Lil' Wayne Pleads Guilty

Lil' Wayne plead guilty today to charges of "attempted criminal possession of a weapon," as announced by the Manhattan, New York district attorney's office. Lil' Wayne was arrested in 2007 when police officers stopped him and another man on the streets of NYC smoking marijuana and with a .40-caliber pistol in Lil' Wayne's possession. Lil' Wayne will be sentenced in February 2010 and is believed will receive a one year jail sentence for possession of this weapon.

Of course, this news brings to mind the weapon possession plea of former New York Giants wide receiver Plaxico Burress, who is currently serving time in jail for famously possessing a firearm in a New York night club and accidentally shooting himself in the leg.

Both incidences raise the familiar questions in connection with celebrity artists and athletes carrying weapons (ostensibly for protection) and the very different state laws around the United States that regulate weapon possession. Many would argue that celebrity athletes and artists are in need of some type of protection from overreaching fans and those in the general public that seek to challenge these individuals. In addition, the possession of these weapons would not be criminal in many states who have adopted unlicensed weapon possession laws, including some that adopt no permit concealed weapon possession laws (concealed carry).

Is this really how we want to criminalize possessors of weapons? Both Plaxico Burress and Lil' Wayne are arguably in the prime of their careers and will now both spend time behind bars, presumably alongside hardened criminals, for possessing weapons (not for using them or hurting anyone (beside themselves)).

Doc Alert: Copyright Criminals Asks 'Can you own a sound?'

Copyright Criminals: This Is a Sampling Sport examines the creative and commercial value of musical sampling, including the related debates over artistic expression, copyright law, and (of course) money.

This documentary traces the rise of hip-hop from the urban streets of New York to its current status as a multibillion-dollar industry. For more than thirty years, innovative hip-hop performers and producers have been re-using portions of previously recorded music in new, otherwise original compositions. When lawyers and record companies got involved, what was once referred to as a “borrowed melody” became a “copyright infringement.”

The film showcases many of hip-hop music’s founding figures like Public Enemy, De La Soul, and Digital Underground—while also featuring emerging hip-hop artists from record labels Definitive Jux, Rhymesayers, Ninja Tune, and more. It also provides an in-depth look at artists who have been sampled, such as Clyde Stubblefield (James Brown’s drummer and the world’s most sampled musician), as well as commentary by another highly sampled musician, funk legend George Clinton.

As artists find ever more inventive ways to insert old influences into new material, this documentary asks a critical question, on behalf of an entire creative community: Can you own a sound?

Hip Hop Academic Presentations

Hip hop in academia is being debated worldwide. On October 2, 2009, at the LatCrit Legal Scholarship Conference, a panel of law professors engaged in a presentation entitled "The Hip Hop Movement at the Intersection of Race, Class and Culture: Hip Hop Music's Effect on the Pursuit of Life, Liberty and Happiness." Law professors (and Hip Hop Law.com contributors) D. Aaron Lacy, Akilah Folami, andré douglas pond cummings and Kamille Wolff each presented provocative talks that discussed and debated the role of hip hop in current law and global culture.

Professor Lacy presented: "Represent: The NFL and NBA's Reaction to the Infiltration of Hip Hop Culture with its Players and its Effects on the Employment of the Black Male Athlete."

Professor Folami presented: "From Habermas to 'Get Rich or Die Tryin': Hip Hop, The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Black Public Sphere."

Professor cummings presented: "Thug Life: Hip Hop's Tricky Impact on Criminal Punishment and Corporate Exploitation."

Professor Wolff presented: "Chutes and Ladders: The Story of Rosario Dawson"

The LatCrit panel engendered much comment and debate following the presentations outlined above.


Additionally, on October 4, 2009, at Franklin College in Lugano, Switzerland, at the "Intersections of Law and Culture" conference, on a panel entitled "Law and Pop Culture" three law professors from the United States debated race, hip hop and equality examining the impact of race and hip hop on global culture. Law professors Akilah Folami, andré douglas pond cummings and David Oppenheimer presented cutting edge talks to an audience of undergraduate and law professors primarily from European institutions (including students from Franklin College).

Professor Folami again presented: "From Habermas to 'Get Rich or Die Tryin': Hip Hop, The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Black Public Sphere."

Professor cummings presented: "Thug Life: Hip Hop's Curious Relationship with Criminal Justice."

