Mediaboss Marketing

The South got something to say.

Andre 3000s infamous response to a hostile Manhattan crowd at the 1995 Source Awards tends to be remembered as prophecy. The quote rarely gets cited directly, but you can hear its puckish echoes anytime someone declares Rae Sremmurd the best duo since Snoop and Dre, or defends Rich Homie Quan forgetting Biggie lyrics, or proclaims Migosare better than the Beatles. Theres something perpetually vindicating about the South, especially Atlanta, eclipsing New York, Los Angeles, and rock, as the epicenter of rap, of music, of culture. Donald Glovers Atlanta plays this game quite adeptly, fueling Atlantas mystique even as itsneers at the sus beliefs that keep that mystique alive. Whats lost in the jokes, the trolling, and the thinkpieces, though, is that Andre 3000 wasnt prophesying: he was picking a side in a culture war.

Culture wars in rap are both high-stakes and utterly insignificantEast vs. West, Lyrics vs. Personality, Written vs. Freestyled, Underground vs. Mainstream, Street vs. Club, Mixtape vs. Album, Thrift Shop vs. Swimming Pool, Detroit vs. Everybodybut the thrust of each skirmish is who, what, or where gets to define rap, for perpetuity, or for the moment.

Another Migos moment is underway, with the release of their latest LP, Culture, and its startling how starkly it contrasts the Migos moments of the past. Migos ended their debut album with a cautious reflection on their success. Now Im having recognition, Quavo crooned on Recognition, more surprised than triumphant. Back then, that surprise made sense. In 2013, on the strength of Versace Migos spread like e. coli in a water park, infecting rappers high and low. But there was skepticism from the start, from dunderheads like Ebro, who openly mocked Migos in an early interview, to backhanded love from places like the Washington Post, where Versace was deemed a flukey success, and the Fader, where Migos were described as getting by on drive and force of personality more than anything else. In 2014, Migos persisted, signing a distribution deal with Lyor Cohens 300 Entertainment, churning out five mixtapes, and riding high on singles Fight Night and Handsome and Wealthy, both of which cracked the Billboard Hot 100. But even they had begun to be touched by the skepticism. How long you think we gonna last? Quavo asked an interviewer toward the end of the year.

By the time Yung Rich Nation was released in the summer of 2015, Migos seemed to be edging toward the periphery. Offset was in jail again following an incident in Statesboro, Georgia, and the album itself was strangely contained, trading the mania and grit of their previous work for polished tracks with slower, bouncier deliveries. Plus, it lacked a strong single. They found their stride in dabbing, making a third song about it (Look at My Dab) and eventually embarking on the Dab Tour, but even as dabbing spread to athletes and politicians, the moment felt marred by how clearly Migos needed the attention. Y.R.N. 2, released in early 2016, was just as longing. We the ones came up with dabbin, we put em on trap fashion, Quavo scoffed on YRN 2 Intro, still seeking recognition.

Culture comes at a time of ubiquitous Migos appreciation, from Donald Glover, from the charts, and from social media. Riding high on Bad and Boujee Migos has earned a platinum certification and grassroots calls to replace Lady Gaga at Super Bowl LI are emerging. If Migos were looking for an opportunity to sneer down from the mountaintop, to definitively declare themselves better than the Beatles, the doubters, and the biters (especially biter-supreme Drake, who took seven years to score a No. 1 single as the primary artist; Migos took four), now would be the time. But Quavo, Takeoff, and Offset arent cynics. Culture is welcoming and assured, above the fray and beyond the conversation.

The album is introduced by DJ Khaled, who appears in full pundit mode to denounce fuckboys and doubters, but his cameo is satirical. Culture album coming soon, Takeoff says, as if the album will be released in some distant future. Quavo and Offset act just as indifferently, punching in and out with a few bars apiece. Khaleds made a career out of blurring the line between self-parody and calculated branding, but Migos choose a different route. Uninterested in either the highs or lows of the culture wars, Migos opt out, leaving the gassing to the blowhards. Its a subtle move and it immediately lowers the temperature in the room, allowingCulture to settle into casualness rather than stiffen into belligerence. The album is a city-sized no flex zone.

