characters, but all females are two dimensional bra commercials - it won't fool my kids.

There's a pecking order in the society: white women were once above black men and black women - now black men are above both white and black women....it's a predictable pattern, like a hen house - where the rooster calls them all out.



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by CSIfan
... lock up all the Vivendi people involved in the exploitation of unfortunate young people ...

I'd put them in a cell, ...

In the jail, I'd have them beaten every day for creating an industry



This is how it starts. And how it has already started. Lock up just a few people, for some pretty justifiable reasons, and don't worry too much about the mechanics of it.

But it never stops there. The urge to lock up more and more people is irresistible to authoritarian types. We can already see this in the fact the the US locks up more people than any other country in the world. And just who do you think bears the brunt of this? Source

The solution here is not to lock up the purveyors of rap music. The solution is parents being involved with their kids, and the evolution of a society that does not value that crap. And of a society that does not require every waking minute of every middle-class or lower adult being devoted just to trying to make a living.

It took us a long time to get to this sorry state, and no quick fix in the world is going to work. We have to dig our way out by doing the hard work it is going to take.

Freedom can be troublesome... especially to the authority types. But I think it's worth putting up with Rap-crap, Jackson, Imus, Sharpton, Duke and all the rest...



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by CSIfan
In many cases the Rappers do not write their own lyrics.


What??? Are you trying to say Zach Horowitz is up there in his office writing about bitches and hos performing oral sex up on him?



This is a real reach!

Didn't Snoop just make a big deal about how these lyrics come from his soul?

Puh-lease! You're going to have to provide a link for me to believe that.



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 07:58 PM
link   
This is going about it all wrong. Its silencing free speech. I thought the whole imus deal was wrong as well. Its free speech though. Dont listen to his shows if you dont like what he has to say. Same with rap. Dont like it, dont listen to it. I personally dont like rap. i listen to rock myself, i simply choose not to listen to rap though. I can think for myself unlike some ppl. I just remember when they were trying to silence rock in the 80's because it wasnt "soft" enough for some ppls taste. Dont like it? dont pay any attention to it then.

People Like Al Sharpton and jesse jackson need to leave their contradicting, hypocritical views out of it. Does anyone else find it funny how all of a sudden ppl like Sharpton and Jackson are suddenly taking offense to rap lyrics? pffft As if this hasnt been a 'problem' for a long time..

Another thing. If they successfully have their way with rap music then I cant help but think whats next? Are they going to try and silence rock music again? I have a feeling that if this goes through that this is just the tip of the ice berg of things to come. And ppl on this board gripe about about our rights and liberties being taken away..




[edit on 083030p://1104pm by semperfoo]



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by clearwater
But I have to say, no matter what they churn out - thongs in size 6x, or songs singing the praises of violence, or commercials and movies that have fully developed male characters, but all females are two dimensional bra commercials - it won't fool my kids.

I applaud your parenting skills! Unfortunately, everyone who has kids don't know how to be a parent, and it's their kids who must be protected by society.

My kids were raised well; I was always confident that they weren't going to grow up to be "followers".

It's a good feeling, isn't it?



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Open,

You make really good points, but please just let me lock up Zach Horowitz?

Just him, and I'll never ask again, lol!



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 10:25 PM
link   
This is one time I have to side with Rev. Sharpton on this issue. Things have gotten way to out of control with the lyrical content of some songs. The claims of free speech are there but why should an artist be allowed to denigrate women in such a manner. The excuses the leaders in Hip Hop are using to defend themselves is pretty lame IMO. :
apnews.excite.com...

Comparing Don Imus' language with hip-hop artists' poetic expression is misguided and inaccurate and feeds into a mindset that can be a catalyst for unwarranted, rampant censorship," (Russell) Simmons said in a statement Friday.
Please what exactly is poetic about some of the lyrics directed towards the hate of women, just because it rhymes?

Anyways you are going to have a hard time as the ones doing the lyrics do not seem to see the damage they cause:


The superstar rapper Snoop Dogg also denied any connection to Imus. "(Rappers) are not talking about no collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports," he told MTV.com. "We're talking about hos that's in the 'hood that ain't doing ---- that's trying to get a n---- for his money."
Simply amazing IMO. What hood does Snoop actually live in now?