Professor Oppenheimer presented: "The Legal and Social Concept of 'Color Blindness' in the United States and France."

Following these three presentations, intense debate ensued discussing the genuine role of color blindness internationally and the true potential of hip hop to be transformative and the difficult intersections of hip hop with negative imagery and influence.

More evidence that hip hop is not dead?

Earlier this year the ABA Journal reported that a litigant who filed his own appeals brief written partially in rap has won his Wisconsin appeals court ruling that he doesn't have to pay legal fees for a law suit deemed frivolous by a circuit court judge.

Gregory Royal, a trombone player, argued that he shouldn't have to pay $3,750 in feels for filing a lawsuit against county officials in Wisconsin who recommended that his divorcing wife should have primary custody of the children.

Royal's brief contained the following lines, "A domestic relations exceptions, I was supposed to know. Appellee would know too, so why did he spend so much doe?" "Regarding frivolous filings, one thing is clear, Notice to show cause and proper service before you appear."

Royal told the Associated Press he used rap in his six-page brief, rather than a lawyer, to help persuade the court. Royal said, "Imagine a real attorney who can actually capitalize and perfect that expression and throw some heavy stuff in there. It's like Einstein's theory of relatively. It's so short but so perfect there's nothing you can say about it."

Perhaps it was Royal's rap that really convinced the judge to rule in his favor. And more attorneys should use more catchy lines in their briefs to get the court's attention. But regardless, this is more evidence that hip hop is still alive kicking.

Sippin' on Some Syrup: Hip Hop's New Drug of Choice

Perhaps this is an old discussion, but I happened to watch Lil' Wayne's VH1 Behind the Music episode and I could not help but think: Are that many people really using cough syrup to get high? And, if so, why? The "sizzurp" discussion really began with Three 6 Mafia's song Sippin' on Some Syrup (video above), which achieved some success although the video was short-lived on BET and MTV. Hip-hop has often and unfortunately been tied with recreational drug culture, as many music genres have over the years. I don't know if hip-hop artists exhibit higher levels of use than non-hip-hop community members. I would be willing to hypothesize that the constant association of hip-hop with drugs is part of a desire for mainstream media to malign hip-hop. That, however, is a whole different discussion.

With people now drinking combinations of cough syrup and soda (and a Jolly Rancher depending on your recipe), how does this change law enforcement's policing of recreational drug use? The "syrup" involved is prescription strength and contains codeine, a Schedule II drug. There are serious addictive consequences to "sippin'." My guess is that because codeine-containing drugs are not sold over the counter in the United States, many syrup concoctions use over-the-counter versions with no codeine, but a healthy amount of alcohol. Cough syrups range from 2.5 to 25 percent alcohol. And you thought that fuzzy navel you were drinking was addictive?

MSNBC reports that one in every 14 high school seniors has used cold medicine to get high. That seems high, not because I think high school students are not involved in all sorts of risky behavior, but because... well... it's cough medicine. I guess stealing your dad's bottle of whiskey isn't cool anymore. It has been well-reported that alcoholics will use cough syrup and mouthwash to satisfy their desire for drink, so perhaps it really isn't shocking that we see individuals engaged in this behavior. It's really not a new trend. What is law enforcement to do? Check everyone's cup like the breakup of a bad college party? Ignore the precocious syrup drinkers? Take cough syrup in any form off the shelf?

Most of us remember when Sudafed was pulled off the shelves because it contained psuedoephedrine, which could be converted into methamphetamine. Although the makers of Sudafed, Pfizer/Warner-Lambert, were able to find a drug to replace psuedoephedrine, apparently the original version can still be found (I don't read labels that closely to say more.). Is that what will become of cough syrup? Will this spur innovation in drug making or be ignored because it only effects "those hip-hop artists?"

So where do we see this syrup trend going? What might law enforcement do if anything? What is the government's role in regulating these types of practices?


-- Nick J. Sciullo


(Video contains content from Sony Music Entertainment)

Little Country Goldilocks Mouse and the Big Bad Black Rapper Who Could

By P.D. Bridgewater

Well, it’s on and poppin’ - yes? Seems like I came back from sabbatical just in time to offer a few random (and sometimes rambling) musings about the drama from the VMAs on Sunday.

First off, I know the title to this entry is silly. Not only am I mixing up my fairy tales it’s a cheap appeal to the big black mean man and the innocent golden haired white woman motif but these themes have proven to be unavoidable in this situation.