Musically, Culture doesnt take many quantum leaps from Y.R.N. 2, but there are some tiny refinements. Migos has been injecting more dead air into their songs since Yung Rich Nation, inserting pauses between rhymes and lightening the density of the vocal layering. This approach pays dividends on songs like T-Shirt and Brown Paper Bag. On T-Shirt Takeoffs opening verse is both choppy and fluid, backed by Auto-Tuned harmonizing from Quavo, which treads along the synths without disturbing Takeoffs punctuated ad-libs. Previous songs (see Trap Funk, Night Time) would have filled all that empty space like a slumlord in winter. The chorus of Brown Paper Bag is just as porous. Brown (brown), paper (paper), bags (bags), Offset calmly says. Bad and Boujee is the greatest testament to this tweak. The verses are full of choice gaps that give the song a blas feel despite its blitzkrieg rhyming. Yeah, that way, Quavo raps after a flurry of rhymes.

The other upgrade is a constant shift in performance order and a few tracks where not everyone contributes. Before Back to the Bando, which was recorded while Offset was incarcerated, the bulk of Migos songs began with Quavo and ended with Offset, with either Quavo or Takeoff handling the chorus. Unequal contributions within a group are acceptable when there are real gaps in skill (see Ratking, Odd Future, Wu-Tang, etc.), but its always a triumph when gaps are closed. Quavo still handles most choruses, but Offset and Takeoff really hold their own here, their strengths on full display on songs like Call Casting and Deadz.

Overwrought bores like What the Price, All Ass, and Kelly Price bring the album to a lull, but even thats forgivable, more sedate than nauseating. Migos lack the audacity of a Kanye, or the ambition of a Kendrick, or the cunning of a Drake, so it doesnt make sense to judge this album based on how it does or doesnt transform culture. Migos arent disruptors or visionaries or auteurs and they dont have to be. Theyre workmen, punching in and punching out, finding success not in leaps forward but in measurable steps.

We tend to think of culture in terms of objects and events, inventions and discoveries, but culture is also defined by repetition, reiteration, recurrence. Migos built a career out of consistency. Let them have their moment.

Go here to see the original:
Migos Are Above the Culture Wars - Complex

Though I hadnt seen her groundbreaking show in years, I was saddened when I heard last week that one of our culture wars feminist icons, Mary Tyler Moore, had died at the age of 80.

Not that her age is causing me any distress by the time we reach 80, lots of us are ready to lay down the mantle of being human and try something new.

Instead, my sorrow was sparked by recollections of the wacky combination of characters and plots on the show that sometimes left me young and impressionable as I was breathless with laughter. I was taken comedic prisoner by the situations the shows writers came up with, the verve with which the cast carried them off and the shows charmingly biting social commentary on a whole host of issues.

Interestingly, one of the shows least lovable characters, that of Ted Baxter (played by Ted Knight), came back to haunt me over the weekend, as I watched a few of the Mary Tyler Moore Show episodes on the Sundance channels tribute to her and the show.

The haunting started when I realized how prescient was Knights portrayal of a supremely self-involved ignoramus, wanna-be elitist and seriously insecure fool, which instantly brought to mind our current president.

His vanity, his shallowness, his mistreatment of women, his blatant lack of knowledge about even the most mundane things, all were mind-blowingly similar to the worst attributes of Donald J. Trump.

As I watched, I began to suspect that Trump must have watched the same shows back in the early 1970s, and at some point fixated on Ted Baxter as his favorite character and role model.

How else to explain Trumps determination to make his ignorance into a weapon, and to use insults, slurs of all sorts and declarations of obvious falsehoods to make a point, not to mention his obvious lack of consideration or empathy for anyone?

