Originally Posted by pUke

And you would know how? You wouldn't have the balls to approach a woman let alone have the opportunity to call her anything to her face.

The only context you'd use "bitch" in is to describe the woman once you didn't get the time of day.

Originally Posted by jubaji

Of course it is.

Originally Posted by Uke

I have no argument or defense for people's greed, GonzoStyles. ( Can you make that sentence shorter? take out "argument or" - keep it concise) That has never been a point that I disputed, even though you constantly make this issue about the greed of artists. You driving point is that artists are greedy, which I've agreed with. Passed that point, what is your point?(Correction: "Your" driving point, not "you" -thanks)

IMO, everyone is greedy. Everyone uses and takes more than they need. Poor people who are presented with million dollar contracts are no different. There is no defense for them. They are desperate, poor people who would do anything to change their situations. Its the same reason why crack became such an epidemic in Black and Latino communities. People want to get ahead, even at the cost of their neighbors and family. However, crack didn't become a problem or receive the media attention that it did until it spilled over into White communities.(No qualms here with the grammer, just make it shorter and more concise, thankyou)

Its the same in this scenario in the record industry. The content of hip hop wasn't an issue until White children started listening to it. Once their parents found out, they began calling for it to be banned and some politicians even used it on their election platforms.(I don't understand what you are trying to say here? Once their parents found out what??)

My point is that over 85% of all rap sales are made by White males, which means that Gangsta rap can only exist because it is perceived as a popular genre that consumers want to hear. Yet, the lascivious and violent messages found in Hip hop are seen as a Black problem instead of an industry problem. I find that fascinating when the majority of those who buy the so-called destructive and mind altering music are White.

Mike Brewer made an excellent point earlier ....(Can you tell us what kind of point Mike Brewer made? Provide the reader with context clues and pay attention to your audience; we're falling asleep here.)



.... And I agree with that. (Incomplete sentence) It is about supply and demand. (What do you mean by It?) The execs are even more greedy than the artists because all they care about are numbers. They execs are the ones with the power to change the perceived image of hip hop, yet they are happy catering to those who buy the most rap music.

This debate is a futile because the criticism about gangsta rap music is largely from those who continue to buy it!

Its GonzoStyles intent here not to let the artists off the hook, which I never did. GonzoStyles also continues to pretend that I have tried to lay the entire blame on one group(record execs) when its never been about the entire blame. This article shows the role that record execs play in the marketing of rap music, which directly affects the messages that people associate with the Hip hop culture.

Regardless of the fact that artists are indeed whoring themselves once they sign crooked contracts, they lack the power to make the necessary changes for more positive hip hop. Independent labels like you mentioned do not command the power of powerhouse labels, whether you are honest enough to admit or not.

This entire debate comes down to who has the power to change the negative messages and images that we see and hear everyday. The artists under contracts don't, and we are not just speaking about washed up rappers either. I have stated today's artists like Kanye West, Talib Kweli, Mos Def, and Common have ALL said the same things that Paris has stated, yet you avoid that fact like the plague.

So, while you're pointing out that artists do have choices does ring true, does it have anything about who markets the music? Does it have anything to do with who gets play on the radio? If you think that the radio stations don't bow down to the Big Labels then you're either naive or need to learn a lot more. That's why we referred to the "industry" and no just record labels. The industry .. the artists, the producers, the studios, the record labels, the radio stations, the concert halls ... they are all tied in together, and they are not going to go against someone with as much pull and influence as Russell Simmons or Sean Combs.

The biggest underground star right now is probably Immortal Technique, who send powerful messages and a positive vibe in his music. He'll tell you that he isn't making any real money. He'll tell you that he does what he does because he loves the music. That's admirable, but its not something you'll see everyday. Its so rare to find an artist like that. He has incredible talent, material, and a huge following. Yet, there is little money for him. (pretty good, I've seen better)

Why is that? He's as underground as underground gets. Is it because he made all the wrong decisions? Is he whoring himself? He's just as talented and has more stimulating messages in his music than damn nearly anyone from the south. His following is worldwide. But the money he would get from signing with someone like Puffy or Jay-Z would be exponentially greater than what he's making now. But do you know what? Immortal Technique also knows that his lyrics would never make it to mainstream radio no matter how positive or educational they are, because they are controversial. That decision would be made by record and radio execs, not Technique.

The lure of millions is too much for most people to resist. In a country where 2% control 90% of the wealth, that kind of money represents a once in a lifetime chance to change their situation. Now, I'm not defending greed here. That's reality. If you feel that a young man is a dumb ass cash fiend because he would rather make music than sell crack or gang-bang, that's you're opinion. We will continue to see that differently, GonzoStyles.

But since when did making rap music become an evil, selfish act? ESPECIALLY when the main consumers won't buy anything else but Thug and Gangsta music? Its free expression. And thug and gangsta music would shrivel and die if people didn't want to hear it.

I guess Red Foxx, Bill Cosby, Richard Pryor and Eddie Murphy are also dumb ass cash fiends because most of their material was objectionable to a large part of America.(You forgot to mention Chris Rock, please start over from the begining and include that, thanks) They were lewd, dirty, sexual and to some they were just plain rude. But they were all funny, and people came to see them in record numbers. They cursed, talked about having sex, they even talked badly about the President. Still, people paid to come out and see them. It was free expression. (What do you mean by "free" expression? If attendees paid a fee in exchange for a short-term viewing priveldge, the expression came at a price! Your theme is business!)

So in the end, passed all your talk about Indy labels that don't have the clout to go against the bigger labels and greedy artists, it still all comes down to who has the power to change the state of the rap music game. Its not the artists. Its not a "Black" problem as it is so often perceived as they don't even make up 10% of all rap sales in the United States.

Seems to me that its like Mike Brewer said. Its about the Record execs(supply)and Gangsta rap fans that buy the CD's, DVD's and records(demand). This problem couldn't even exist without them.

Let's be truthful for moment here. No one here really has a problem with Gangsta or Thug rap per se. The real problem is that those genre's have become mainstream, and so those are the messages that are taken in and perceived as what rap music offers. If Gangsta and Thug rap were small, underground genres then no one would really have a problem because the attention would go to other rap that sends more positive messages.

This last revelation goes even further to prove that this entire debate is about who has the power to change the problem, not who has a hand in contributing to it.

Originally Posted by jubaji

A little extra sensitive today, little pUke?

Too F-ing bad


The term is obviously insulting, and your juvenile failure at transparently attempting to contextualize it only makes you look as ignorant as ever.

Originally Posted by pUke

There are a lot of things that are different outside of your culture, jubaji. Don't pretend to know them.

Originally Posted by jubaji

Of course it is.

Originally Posted by medic06

"Bitch" is a dirty word all of a sudden?

Originally Posted by medic06

"Bitch" is a dirty word all of a sudden?

Originally Posted by medic06

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Originally Posted by Tom Yum

Your post was average, perhaps satisfactory at best. I also lost interest and decided to get a glass of water near the end. Therefore I assume this is a accurate reflection of your business accumen and know-how.

I'm going to ask you to write it over again - starting from the beginning; I believe this writing sample falls short of the standards set by most accredited MBA programs, much less a successfull businessman. Think about keeping your verbage short and concise. If you chose not to re-write it, I will be forced to scrap your "draft" and re-write it in a manner that suits me (not you)...







just playing, Uke!

I'm just giving you a hard time, man.

In all honesty, if you catch a post of mine that uses poor writing, bring it to my attention and I'll make corrections.

That is all.