Ok, real talk: I’m finding it harder and harder not to get in on some of the crazy action. Why, I asked myself after Kanye's weird but funny blog entry Sunday night, is everybody acting(?) so crazy this summer.

Just in case you haven't heard about the latest crazy action, Kanye West interrupted Taylor Swift’s acceptance speech for the Best Female Video – the first award of the evening. I didn’t watch it live (I would have had to be in the audience to do that) nor did I watch it with Kanye who saw it on TV with everybody else (I dont own a TV) but I “heard” about it via Facebook when all of my FBPEEPS started registering their disgust. At first, no one bothered to mention what he did - they just said that West was ignorant or that he had gone too far this time, or that he should be ashamed. I finally found out that ‘Ye had bounded onstage, took the mic from Taylor Swift and said some foolishness about B’s video being the best of all time (has he not heard of Thriller?). All of this happened as Swift was expressing her surprise that she, a country singer, was selected by these big city folks for this honor.

The whole story – from beginning to end – was hilarious to me. In fact, I LOL’d. I was even more amused when I read Kanye’s rushed and disingenuous apology where he said that Swift’s mother had said what his mom would have said had somebody did that to him. He ended it, though, by saying that although he was sorry, he had to do it! So, just like when he was on stage with Swift, he was still mixing irreverence with a dab of politeness – I loved it! A perfect example of righteous indignation of an artist splashed with hip hop and high tech highlights!

I wasn’t mad at ‘Ye nor was I shocked – West has a history of award show shenanigans. And despite all that I think Kanye is a very smart hip hop artist who, as his mother’s only child - a boy child- was spoiled and encouraged to speak his mind. From his lyrics and behavior Kanye has been telling us for years that he has an ego fueled by talent and nurtured (and indulged) by his mother. So when he performs true to form – I appreciate the man-child's consistency. I was alone in my appreciation for Kanye last night. Even my attempt to temper criticism by reminding my FBPEEPS that this was the same spontaneous young man who spoke truth to power while many (most?) of us were still dazed and confused after the Bush/Brownie debacle during and after hurricane Katrina in 2005. No one bought it so I went to bed.

I woke Monday morning with my stayed on Kanye - but my mind had changed. No, I had not joined the chorus of Kanye critics (to which the POTUS has apparently has added his voice). I woke with a nagging feeling that all of us had been duped – that the event on the stage had been, well, staged. B’s quick and well articulated generosity and Swift's poise were at the core of suspicion although larger socio- (pop) cultural dynamics were at play as well.

Here's the theory I posted on FB Monday afternoon:

“Kanye clowns the young blonde who won best female video award at the VMAs on MTV. He can do it cuz, well, young black men do what they pleez in the US especially w/ young blondes. K? k. so the blonde youngun sings instead of cries (since when?) then...B wins a bigger award! The next nite Kanyeezy is on Jay Leno's debut wch wz expectd to fail but doesnt cuz we tune in to see Jay ask 'Ye abt the VMAs! mmmmmk?”

The responses showed varying degrees of hostility towards Kanye’s antics – whether staged or not. Since my earlier posting, my suspicions have all but been confirmed by me. First, one of my FBPEEPS brought up the fact that rather than the shimmering shiny frock Taylor Swift wore when she accepted the award, she wore the same material as Beyonce during her performance. This new wrinkle makes me wonder why we even bother with MTV if we suspect that, like last year’s staged disruption, they thought it wise in this climate of hostility directed toward "uppity" black men (as in like Obama, Holder, Gates, Van Jones, now West) to have this particular trope played out.

Tempers have been running hot this summer and I had hoped Serena WIlliams' outburst at the US Open would mark the end of the summer of temper tantrums and "town hall moments" but, alas it was not to be. The crazies are spewing their venom all over twitter and beyond. ck out http://harryallen.info/?p=5154#more-5154. There you will find a cogent discussion of racist tweets using the word N*GG*R (asterisks added), the racist post that all suggest lynching West and the racist violent ones that have a common them re: putting various items in Kanye’s ass. Equally disturbing where the black folks saying that Kanye’s conduct had set black folks back 50 years. (I wonder how many years his recent collaboration on with Drake on “Poke(H)er Face” took us back).