Ted and The Donald even look somewhat alike, with the mane of white hair (at least since The Donald stopped using orange dye for its shock value) and the jowly, often angry expressions that adorn their faces.

In addition, both Ted Baxter (fictionally) and The Donald (politically and in reality) climbed the ladder of success based not on ability or intelligence, but on clownish and aggressive behavior that seemed to somehow be in sync with attitudes of equally uninformed, shallow and antagonistic members of the public.

A final note of similarity is the dismissive attitude that Baxters character, and our current presidential character, hold toward the unfortunate shadow of political correctness that has long loomed over our national consciousness. Both personalities ignored any such conventions flaunted them, in fact and were rewarded for it.

I recall that, in the shows final episode (which I missed over the weekend), it was Ted Baxter who was retained when new owners cleaned house at the fictional TV station where Mary Richards, Lou Grant and the other characters had worked a snarky jab at the shallow, insecure nebbishes who inhabit the upper tiers of far too many news organizations.

Yep, it was an amazing body of work, the Mary Tyler Moore Show, and it is a testament to its predictive ability that life is now imitating art in at least one, rather goofy arena.

And another thing

Wait a minute.

Did I read that right?

Did Saturday Night Live suspend Katie Rich for poking fun at Barron Trump, the 10-year-old son of our current Ridiculer in Chief?

In a tweet on Inauguration Day, Rich observed Barron as he stood stolidly, frowningly, unhappily on the steps of the Capitol and concluded, Barron will be this countrys first homeschool shooter, and almost immediately joined the worlds roster of cultural martyrs.

Granted, Barron (whats with that name?) cannot be held responsible for his fathers insanity, but he sure gave every indication that he was there because someone made him do it and he was royally pissed off.

And Richs remark was inarguably within the bounds of our new norm in political discourse, where spite, satire and political commentary blend together to create outrageous utterances scarcely to be believed.

It seems a bit of a leap to suspend her indefinitely from her job for something that pales in comparison to the lying, belittling and generally offensive remarks that came out daily from Trumps mouth, his Twitter account, his campaign and many of his supporters over the past year and a half.

I recall one instance, in early 2016, when commenters on a Fox News story about Malia Obamas choice of Harvard as her college of choice went into racist overdrive, actually calling her out by the N-word before Fox managed to pull down its commenting function.

Rich was simply resorting to a fairly tame version of the kind of treatment Trump and his ilk spent 18 months spewing at the rest of us.

And the plain truth is, Barron was giving a very good impression of a youngster with an attitude problem as he stood there on the steps of the Capitol on Inauguration Day.

In fact, I turned to my wife after watching him for a couple of minutes and said something like, That kid looks like trouble in the making.

I thought it then, I think it now, and Ill be watching to see if he proves us (Katie and me) right.

Email at jbcolson51@gmail.com.

See the article here:
Colson: Culture wars lose an icon, gain a martyr - Aspen Times

BANGKOK When the Miss World Pageant 2016 was broadcast in Thailand last month, millions saw Filipino-American host Megan Youngs cleavage blurred by Thai censors every time she appeared on camera.

Irish-born, Thai-raised net idol Jessie Vard, who commands more than 1.4 million Facebook followers, was shamed online for not acting like a proper Thai woman for her sexually charged photos. She vowed to dial it down then apologized for a Christmas Eve event where lecherous men plastered her chest with stickers at a party.

I must apologize for the photos and the clip that came out, Vard wrote on Facebook. Jess will no longer accept such work again but bikini-shooting jobs are still a go.

Then theres the controversial junta-sponsored rewriting of the Computer Crime Act that grants power to the state to censor anything online deemed against good morals that will soon come into effect.

Coupled with early closing times, crackdowns on hookahs and e-cigarettes, sidewalks sanitized of street vendors, desexualized motorshows, booze bans andfeigned surprise at itspervasive commercial sex industry, one might ask if Thailand is experiencing a new wave of moral and cultural policing by the military regime, aided by netizens and the private sector.

