|
| ||||||||||||
|
ABOUT GO NETWORK | SIGN IN | FREE E-MAIL | ||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
ABCNEWS.com A FRIEND HELPERS |
|
||||||||||||
| By Erica D. Rowell N E W Y O R K, July 27 — For a long time, Chuck D has been fighting the powers that be. Since forming the politically toned rap group Public Enemy in 1986, the rapper (né Carlton Ridenhour) has been vocal about all sorts of issues — from empowering African-Americans through self-sufficiency (“Brothers Gonna Work It Out”) to extolling black leaders like Malcolm X (It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold us Back). Now, he’s getting the message out about technology and the Internet, and what he feels is the future of music. And one thing Chuck D has proved being good at is being vocal. The group’s second album, It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold us Back, was ranked as one of the best rap recordings ever by People magazine. The group wrote the politicized anthem “Fight the Power” for Spike Lee’s acclaimed 1989 film Do the Right Thing. And in 1991 Rolling Stone rated Public Enemy as the best rap group. After Chuck D went solo for several years the original crew got back together in 1998 for the soundtrack to Spike Lee’s He Got Game (1998). Then in the fall of 1999, after publicly embracing file-sharing and the Internet, the rapper put his money where his mouth was and launched Rapstation.com, a Web site “for the global hip hop community.” Chuck D spoke with ABCNEWS.com about the recent Napster injunction, file-sharing, the Internet, technology and the future of music. Following is an edited transcript of the interview. Q: If Metallica has become the voice of anti-Napster
sentiment, can you be thought of as the pro-Napster voice? Chuck D: I’m pro-file-sharing, and I think file-sharing is the process that Napster specializes in, and you have tons and tons of situations are going to join the process. We at Rapstation have Gnutella, and Gnutella does file-sharing as well. So my whole thing is the government is looking at file-sharing like they can stop it and they just can’t. They’re stopping one company, and I think that’s shortsighted of the industry, but I don’t really give credit to the industry for being too smart anyway. Q: Why have you decided to become outspoken about
file-sharing? Chuck D: I take an outspoken role on everything I think is progressive for art. And I think this is progressive for the art because the industry and corporations have dominated and monopolized the outlets for the art whether it be radio, television or even the skewing of the price factor. Dominance of record companies dominating over retail and other outlets. Why should I care about that? Q: In your New York Times editorial in April, you said
we should think of the Internet as the radio of the future. Chuck D: We should think of file-sharing as a new kind of radio. We should think of the Internet as a parallel industry to the traditional one that is run by lawyers and accountants. Q: What are your feelings about the judge temporarily
shutting down Napster last night? Chuck D: If Judge Patel was in the last century, we’d still be
stuck … depending on horses and buggies and boats and trains to get
around. People like that don’t have the big
picture. Q: How can artists actually profit from things like Gnutella
and Napster? Chuck D: Artists can profit more from the Internet, but at the
same time they shouldn’t have delusions of grandeur of creating their art
for the standard industry price. Artists usually make their art because
the industry dictates the standards for the amount they should make their
art for. Therefore, a lot of the artists are in the position of trying to
recoup what has already been spent on their behalf. And now as far as the
Internet is concerned, it gives each artist the ability and the advantage
to control every aspect of [their art]. Q: So you see the Internet as a way for artists to get out
from under the thumb of record companies? Chuck D: Of course. I think that’s a big thumb, and what you see
now is a third tier of music industry going to crop up, and a lot of
people think it’s a threat, but I think it’s a service to the big tier. I
think you have majors and independents. Now you have Internet, which I
think is almost akin to high school sports to college and professional. So
I think there’ll be a great big talent pool, but you’ll have a lot smarter
musicians who have a better understanding of their terrain rather than
being locked outside the musical game. Q: So this third tier you refer to is a more open tier?
Chuck D: A more open tier that doesn’t exclude artists from
getting to the top tier. It just gives the artists a better vision of what
they’re dealing with instead of being the gullible artist that doesn’t
know [expletive] and relies on the major industry to let them know about
[expletive]. So now you have the artist situation who are putting together
their own teams, who are down with whatever the Internet has to offer.
They know how to navigate through some of the areas that might be
problematic for the major situations who think everything is problematic
except for the process they invented or the process that they’ve dominated
over. Q: Who would take up the mantle of the good things record
companies do? Like finding the better artists out there? Chuck D: I thought art was subjective. What do you mean by
“better”? You can’t tell me that Britney Spears is better than every
17-year-old girl singing out there. It’s just that she’s marketed and
promoted and financed. Before financing an artist might have cost 600, 700
thousand dollars now it costs 10 million dollars. So these corporations
have found a way. It’s not even art any more.
… Q: What about the independent film analogy? The Independent
Feature Film Market that is held annually here in New York has become so
overcrowded, largely due to the success of indie films and the advent of
digital filmmaking, that it’s difficult to find your way through some
terrible films people are making. Chuck D: But what might be a good film to you might be a terrible film to me. Q: So you think the broadest landscape of artists is best?
Chuck D: I think the cream rises to the top as opposed to being
selected. I don’t think record labels have ever done a great selecting
process. Whoever went ooh, ooh, ooh, or raised their hand the highest and
kept raising their hand, you know, eventually became signed. And you had
this guy that divvied out the selection process like he was some kind of
king. Oh, you are the one that’s chosen. That’s ridiculous. Now technology
has afforded a lot of people to make music, so you’ll see talent come from
all kinds of areas. So yeah in the Internet realm, yeah, you’ll see a lot
of artists and a lot of labels. And independents you’ll see the majors and
the independents swoop into that marketplace to see who will be able to go
up to that next level. … Q: How has file-sharing helped with your own music? Chuck D: It’s a form to be a new radio. Definitely exposure.
People will go up and look at Public Enemy and see a lot of songs and by
them taking a lot of songs then they’ll go to the store and being exposed
to a lot of different things. Might have seen an album but not heard it.
It’s just led them into saying I didn’t know this [expletive] was on the
album. I kind of dig it. And they would go get the hard copy anyway. So
for me, it’s new radio. Make your own radio
station. Q: Does at any point that sharing ever cross the line of
copyright infringement? Chuck D: I think the copyright laws that were created in the
last century, they’re definitely going to have to go through a revision
period. And what applied last century doesn’t apply in this century. No.
But I think copyright will be reformed to mean a whole other thing. I
think the Internet might be more like a situation where BMI or ASCAP
increases the performance situation and almost ignores the mechanical.
Q: So does that mean live performance will become a larger
revenue stream for the artists? Chuck D: I’m also talking about performance fee, whether it be a
penny or whatever, through the process of file-sharing. That might come
into the equation, where, for example, when you sing with BMI, your record
gets played on the radio, you have a performance royalty coming your way,
as little as it might be, but it’s something. The areas of exposure for
music right now in the traditional realm are either financially controlled
by corporations which keep the start-up entrepreneurs out and the new
artists out. There’s just no room. And so a new equation has to come out
as with any technology. It comes in because there’s a need for it. If
there wasn’t a need for it, we wouldn’t be talking about it. If it didn’t
have the attitude and the excitement of the public, it would be a moot
point. … |
W E B
L I N K S | ||||||||||||
Copyright ©2000 ABC News Internet Ventures. Click here for Terms of Use and Privacy Policy and Internet Safety Information applicable to this site. |
|||||||||||||