Enter President Obama who after an interview on health care reform calls ‘Ye a jackass – but off the record in case he wants to bum a Newport from him or have him perform again at an inauguration in Jan. 2013. (note to POTUS: stop commenting on dumb shit! First Gates gate now West Gate). ck it out:
http://www.politico.com/click/stories/0909/did_obama_call_kanye_a_jackass.html


Finally, I read that after saying he was soooo sorry, Kanye, Rhianna and Jay-Z performed masterfully together on Jay Leno’s show.

ck it out at
www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/14/kanye-west-on-leno-apolog_n_286675.html.

Well all I know is that my nagging feeling earlier this morning and the developments throughout the day have me appreciating Mr. West Mr. West Mr. West less and less. If the whole thing was staged then he is less the impetuous, passionate, stream of consciousness devil may care, rude boy man child hip hop visionary I admire so and more like everybody else (and me) - looking to get in on the crazy action. The problem is that the present climate in the country (a la Rep. Wilson, the birthers, Glen Beck, the 9/12ers, and 'Obama is a socialist, nazi, death panelist' crazies) - the crazy action oftentimes involves racism, violence (sexual and otherwise) or greed.

Sadly, people end up getting hurt especially when, like now, it involves all three.

New Technology and Hip Hop

This blog has previously discussed the impact that Twitter would have on the burgeoning social networking scene in general, predicting that Twitter would become an important tool in promoting artists and athletes and providing access never before seen. So, with the growing popularity of Twitter, the following was bound to happen: In this new age of Twitter, blogs and moment-to-moment updating access, a lawsuit has been threatened based on the content of a Twitter message sent to thousands of "following" fans.

In recent news, Mistah FAB received a cease-and-desist letter from publisher Julia Beverly after FAB posted unflattering comments about Beverly on his Twitter account. Beverly is the owner of the music publication Ozone Magazine. The comments that Mistah FAB posted on Twitter were reportedly his response to a two year old interview that Julia Beverly, owner of music publication Ozone Magazine, recently posted online. In the newly posted interview, Mistah FAB discusses his disinterest in dark-skinned women. After purportedly receiving severe backlash for this comment after the interview was posted online, Mistah FAB attacked Beverly through Twitter.

FAB referred to Beverly in derogatory terms (i.e., “b**ch” and “hoe”) also referencing her in unflattering sexual contexts, which resulted in her letter calling for the retraction of the false and defamatory statements. The letter claims that the statements by Mistah FAB on Twitter will “damage and cause irreparable harm to Ms. Beverly’s image and reputation.” While the cease and desist letter did not state when an actual lawsuit would be filed, it threatened FAB by stating that his failure to remove the statements would ultimately result in a defamation action against Mistah FAB for libel. While defamation and libel law is convoluted, particularly when it comes to celebrities, it is very likely that courts will struggle with defining traditional defamation law in the new context of social networking sites and Twitter in particular.

With the recent Tila Tequila - Shawne Merriman ordeal dominating the news, notorious Twitterer Tequila may have to use caution going forward. With a District Attorney weighing whether to file charges against Merriman for false imprisonment and battery and with Merriman denying Tequila's allegation of choking and restraining her, instead arguing that he was trying to keep her from leaving while intoxicated, what Tequila "tweets" may become a part of future court records.

The Bar Exam

Artist: GZA
Song: Fame
Album: Legend of the Liquid Sword

Larry's Bird flew outta Nicholas' Cage
Joe Tex messages from Satchel's Paige
Betty Wright+letters with ink from Sean's Penn
Infinite bars, you couldn't tell where the song end
Glenn Close enough to quickly duck the tapes
Richard Gere ripped while he was climbin' Bill Gates
He was a southerner, posing as a, native New Yorker
The Jason Kidd took his first steps in Jimmy's Walker
He stayed on line chattin' with rap celebs
Used Bernie's Mack to search Veronica's Webb
It cost them their life for the advice you gave
Now Pete Rose lay on Vanessa's Redgrave

With CREAM I ain't with the fame
Fame is the measure
Rap celebs
The place where stars are born
With CREAM I ain't with the fame
Fame is the measure
Rap celebs
The place where stars are born

Michael Jackson death ruled a murder, questions of culpability arise

As most people interested in entertainment news have heard, the Los Angeles County Coroner's Office has ruled Michael Jackson's death a homicide. There's been a flood of well-written articles on this latest development that offer up opinions suggesting ideas as disparate as a conspiracy to the notion that Michael Jackson's suffering might excuse his doctor's actions.

