When the Claws Come Out
Music through the years has inspired many feuds. The classic “Bad Blood” Between Taylor Swift and Katy Perry, or the actual bloody feud between Tupac and Biggie Smalls made their mark on pop culture. One line in a song could cause years of back and forth between artists. Recently Megan Thee Stallion released her new track, “Hiss”, and it’s potentially chock-full of jabs at other artist’s. One artist in particular, Nicki Minaj, did not handle the situation well. Music can make us respond with strong emotions, and Nicki Minaj was furious. Days after the release Hiss, Minaj released her response track “Big Foot”. While audiences were in awe over Megan’s “Megan’s Law” line, they were appalled at Nicki’s disrespectfully lyrics referencing Megan getting shot in her foot. A major difference between the artist’s approach stands out. While Megan’s song has many individuals speculating about who she is referencing, Nicki’s diss track leaves no room for the imagination. Megan’s method allows listeners to speculate and analyze what each lyric is referencing. Causing listeners to listen to the lyrics over and over again. It’s difficult to love something when every line is blatant hate. It leaves little to the imagination. What approach do you think is the most effective?
In answer to your question, I believe that artists who promote hateful content, whether it is straightforward or vague, are taking a risk. Music has the power to evoke emotions, convey messages, and influence listeners. Instead of spreading hate or negativity, artists can choose to use their platform to inspire positivity. When artists promote these values, they contribute to a healthier environment.
ReplyDeleteI think it's important for artists to be mindful of the potential consequences of creating content that promotes hate, discrimination, or harm. By choosing to use their creativity to contribute positively to the world, they benefit everyone.