Tuesday, June 16, 2020

Why doesn't "Alphabet" demonetize Rap?

Alphabet is the umbrella company for Google and her sister companies.

Alphabet is the 800 pound gorilla of the digital world.

It is a very big deal when Alphabet "demonetizes" a source of digital content.

It takes the oxygen out of the room for that source AND for sources that are similar to the demonetized source. They tippy-toe out of fear of being the next digital content supplier to be black-listed.

Haiku is highly stylized, Japanese prose/poetry that is written in three lines.

old pond
frog leaps in
water's sound
The size limitations of the commonly available scraps of rice-paper caused poets to economize. Maximum content, minimum syllables.

Far be it for me to criticize Alphabet. They host Blogger, the platform that hosts this blog at no cost to me or you.

However, with all due respect I propose that Alphabet seriously entertain the possibility of placing restrictions on music that is hosted/monetized via Alphabet platforms.

If Haiku can be art with 17 syllables, then why must some kinds of music have dozens of M-fers, and references to ho's, murder, arson, rape and drugs in each song?

Songs by dead artists can be left-in-place as cultural legacy, much like the statues of the Confederacy.

The proposal is that as of today, songs by living artists that contain more than one M-fer or "ho", or "bitch", or reference to homicide, or rape, or drugs be demonetized. Living artists can re-write and re-record their masterpieces in conformance with the new guidelines.

If the artists want to stand on principle: Fine. They can sell that music through brick-and-mortar stores or via dedicated websites.

Alphabet demonetized an alternative news source that is notoriously pro-Russia because it is too right-leaning (Zerohedge). Presumably, they demonetized it because they determined that it is disrupts civil society.

Can anybody make a coherent case that Rap Music is LESS disruptive to civilized society than a niche, alternative news source?