A Baltimore Sun story offers some excellent writing. The Gainesville Sun provides solid information on the drug in question, Propofol. Also check out the Star-Ledger.

Is it possible to excuse Dr. Conrad Murray's actions if Michael Jackson was in fact suffering greatly? Are homicide or manslaughter charges appropriate? What about questions of negligence? We'll continue to follow this story closely.

-- Nick J. Sciullo

(Picture of Dr. Conrad Murray from the Associated Press)

The Fourth Circuit, a 3L, and thinking about Miranda

A recent column on HipHopDX.com was written by Chris Thomas, a third year law student at Brooklyn Law School that raises some interesting points about Miranda warnings. The article's thesis seems to be that alleged criminals should say nothing (something Thomas repeats throughout the article) to the authorities. This claim is not particularly controversial, as people accused of crimes are often tricked into confessing or otherwise incriminating themselves. It is not always easy to remember, especially when one believes they are innocent, but vitally important. There's no argument here that the state justice system is not looking out for the best interests of suspects.

What strikes me as particularly problematic about the column is that Mr. Thomas makes some gross generalizations about a very complex area of law. I know, I know... It's a blog post not a law review article, but the article seems more geared toward eliciting blogger comments than it does about thoughtfully engaging a serious problem. There are no easy answers when discussing the finer points of Mirandizing suspects or even when, how, and if a police officer can continue to talk with a suspect after they assert their right to remain silent and/or to counsel.

Thomas describes a discussion he had with rapper Prodigy, about Prodigy's recent arrest, and proceeds to list a litany of constitutional violations that stem from improper conduct by police officers after Prodigy allegedly (by Mr. Thomas) invoked his write to remain silent. The facts are simply too unclear in prodigy's story to make some of the logical leaps Thomas does.

The problem with Thomas' analysis is that it makes broad assumptions about a factual scenario about which he has little knowledge. It also too broadly asserts these alleged Constitutional violations, which in the light of the somewhat cryptic progression of Maryland v. Blake, 571 F.3d 331, 2009 U.S. App LEXIS 14609 (2009), just does not seem that clear. If anything, or more appropriately if we read Maryland V. Blake plainly, the Fourth Circuit has clearly upheld the legality of certain communications after an invocation of one's right to counsel. And the Supreme Court dismissed the case after certiorari was improperly granted. See Maryland v. Blake, 546 U.S. 72 (2005).

In an earlier case the Supreme Court wrote:

"[T]he Miranda safeguards come into play whenever a person in custody is subjected to either express questioning or its functional equivalent. That is to say, the term 'interrogation' under Miranda refers not only to express questioning, but also to any words or actions on the part of the police (other than those normally attendant to arrest and custody) that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect. The latter portion of this definition focuses primarily upon the perceptions of the suspect, rather than the intent of the police. This focus reflects the fact that the Miranda safeguards were designed to vest a suspect in custody with an added measure of protection against coercive police practices, without regard to objective proof of the underlying intent of the police." Rhode Island v. Innis, 446 U.S. 291, 300-1 (1980) (footnotes omitted).

Applying this test to the facts of Blake (which again are too long to list here, but are linked above), the Fourth Circuit decided that an officer's handing of a piece of piece of paper with a list of the charges and penalties for the accused's alleged conduct and the off-hand comment by the officer,"I bet you want to talk now, huh!" after a suspect invoked his rights, was not violative of the suspects right to counsel, essentially because such communication did not rise to the level of an interrogation. Blake, at 14-19.

I'm not saying that we ought to give law enforcement a free pass or even the benefit of the doubt, but that if we don't slow down and think more clearly about arrests, Miranda rights, etc.; we may come to conclusions that miss the mark. Furthermore we may erode the progress that more thorough criticism has made on the atrocities perpetrated by law enforcement. The facts as Thomas lays them out are not clear cut. We do not know if Prodigy invoked his right to counsel. We do not know what the officer's words were, or the facts surrounding the totality of the communications between the officer and Prodigy. With such an incomplete picture, it is difficult to make thoughtful legal analysis.

The seesawing of protecting a suspects rights and the ability of law enforcement to engage in productive interrogation continues. Thomas argues, "Say Nothing!" This part of the analysis is well placed. As to the analysis of constitutional wrongs, we need a much clearer picture and more thorough analysis given the recent decision of the Fourth Circuit.


