The Guardian

[S35_2o21]

16 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

Do you think it's appropriate that a mainstream newspaper promotes such violence?

How is a review of an album promoting violence? Or is it introducing an album to a wider audience who might appreciate it?

 

When The Guardian reviewed the latest James Bond film, was that 'promoting 'violence? Or when it reviewed the Beyonce album, what was that 'promoting'?

 

Grime/Drill music is not to my taste, so I choose not to listen to it. Neither is classical music. However, I do believe in free speech. 

 

Is it only right wing media that is allowed to tell us what to think?? 

 

 

[Al Bundy]

12 minutes ago, S35_2o21 said:

How is a review of an album promoting violence? Or is it introducing an album to a wider audience who might appreciate it?

 

When The Guardian reviewed the latest James Bond film, was that 'promoting 'violence? Or when it reviewed the Beyonce album, what was that 'promoting'?

 

Grime/Drill music is not to my taste, so I choose not to listen to it. Neither is classical music. However, I do believe in free speech. 

 

Is it only right wing media that is allowed to tell us what to think?? 

 

 

Oh I totally believe in free speech. 

 

However, the hypocrisy of the guardian is astounding.

 

They promote artists who talk about gang violence, stabbings and sexual violence towards women, yet will have a collective circle jerk of outrage when a white male does it.

 

Can you not see the political hypocrisy?

 

 

Edited January 3, 2023 by Al Bundy

[MJ01]

1 hour ago, butlers said:

Certainly misdirected you

Indeed - a 'Barnsley Kiss' became something else altogether......

[Magilla]

43 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

They promote artists who talk about gang violence, stabbings and sexual violence towards women, yet will have a collective circle jerk of outrage when a white male does it.

Films and novels often have gang violence, stabbings and sexual violence towards women...

 

...are they promoting those things?

 

Is anyone who watches and comments promoting them?

 

Quote

Can you not see the political hypocrisy?

A lot of political desperation, that's all!

Edited January 3, 2023 by Magilla

[Guest makapaka]

1 hour ago, Al Bundy said:

Nothing tastes sweeter than highlighting the hypocrisy of the left.

 

Lovely Jubbly.

 

 

 

Nice try but conflating a guardian album review by a rapper - with the actions of Andrew tate - as a demonstration of hypocrisy of the left - is nonsense.

 

and you know it. It’s just bad trolling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Al Bundy]

20 minutes ago, makapaka said:

Nice try but conflating a guardian album review by a rapper - with the actions of Andrew tate - as a demonstration of hypocrisy of the left - is nonsense.

 

and you know it. It’s just bad trolling.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's hypocrisy and you know it.

 

👍

[Delbow]

I don't know anything about Clavish, so can't comment on him specifically. I used to have a problem with the lyrics in gangsta rap, but changed my mind quite a bit after I read the writer John Berger on cultural impoverishment, which he described as (I'm paraphrasing here) "When people lack the means or ability to tell what they know". 

 

So for example, KRS1's 9mm Goes Bang I had a real problem with initially, but when you hear him talking you realise that he wasn't trying to glorify the violence but to describe what was going on around him. He lived in the South Bronx when it was at its worst (an interesting history in its own right) - and the facts of how the South Bronx was allowed to fail is scandalous in itself, and therefore it's justified for people to narrate what is/was happening. Same with Run The Jewels - a lot of the lyrics feature violence and crime, but again when you hear Killer Mike talking, he is very eloquent and has a really sharp mind, and is a positive force despite his dubious youth.

 

So for me, it's about whether someone is describing their reality (which I think is important, regardless of how unpalatable it is, because it's important that people can tell what they know) or whether they are condoning stuff that is obviously not ok.

Edited January 3, 2023 by Delbow

[Guest makapaka]

20 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

It's hypocrisy and you know it.

 

👍

For it to be hypocritical the guardian would have to write an article denouncing Andrew tates attitudes to women and then publish another article praising the rap singers attitudes to women.

 

that hasn’t and will not happen.

 

it’s a review of an album, they’re no more promoting the content of his lyrics as they are advocating murder by reviewing the glass onion,

 

what you’ve got here is an attempt to try and make the misguided actions of a white man into some kind of race argument in which the poor white fella is just being condemned for being white when he’s actually being condemned for being a wrong un - “and then look at the black person getting away with it….”

 

pathetic really.

[Al Bundy]

14 minutes ago, Delbow said:

I don't know anything about Clavish, so can't comment on him specifically. I used to have a problem with the lyrics in gangsta rap, but changed my mind quite a bit after I read the writer John Berger on cultural impoverishment, which he described as (I'm paraphrasing here) "When people lack the means or ability to tell what they know". 

 

So for example, KRS1's 9mm Goes Bang I had a real problem with initially, but when you hear him talking you realise that he wasn't trying to glorify the violence but to describe what was going on around him. He lived in the South Bronx when it was at its worst (an interesting history in its own right) - and the facts of how the South Bronx was allowed to fail is scandalous in itself, and therefore it's justified for people to narrate what is/was happening. Same with Run The Jewels - a lot of the lyrics feature violence and crime, but again when you hear Killer Mike talking, he is very eloquent and has a really sharp mind, and is a positive force despite his dubious youth.

 

So for me, it's about whether someone is describing their reality (which I think is important, regardless of how unpalatable it is, because it's important that people can tell what they know) or whether they are condoning stuff that is obviously not ok.

Good post.

 

I've nothing against this particular kind of music, each to their own, my debate is whether it should be promoted in a national newspaper, especially one that loves shouting from the rooftops about equality, any kind of sexual violence against women and the latest buzzword misogyny.

 

Yet they have no issue giving airtime to artists that blatantly glorify it.

 

It smacks of hypocrisy and political narrative.

5 minutes ago, makapaka said:

For it to be hypocritical the guardian would have to write an article denouncing Andrew tates attitudes to women and then publish another article praising the rap singers attitudes to women.

 

that hasn’t and will not happen.

 

it’s a review of an album, they’re no more promoting the content of his lyrics as they are advocating murder by reviewing the glass onion,

 

what you’ve got here is an attempt to try and make the misguided actions of a white man into some kind of race argument in which the poor white fella is just being condemned for being white when he’s actually being condemned for being a wrong un - “and then look at the black person getting away with it….”

 

pathetic really.

On the contrary.

 

What's pathetic is your defence of a publication that's giving airtime to artists that glorify violence and sexual abuse.

 

Incredible really.

[Palomar]

I think Ted has ruined his reputation as a serious contributor by starting this barrel scraper.