In 2004, students at Spelman College, a black women's college in Atlanta, became upset over rapper Nelly's video for his song "Tip Drill," in which he cavorts with strippers and swipes a credit card between one woman's buttocks. The rapper wanted to hold a campus bone marrow drive for his ailing sister, but students demanded he first participate in a discussion about the video's troubling images. Nelly declined.
I guess taking care of his sister's needs came second to his image.

It's just hard for me as a man to defend another man's right to basically spit on women lyrically.



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Who decides which lyrics are going to be allowed and which are not?

Don't just say Society, that is pure cop out. Society is not going to "decide" anything.

So, what group is going to be selected, by society, to determine what we should hear and what we should not?

What limits are going to be placed on the group?

Who determines what those limits are?

Who would have impeachment powers over the group?

Mass vote? On each and every song written? Go to the polls a couple times each day?

What about what can be read on the Internet? Should that not also be censored?

How about books that have terrible words in them? Shall we burn them? If we just ban them, they will get out, they always do.

Once we do that, how about we institute criminal charges on anyone that says certain words?

Advance the technology and we can charge anyone that thinks them too.

Just where are we headed people?

Semper



posted on Apr, 13 2007 @ 11:46 PM
link   
I don't know semper, is it better that we have and are raising a generation of youth that thinks it is cool and ok to demean women? Which is the greater ill to society? Most characterizations of women in rap videos are hardly positive role models for the most part. It's a tough problem.

I grant that it is not an easy problem to rectify. We supposedly do some monitoring of things in movies and music now, I would think those bodies already existing should do it.

Just have record companies recut songs, videos and CD's and if necessary fine them to the point where it becomes economically hurtful for them to continue down that route. If they don't make money doing it, they won't do it.

[edit on 13-4-2007 by pavil]



posted on Apr, 14 2007 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
What??? Are you trying to say Zach Horowitz is up there in his office writing about bitches and hos performing oral sex up on him?
This is a real reach!
Didn't Snoop just make a big deal about how these lyrics come from his soul?
Puh-lease! You're going to have to provide a link for me to believe that.

Rappers don't always write their own lyrics, but whoever writes the lyrics, they must be approved by the Corporate owners of the label.

They hold boardroom "listening parties", which makes lots of big shots very complicit in approval of the lyrics. If they don't approve the lyrics, we could never hear it on their label.

Some corporations hire staffs of ghostwriters, and then again, some ghostwriters are free-lance; in this way the music industry is similar to publishing companies. An example of a ghostwriter-turned-R&B performer is Ne-Yo; you can check him out at this link:

en.wikipedia.org...

No, Mr. Horowitz and the French Company, Vivendi does pay the bills and cash the checks; he doesn't write lyrics, but does pay the ghostwriters, if any...and he does absolutely hold responsibility for the approval of the product of his company, IMO.

BH, please be careful with your language here. Just because we are discussing Rappers there's no reason for you to be vulgar, it takes away from the discussion.

[edit on 14-4-2007 by CSIfan]

[edit on 14-4-2007 by CSIfan]



posted on Apr, 14 2007 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Maybe the reason Sharpton hasn't been successful doing anything about rap lyrics is that he isn't as 'powerful' as some would like to think. I personally don't think he has the influence to make anything happen, or it would have happened already. I mean, he's been trying since at least 2003 to do something about rap (supposedly).

Imus would have fallen with or without Mr. Sharpton.



"Al Sharpton is a convenient diversion from what really happened to Imus," Brown said. "This was so egregious, so over the line, it would have happened anyway, with or without Sharpton."
Did Sharpton Bring Down Imus? Some Doubt it



Originally posted by CSIfan
BH, please be careful with your language here.


I think the moderators can handle the difficult task of keeping me in line.
Besides, I was speaking from my soul! It was artistry!



posted on Apr, 14 2007 @ 09:09 AM
link   

I don't know semper, is it better that we have and are raising a generation of youth that thinks it is cool and ok to demean women? Which is the greater ill to society? Most characterizations of women in rap videos are hardly positive role models for the most part. It's a tough problem.


I don't see it as difficult at all...

Tell me where in the Constitution it gives the government the obligation to raise our children?