Cultural critics differ on whether the situation is aggravating but agree Thailand remains culturally conservative.

Read:On Booze and Buddhism, Culture Warriors Grasp for a Past Thats Passed

Suraphot Thaweesak, a religion and cultural critic at a public university he asked not be named due to political sensitivities, said moral and cultural controls have been imposed by Siamese elites for a long time. He traced it back to the modernization of Siam during the reign of King Rama V, who reigned from 1868 to 1910. Suraphot said secular morality, which includes love of freedom and equality, has yet to take root in Thailand. Instead, morality has been incorporated into the nationalist and royalist ethos. Liberal democracy has meanwhile been perceived as a threat to the traditional elites and the only moral authority most Thais are acquainted with is religious.

The elites do not permit us to question fundamental problems, said Suraphot, adding that the Thai middle class is a product on autocratic conservative ideologies inculcated through religious and school teachings. Its worrying.

Asked to discuss the issue from the governments perspective, the Culture Ministrys Culture Surveillance Bureau declined requests for an interview about the growing role of netizens and private sector in moral and cultural policing.

The office said its director, Yupa Taweewattanakitboworn, was indisposed due to the hectic schedule of the ongoing funeral for His Majesty King Bhumibol.

An official at the bureau who asked not to be named added that the bureau has two to three staff members who constantly monitor the appropriateness of what is on the internet and in other media, then inform the Digital Ministry and other related agencies to do something it if they see something inappropriate.

Again, the target seems fixed on targeting female sexuality.

We also inspect events such as Motor Shows to see if their pretties [promotional models] are properly dressed or not, said the female official, in reference to the ongoing debate over how much sexuality or flesh such presenters, typically young and beautiful, should display.

Social Media the New Morality Police?

Instead of just waiting for the state to nanny us, the role of moral and cultural policing has trickled down to netizens as seen in the case of Jessie Vard and others.

Chulalongkorn University Professor of philosophy Soraj Hongladarom thinks the growth of social media has amplified moral and cultural policing activities and led to policing by the masses.

Social media act as an amplifier in a sense that people can post whatever they think [is acceptable or not] and it can set a trend.

Soraj and Suraphot were quick to note that social media also enable people on opposing camps to debate the merits of morality and whats culturally acceptable. As often as moral scolding breaks out online, backlashes rise to meet them, be it by netizens or the state.

People just laugh at them, said the professor.

For Soraj, the existence of social media means people are able to debate, and its no longer possible for conservatives to drag Thailand back to bygone era of, say, five decades ago. Soraj attributed moral and cultural policing by netizens to nostalgia for the notion of a good old days when they believe things were simpler.

Society has become complex and theres social media, Soraj said. Except issues like the monarchy or anything bordering on defaming the monarchy, Thailand is rather free compared to China or Singapore. If theres too much coercive pressure, people wont accept it.

Soraj gave an example of netizens normalizing exposure of their bodies on social media. This, said Soraj, exemplifies the clash between conformity and individuality.

Back to Vard, despite harsh criticism against her, there were also those who defended her on Facebook.

Why should you apologize? asked Facebook user Arinchai Aob Viteetammaasakdi, following the Christmas Day posting by Vard. Its our body, and what we do with it is our business. I dont want you to apologize because every time someone apologizes, its no different from branding this as a wrong choice. It will affect others who make the same choices.

Those upset with Vards behavior continued to criticize her, however, and the online debate continues. Facebook user Monthakan Ratchaleam said those men defending the net idol by saying its her job should ask themselves if they would allow their wife to do the same, saying her behavior is disgraceful.

Not all think social media intrinsically advances a progressive ideology, however.

Feminist and well-known TV host Lakkana Panwichai, aka Kam Phaka, said social media tends to end up a platform for witch-hunting and ghettoization of like-minded people. Its more of a tool to discredit people and to witch hunt. Liberals tend to care about manners while conservatives dont.