-- Nick J. Sciullo

Artist: Wyclef Jean
Track: The PJs
Album: Masquerade

Before I was signed, I used to move on the block
All I wanted to do was rhyme, rhyme, rhyme
Line for line, I make the blind man walk in a straight line
to prison and take a message to Shyne
Peace God from the PJs to Ground Zero
It’s a “Hardknock Life” but “The Sun’ll Come Out Tomorrow”
Walk with a shadow through ghettos, playin’ in every borough
You would think rap was rock they way I carry heavy metal
It such a shame, cocaine in ya veins, screamin’
“Teen Spirit” grippin’ the shotty like Kurt Cobaine
In the projects God, nuttin’ come easy
Gotta deal with the grimy, greasy, the sleazy
Move like a professional, young thug funeral
What chu thought this was another Pepsi commercial?
Nah it’s the art of war, when you least expected it
Wyclef the president, the PJ’s elected him

President Obama, the NAACP and Flow

President Barack Obama spoke at the NAACP convention during the celebration of its 100th year last month. President Obama, in a wide ranging speech, touched on a number of issues confronting the African American community. Specifically, his message included an admonition to parents of young African American children. President Obama stated in referring to young black youth:

"They might think they've got a pretty good jump shot or a pretty good flow, but our kids can't all aspire to be the next LeBron or Lil Wayne. I want them aspiring to be scientists and engineers, doctors and teachers, not just ballers and rappers. I want them aspiring to be a Supreme Court justice. I want them aspiring to be president of the United States."













President Obama identifies a curious diffusion created in some ways by the media. Often, inner city communities are inundated with the notion that the career path that offers the most promise includes basketball or rhyming. Often, superstar black athletes and artists are overrepresented in the media while high acheivement in non-sports or non-entertainment careers are less highlighted. The truth is that many African Americans have acheived in spectacular ways including doctors, lawyers, engineers, Supreme Court Justices and Presidents of the United States. President Obama would like to see this focus become clearer.

Florida Rapper Gets Two Years In Prison For Threatening Lyrics

Antavio Johnson, a 20-year old rapper from Lakeland, Florida, was sentenced to two years in prison on July 24 for threatening a pair of police officers in his song, “Kill Me a Cop.”

Johnson, who was already on probation stemming from cocaine possession charges, received his sentence after pleading no contest to two counts of corruption by threat against a public servant under Chapter 838.021 of the Florida Criminal Code.

In the first verse of “Kill Me a Cop”, Johnson raps: “If Officer Bailey care at all/ Get my timing wrong/ Im’ma be puttin’ one in his dome/ Mr. Officer, Mr. Officer/ Try me on the wrong day/ And I’m offin’ ya …” In his next verse, Johnson makes a similar threat against another officer, rapping: “If Officer Campbell/ The Wonder Woman/ Get my timing wrong/ Im’ma be puttin’ one in her dome/ Mrs. Officer, Mrs. Officer/ Try me on the wrong day/ And I’m offin’ ya …” Johnson concludes both verses with: “Call me crazy but I think I fell in love with the sound/ Of hearing the dispatcher saying, ‘Officer Down’ …” You can listen to the full song here.

A handful of lawyers in central Florida have joined the American Civil Liberties Union in looking into Johnson’s case. While it remains unclear whether they will take up Johnson’s cause, any legal action on the rapper’s behalf will require yet another reexamination of just how much protection the First Amendment provides free speech when it is delivered via threatening song lyrics.

Prior Supreme Court decisions have established that the freedom of speech guaranteed under the First Amendment is not absolute. For instance, speech amounting to solicitation of crime or conspiracy is outside the scope of constitutional protection according to Konigsberg v. State Bar, 366 U.S. 36 (1961). Also, speech which is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and which is likely to incite or produce such action, is outside the scope of First Amendment protection under Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444-448 (1969). Furthermore, the constitutional freedom for speech does not immunize “speech used as an integral part of conduct in violation of a valid criminal statute.” Giboney v. Empire Storage Co., 336 U.S. 490 (1949).

Of course, Giboney seems to represent the strongest rebuke to any constitutional challenge Johnson may mount over the state of Florida’s punishment of his speech. From this writer’s viewpoint, the specificity of Johnson’s threats will make it very difficult for him to successfully assert protection under the First Amendment.

