Hip-hop is mainstream. It’s what pop music is. It’s a HUGE juggernaut for business. The President mentioned a hip-hop artist recently in a speech regarding his campaign for re-election. But even in 2012 it still intimidates some. New York Post writer Phil Mushnick’s column contained a few thoughts about partial owner Jay-Z’s involvement with the marketing of the re-branded Brooklyn Nets.
I’m really curious as to how he developed this idea of what the “full Jay-Z treatment” consists of. Jay is also a husband and a father, could that be the treatment? Where is this stemming from? Jay-Z has created a multi-million dollar empire which encompasses clubs, clothing lines, liquor, talent management and yes, music. Because he’s a rapper he can’t offer more? Because he’s a rapper he can’t be diverse? Because he’s a rapper you automatically feel “ghetto-cized” by his involvement?
Do you feel that way about actors too? What about owners with a shady past or convictions involving discrimination i.e. Donald Sterling. Probably not as it appears he’s probably on board a similar thought train as yourself.
I’m a believer in freedom of speech and truthfully, I prefer my racists out in the open BUT, if you’re going to kick these suggestions out, offer some sort of concrete reasoning as to why this makes sense. And don’t just point to his music as I’ve given several other examples (and more current ones to boot) that sort of make that argument obsolete.
On the latest episode of RSVP with Jill Munroe, we get into the latest swirl…
The past week has been a whirlwind of drama and dominance in the culture, and…
The NBA's Ratings Woes: Why 2024 is Looking Like a Dunk Gone Wrong The 2024…
Thanksgiving is all about family, food, and football—and let’s be honest, the drama that comes…
Hulu's *Reasonable Doubt* highly anticipated second season delivers a complex mix of courtroom drama, personal…
The *Frasier* reboot on Peacock returns for its second season, bringing back the beloved character…
This website uses cookies.