Musical Artists Should Be Able to Count on Labels’ Support

Chuck Philips reports in his article “Ice-T Fallout: Signs of Industry Wariness of ‘Gangsta’ Rap” (Calendar, Aug. 20) that there is growing concern among record executives regarding “violent and sexually explicit rap music.”

After reading this story, one might believe that the practice of restricting the expression of artists and their material is becoming widespread throughout the industry. Sure, we’ve had to suffer through the threatened boycotts of Time Warner for “Cop Killer,” and now MCA has withdrawn FU2’s “No Head, No Backstage Pass.”

Yet Philips quotes one--just one--named executive (from MCA) who verifies and admits to the actions implied in the story’s headline. And he’s supposed to be talking for the whole music industry?

I’m no journalist, but it seems to me that if you’re going to report on an issue--especially one as controversial as the topic we’re talking about here--you should get both sides of the story. Makes sense, doesn’t it?

What doesn’t make sense is that Chuck Philips interviewed me for more than 45 minutes for this piece and my views are nowhere to be found in the article. And my feelings on this issue are those that I know are shared with numerous other record executives--a lot more, anyway, than Philips quotes in his willfully deficient story. So, Chuck, now it’s my turn.

Any recording artist--and certainly the record executives who support these artists--should be outraged by the restrictions being placed on these musical groups. Oppression of artistic expression, like any sort of oppression, should not and cannot be tolerated.

When rap music began to hit the scene more than 15 years ago, groups could only get record deals on independent labels. It was in this environment that the groups found support, encouragement and people who believed in the significance of artistic freedom.

Once the major labels saw the money that could be made, they jumped right on that bandwagon and began signing as many rap acts as they could. Rap became the most powerful influence in music and these companies made a lot of money.

There is more to any type of music (or any artistic expression) than the amount of money it can make. When a label signs an artist, it should be prepared to understand that artist’s vision and to commit and support that vision. To abandon an artist because of what he or she is expressing is sheer hypocrisy.

(A side note to MCA: I note that “Angel’s Delight” by Fatima Mansion--a white group--contains lyrics about killing cops and, if published, would no doubt generate the same sort of hysteria that was generated by those who called for a boycott of Time Warner and those who contend that because they are offended by FU2, FU2 ought not be sold. Although I would never advocate pulling Fatima Mansion, MCA’s failure to do so raises serious questions as to whether MCA is applying its content-based lyric standards equally to both rap artists and artists of other genres.)

The Recording Industry Assn. of America (RIAA) released a blanket statement of support for Time Warner and Ice-T that included more than 60 record companies. Although the support came almost a month after the controversy began--a month too late--it came nevertheless.

As a member of the entertainment community for more than 10 years and as a representative through my record label and management companies of the most influential voices in black culture that by some are considered to be the biggest influences in pop culture, I call for immediate action by artists and record executives to verbalize their support of artistic freedom--whether it be for rap, rock or heavy metal.

If we don’t actively demonstrate a united front, the avalanche of attacks and restrictions on artists, particularly black musicians, will continue.

And Chuck Philips will be right.