How An Electronic Device May Be Eradicating Hip Hop Radio

Basking in the glow of the Steelers sixth Super Bowl title and the Penguins’ march to their first Stanley Cup since 1992, Pittsburgh natives were brimming with civic pride this spring. That glow dulled ever so slightly on May 15, when Steel City residents learned they were about to lose a local institution that some cherished as much as the city’s illustrious professional sports franchises.

WAMO 106.7 FM, Pittsburgh’s only hip-hop radio station, had unexpectedly been sold to a Catholic organization. Founded in 1948 by a white Navy cadet who dreamed of providing a voice for all of the city’s races and ethnicities, WAMO was to be rededicated to religious programming by its new owners.

But why, many asked, would a radio station that had so ably filled a niche in Pittsburgh for more than half a century suddenly decide to give up on itself and its listeners and cash out for a modest $8.9 million?

The answer was just as mysterious: according to WAMO management, a cell phone-sized device known as the Portable People Meter (PPM) was mostly to blame for the station’s demise. Although many listeners had never heard of the PPM, radio executives around the country were already engaged in a pitched battle against a device they claim is slowly driving out of business radio stations that enjoy popularity with minorities.

The PPM is used by media marketing research firm Arbitron, Inc., to compile listener data relied upon by advertisers wishing to reach the largest audience possible. Introduced earlier this decade, the PPM is given to select individuals by Arbitron so that the company can track and record the radio stations they listen to over an extended time period. The PPM achieves its purpose by collecting inaudible codes embedded in the audio of the programming to which the listener is exposed and relaying the data back to Arbitron. The use of PPMs replaced the previous method of collecting such data, which was based on the more unreliable written journals kept by selected listeners.

Although one would expect PPMs to produce more accurate marketing data than the paper journals, critics argue that Arbitron’s deployment of the devices has resulted in discrimination and dire financial consequences for radio stations with audiences comprised largely of minorities.

Specifically, critics point to Arbitron’s heavy reliance on public telephone directories for solicitation of potential PPM carriers. Statistics show that Hispanics and African-Americans represent the largest number of cell phone-only households, which means that members of these households are more often excluded from participation in Arbitron’s studies than other ethnic groups. That wouldn’t seem to bode well for radio stations such as WAMO, whose listeners are less likely to show up in the Arbitron ratings used by advertisers to determine which radio stations will receive their lifeblood revenue. For its part, Arbitron claims that it has instituted a “Feet on the Street” campaign in an effort to attract more minority participants for its data collections.

In response to the controversy, the Federal Communications Commission opened an official inquiry (read the full inquiry here) into Arbitron’s use of PPMs. Comments by interested parties (akin to administrative amicus briefs) were filed on July 1, and comments on the initial round of comments are due to the FCC today.

As for WAMO (named after Pittsburgh’s three rivers, the Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio), the station could still be heard broadcasting hip hop to the masses on Thursday night despite its recent change in ownership. However, other American radio stations enjoyed by a large number of minority listeners could face a more unceremonious end without changes to Arbitron’s PPM regime.

Marc Lynch, Hip-Hop, and Foreign Policy

Hip-Hop and law took a new direction recently with some astute analysis on hip-hop and international relations theory. In the most recent Foreign Policy, readers will find an article by Marc Lynch, a professor of international relations at George Washington University. You can find the link here. In this article he applies international relations theories as diverse as "rogue nations," "hegemony," and "unipolarity" to the Jay-Z/The Game feud. In my experience with the literature on hip-hop, this is an exciting new direction for scholarship.

Prof. Lynch's work isn't a complete tome on the subject, but does move hip-hop scholarship forward. He provides insightful commentary on the beef between Jay-Z and The Game, while perhaps providing an opening for those who might be interested in international relations to read up on hip-hop.

Lynch's work isn't without fault or beyond inquiry, however. One wonders if the theory could be applied to other artists and if it should. One also wonders where message-oriented rappers fit into the puzzle. Is Common Canada? An important ally of mainstream hip-hop (the hegemonic US), but with a soulful introspective stance (perhaps akin to Canada's environmental and social welfare policies) that often positions him at odds with mainstream commercial success (US hegemonic discourse). Do countries that veer toward more socialistic or environmental policies equate with message-oriented artists? If we take Lynch's analysis and apply it to early hip-hop does it still hold true?

You can listen to Marc Lynch's interview on NPR here. The theory might not be complete, but Lynch has the ball in his proverbial court. It will be interesting to see what develops from this new discussion.

-- Nick J. Sciullo