That is NOT the governments job.

The governments job is to provide and secure the rights we are guaranteed which allows us to raise our own children.

Just because some parents are not doing a good job is no reason to limit our basic rights as they are guaranteed by the Constitution.

(Cutting our nose off to spite our face)

Semper



posted on Apr, 14 2007 @ 11:27 AM
link   
I'll agree with you Semper in that the gov't shouldn't be raising our kids. However, the sheer pervaisiveness of some of the vileness out there, as much as I hate to admit it, almost demands at least some gov't intervention. What form that intervention should take is the problem, grassroots organization is just too overwhelmed. Perhaps a certain level of funding of grassroots organizations to counter the incredible media circus that surrounds todays hiphop culture.

I'm not a socialogist, but I know enough to see that there's a problem that needs to be addressed. The why is obvious, the how is the problem.

Did any of that make sense? I read back over it and I'm not sure
.



posted on Apr, 14 2007 @ 12:05 PM
link   
When I was a kid, I think the FCC kept the TV and radio airwaves very clean. I mean, I didn't even hear a bleeped word. You just weren't allowed to say it at all. Then they started bleeping words and blurring the mouths, so you knew it was a "bad word" you just couldn't tell what it was except in context.

These days, they don't blur the mouth and let the "sh" be heard while bleeping the "it". And they do that with all but the most hard core "insulting" words, which they bleep entirely, but you'd have to be a moron not to know what it is.

The FCC, a government institution, has relaxed over the years and more and more is "acceptable". They came up with ratings to let the parents know, but the parents didn't really pay attention. They've got lives, too.

And adult situations are now allowed on the air. Soap Operas, Prime time, whatever.

Why did the FCC become so lax? Because of money. You clean up the airwaves to the standards of the 60s now and the networks and advertisers are going to go nuts! They're used to pulling in the viewers and the government likes it because it keeps the people comfortable squatting in front of the boob tube, instead of noticing what's going on in the world.

I do believe the only answer is for parents to take a more active role or else give your child's mind over to the TV, rap music and video games. Because censorship isn't going to happen.



posted on Apr, 14 2007 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
I don't see it as difficult at all...

Tell me where in the Constitution it gives the government the obligation to raise our children?

That is NOT the governments job.

The governments job is to provide and secure the rights we are guaranteed which allows us to raise our own children.

Just because some parents are not doing a good job is no reason to limit our basic rights as they are guaranteed by the Constitution.

(Cutting our nose off to spite our face)
Semper


Yes, Semper, you make good points, but the good citizens that we raise will have to make their way in a Society that may threaten our children's lifestyles...is that where we incarcerate the "others"? No...I don't think that's a good plan...As a Society that espouses the inscription on Lady Liberty, we pledge to undo the ills that affect our Countrymen.

We want to create a good Society here, so we must take on the things that threaten us, namely, an industry that exploits children with pornographic lyrics and images! If we were all adults, we wouldn't have much need for the censorship powers of the FCC, now would we?

By the way, where is the FCC hiding in all of this? They are funded with our tax dollars, yet the burden falls on grassroots, unsalaried people to do their jobs? Not good...



posted on Apr, 14 2007 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
I'll agree with you Semper in that the gov't shouldn't be raising our kids. However, the sheer pervaisiveness of some of the vileness out there, as much as I hate to admit it, almost demands at least some gov't intervention.

Did any of that make sense? I read back over it and I'm not sure
.

You make a lot of sense, and I agree wholeheartedly! Somewhere, somehow, there has to exist a "happy medium" for intervention.

If it can't be played on public airwaves, some of the profit will be lost. Let's face it, this is pornography in lyrics and images! And corporate approval does not happen at the artist's level. This is big money, and they could care less if our youth are corrupted.

These Corporations are so clever, they Blast the artist's images all over the media... but I could not find a picture of the CEO, Zach Horowitz, in the entirety of the Internet! He must be on the "down-low"...despicable!



posted on Apr, 14 2007 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by CSIfan
I could not find a picture of the CEO, Zach Horowitz, in the entirety of the Internet! He must be on the "down-low"...despicable!


Third from the left.



And here is a page full of pictures of him.

He's way younger than I thought!





new topics
top topics
 
4
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join