No Change Detected

Lakkana believes things have remained the same and Thai society, be it under elected government or military regime, remains conservative and autocratic.

Its just that under the NCPO (junta), liberals cant really criticize [those in power], so they feel its now unbearable, she said.

Lakkana argued that its not the lack of free expression that emboldening cultural conservatives, but the fact that many Thais support such conservatism to begin with. She cited the example of TV stations like Channel 3 exercising greater self-censorship to cover up women they perceive as improperly dressed.

She acknowledged however that the social and political climate under dictatorship leads to greater self-censorship when it comes to what is and what is not considered appropriate.

Under a normal regime, we know the limits of the law. Now, everyone must be more careful than usual and theres the tendency to play it safe, she said. Its unpredictable.

Related stories:

Why Thailand Should Worry About an Improved(?) Computer Crime ActHeres What a Motor Show Looks Like Without Sexy Pretties (Photos) Did These Motor Show Pretties Hew to Thainess? Govt Wants Less Sex, More Thainess for Motor Show Pretties Siam, Silom, Sukhumvit Street Markets Shut Down Beam, Climax Night Clubs Raided by Soldiers Underage Girls, Police Bribe Ledger Discovered in Raid on Ratchada Flesh Parlor Bangkok Man Opens Microbrewery in Home. Goes Straight to Jail. Regulator Shuts Down Booze Buffet; Threatens to Prosecute People Sharing Alcohol Pics Why Thailand Should Worry About an Improved(?) Computer Crime Act

Read the original here:
Social Media Opens New Fronts in Thailand's Culture Wars - Khaosod English

Anyone who has tried to organise a protest march anywhere must be impressed with the Women's March last Saturday that drew on to the streets more than two million participants globally. Branded as a March on Washington, it actually drew protesters on the streets in dozens of countries all over the world.

The target was Donald Trump, sworn in as the 45th US president just the day before after a campaign in which he made grossly insulting remarks about women in general, in which he insulted several women in particular, none of which were withdrawn or apologised for. In the campaign, Trump promised to withdraw federal funding from organisations that supported and provided abortions and contraception, and he promised to uphold "family values", interpreted to be support for the anti-LGBT, anti-gay marriage folks. He must have expected a big pushback.

It was not a spontaneous protest. It was very well organised by a committee of women determined to protest the threat to what they term their sexual health and reproductive rights. According to their website [see https://www.womensmarch.com], the national organising committee has four co-chairs (all women) - white, black, Latina, and Muslim - and the following officers: head of campaign operations, head of communications, head of logistics, head of web development, head of digital products, head of digital operations and data, a social media manager, a legal director, a volunteer coordinator, a youth initiative coordinator, two global coordinators, two state coordinators, a producer, a music director, and an artistic director. Each officer has a team of advisers and workers.

They also appointed five well-known honorary co-chairs - four women and a man: Angela Davis (black activist), Dolores Huerta (Latina activist), Gloria Steinem (white feminist), LaDonna Harris (native American), and our own Harry Belafonte (Jamaicans have to be in everything).

They had planned 408 marches in the USA and 168 in 81 other countries. The organisers report that 673 marches took place worldwide, including 29 in Canada, 20 in Mexico, and at least one on all seven continents (including Antarctica).

According to their official website, their 'Exclusive Premier Sponsor' is the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc, a US non-profit organisation that provides reproductive health services in the USA and globally (they fund such services in Jamaica). They are the largest single provider of reproductive health services, including abortion, in the USA.

Among their other official sponsors listed on their website is NARAL Pro-Choice America, a US organisation that engages in political action and advocacy efforts to oppose restrictions on abortion and expand access to abortion for all Americans.

