This book discusses the history of music warning labels, specifically the Parental Advisory Label (PAL), and the Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC). It aims to answer these questions: How could the PMRC trigger a debate on music lyrics as a negative influence on children that led to the introduction of the PAL in the long run? What did the implementation of the PAL warning mean for musicians and how had the perception of music changed so that the advisory label was deemed necessary? The central thesis is that through the discourse on explicit lyrics, certain music was marked as an actual threat to children and society and consequently started to be perceived as such. By the way in which the discourse evolved, and how other actors conducted themselves in the debates, this understanding of certain music was repeatedly (re-)negotiated and connected to other current discourses, such as discourses on family values, sexuality, youth culture, generational conflicts and social problems. Through this, the understanding of certain music as a threat to children and society was constantly renewed. The book analyses the PMRC’s campaign on explicit lyrics and provides insights into their strategy and success from a historical perspective.
Reality first appeared in the late 1980s—in the sense not of real life but rather of the TV entertainment genre inaugurated by shows such as Cops and America’s Most Wanted; the daytime gabfests of Geraldo, Oprah, and Donahue; and the tabloid news of A Current Affair. In a bracing work of cultural criticism, Eric Harvey argues that reality TV emerged in dialog with another kind of entertainment that served as its foil while borrowing its techniques: gangsta rap. Or, as legendary performers Ice Cube and Ice-T called it, “reality rap.” Reality rap and reality TV were components of a cultural revolution that redefined popular entertainment as a truth-telling medium. Reality entertainment borrowed journalistic tropes but was undiluted by the caveats and context that journalism demanded. While N.W.A.’s “Fuck tha Police” countered Cops’ vision of Black lives in America, the reality rappers who emerged in that group’s wake, such as Snoop Doggy Dogg and Tupac Shakur, embraced reality’s visceral tabloid sensationalism, using the media's obsession with Black criminality to collapse the distinction between image and truth. Reality TV and reality rap nurtured the world we live in now, where politics and basic facts don’t feel real until they have been translated into mass-mediated entertainment.
Illustrates the ways that the “war on crime” became conjoined—aesthetically, politically, and rhetorically—with the emergence of gangsta rap as a lucrative and deeply controversial subgenre of hip-hop In The Mark of Criminality: Rhetoric, Race, and Gangsta Rap in the War-on-Crime Era, Bryan J. McCann argues that gangsta rap should be viewed as more than a damaging reinforcement of an era’s worst racial stereotypes. Rather, he positions the works of key gangsta rap artists, as well as the controversies their work produced, squarely within the law-and-order politics and popular culture of the 1980s and 1990s to reveal a profoundly complex period in American history when the meanings of crime and criminality were incredibly unstable. At the center of this era—when politicians sought to prove their “tough-on-crime” credentials—was the mark of criminality, a set of discourses that labeled members of predominantly poor, urban, and minority communities as threats to the social order. Through their use of the mark of criminality, public figures implemented extremely harsh penal polices that have helped make the United States the world’s leading jailer of its adult population. At the same time when politicians like Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and Bill Clinton and television shows such as COPS and America’s Most Wanted perpetuated images of gang and drug-filled ghettos, gangsta rap burst out of the hip-hop nation, emanating mainly from the predominantly black neighborhoods of South Central Los Angeles. Groups like NWA and solo artists (including Dr. Dre, Snoop Dogg, and Tupac Shakur) became millionaires by marketing the very discourses political and cultural leaders used to justify their war on crime. For these artists, the mark of criminality was a source of power, credibility, and revenue. By understanding gangsta rap as a potent, if deeply imperfect, enactment of the mark of criminality, we can better understand how crime is always a site of struggle over meaning. Furthermore, by underscoring the nimble rhetorical character of criminality, we can learn lessons that may inform efforts to challenge our nation’s failed policies of mass incarceration.
What happens when enemies work to advance similar goals? Who wins, who loses, and why? In Frenemies, Nancy Whittier addresses this question through a study of feminist and conservative opposition to pornography, campaigns against child sexual abuse, and engagement on the Violence Against Women Act. Drawing on extensive research, Whittier shows how feminist and conservative activists interacted with each other and with the federal government, how their interaction affected them, and what each side achieved. Whittier re-conceptualizes relationships between social movements, presenting a model of how "frenemies"--groups that are neither allies nor opponents--work toward related goals. She outlines the dynamics and paths of frenemy relationships, describing the unintended consequences for the groups involved and for their respective movements at large. With high levels of political polarization across the U.S., Frenemies provides a crucial look at both the promise and the risk of cooperation across political differences.