Last Monday, on his first official day in the Oval Office - two days after the massive marches - President Trump signed an executive order prohibiting the US Agency for International Development (USAID) from granting family-planning funds to any overseas health centre unless it agrees not to use its own, private, non-US funds for abortion services, abortion-related advocacy, or abortion counselling or referrals. The following day, the US House of Representatives passed legislation that banned the use of federal funds for abortion services within the USA, thus defunding Planned Parenthood.

Trump is expected soon to nominate a conservative judge to the US Supreme Court who might swing the court towards reversing Roe v Wade and reversing the decision that made same-sex marriages legal in the USA.

The culture wars are on!

The USA remains a deeply divided society. "Obama is not our president," said hundreds of thousands of white racists in 2008 as they plotted against their first black president. "Trump is not our president," said hundreds of thousands as they protested against his election in 2016.

The present divisions are largely President Obama's legacy. He used his presidential power to advance the urban liberal agenda in the US culture wars, stirring up and earning the ire of the rural conservative right-wing and fundamentalist Christian segments of American society. The urban liberals will turn out for mass rallies. The rural conservatives vote at the polls.

- Peter Espeut is a sociologist and Roman Catholic deacon. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.

The rest is here:
Peter Espeut | Culture war is on | In Focus | Jamaica Gleaner - Jamaica Gleaner

The old culture war was about morality and was informed by religion. The new culture war, signaled by the election of Donald Trump, is about nationalism vs. multiculturalismand the people vs. the elites. Trump has little interest in the old culture wars, with the important exception of being pro-life. But the new culture war is just as emotional, with pretty much the same people on either side. So says Rich Lowry in a piece excerpted and linked after the jump.

So where does that leave Christians and others who are still concerned about morality and religion?

If those issues are taken off the table, Christians have other interestsjobs, security, libertythat could align them with this alleged new culture war. Many are members of what Lowry calls Jacksonian America, those ordinary citizens scorned by the elite as vulgar masses, like those championed by Andrew Jackson (and who trashed the White House when he invited them in).

Other Christians may be on the elite side, a faction often championed by traditional conservatives. Just as populism used to be central to the ideology of the Democratic party.

If this analysis is correct, isnt there going to be tension between a catholic religion like Christianity (from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages [Rev. 7:9]) and nationalism?

From Rich Lowry,Donald Trump Culture War | National Review:

The nations foremost culture warrior is President Donald J. Trump.

He wouldnt, at first blush, seem well suited to the part. Trump once appeared on the cover of Playboy. He has been married three times. He ran beauty pageants and was a frequent guest on the Howard Stern radio show. His locker-room talk captured on the infamous Access Hollywood tape didnt, shall we say, demonstrate a well-honed sense of propriety.

There is no way Trump could be a credible combatant in the culture war as it existed for the past 40 years. But he has reoriented the main lines of battle away from issues related to religion and sexual morality onto the grounds of populism and nationalism. Trumps culture war is fundamentally the people versus the elite, national sovereignty versus cosmopolitanism, and patriotism versus multiculturalism.

Its the difference, in a nutshell, between fighting over gay rights or immigration, over the breakdown in marriage or Black Lives Matter. The new war is just as emotionally charged as the old one. It, too, involves fundamental questions about who we are as a people, which are always more fraught than the debate over the appropriate tax rate or whether or not we should have a defense sequester.

The participants are, by and large, the same as well. The old culture war featured Middle America on one side, and coastal elites, academia, and Hollywood on the other. So does the new war. And while Trump has no interest in fighting over gay marriage or engaging in the bathroom wars, his staunch pro-life position is a notable holdover from the old war.

Yet any of his detractors who is warning, out of reflex more than anything else, of an attempt to control womens bodies or establish a theocracy is badly out of date. Donald Trump has many ambitions, but imposing his morality on anyone clearly isnt one of them.

[Keep reading. . .]

Illustration of Andrew Jacksons inaugural reception: Made by Robert Cruickshank as an illustration in the The Playfair papers, published in London by Saunders and Otley in 1841, v. 2. [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

See original here:
The new culture war - Patheos (blog)