Free speech needs its heroes

“Words differently arranged have a different meaning, and meanings differently arranged have a different effect” — Blaise Pascal

No right is more fundamental to the existence of democracy than the freedom of expression. Yet this concept has even more importance for those of us in the media, because we are charged with the duty to uphold that right through the freedom of the press.

Journalists are privileged to be able to shape the views of others. Through the freedom of press, an editor like myself at the Manitoban, in conjunction with my colleagues, have the power and responsibility to influence opinion by deciding which articles, which pictures — and sometimes even which individual words — are to be printed each week. Occasionally these difficult decisions become even more complicated when controversial words are involved — words that often connote different ideas to different people dependent upon the word’s context.

This is not only true of newspapers, as it happens in all other forms of expression as well. Speech, art, and in the example that follows — music — are not immune from the delicate balance between the constitutionally-entrenched negative right to express yourself, and the positive right to be free from certain expression. No one is more aware of this delicate balance than Nasir Jones.

In October 2007, prominent American hip hop artist Nas announced to the world the name of his upcoming and highly-anticipated ninth studio album. The title Nas intended to call his release was Nigger.

Nas is a well-known lyricist from New York City, and is considered by most heads and hip-hop connoisseurs to be one of the greatest MCs of our times. His first album, Illmatic, is widely recognized to be the definitive hip hop LP of the ’90s. MTV ranked Illmatic as the second greatest rap recording ever produced, while simultaneously naming Nas the fifth greatest rapper of all time. Thus, Nas does not need to name his album in a controversial manner just to hype and sell records.

Rather, Nas’ goal was to take the very power of out the word itself. Nas made his point clear in an interview with Shaheem Reid from MTV, which I quote verbatim from the article: “You see how white boys ain’t mad at ‘cracker’ ’cause it don’t have the same [sting] as ‘nigger’? I want ‘nigger’ to have less meaning [than] ‘cracker.’ With all the bullsh-- that’s going on in the world, racism is at its peak. I wanna do the sh-- that’s not being done. I wanna be the artist who ain’t out. I wanna make the music I wanna hear.”

Ultimately, Nas was forced to change the name of the album. Nas’ record label, Def Jam, was informed that major chain stores would not carry the disc should it contain the controversial name, and as well a prominent New York politician threatened to withdraw $84 million dollars of taxpayer money invested in Def Jam’s parent company should the disc keep its name. Nas has even gone on record to say that American Congress has made its concerns known about the proposed title of his CD.

In May of 2008, Nas was forced to bow to the pressure. Nas poignantly left his album (literally) untitled, not wishing to legitimate the censorship of his LP. On July 15, 2008, Untitled was released and debuted at number one on the Billboard charts. The first single off of Untitled, “Hero,” speaks of Nas’ losing battle to express his opinion freely through the title of his album, cautioning: “but people remember this / if Nas can’t say it, think about these talented kids / with new ideas being told what they can and can’t spit.”

On one hand, the original title of Nas’ album is a purely derogatory term that conjures up the spectre of America’s racist past of slavery and separate but equal segregation. It is an epithet that is bleeped out on television, silenced on the radio, and censored in some forms of print with euphemisms like “n****r.”

Yet it is also a word in the lexicon of almost every American hip hop artist, regardless the colour of their skin. It is a word that is integral when discussing racial and social history, especially in the American context. And it is a word that, like it or not, exists in our language, no matter how hard some may like to deny this reality.

This raises the obvious question — despite the storied history behind this derogatory word, should Nas be able to print such a title on his CD? And more importantly, should we, the Manitoban, be allowed to reprint that very word that Nas could not write on his own album? When it comes to reporting on facts and what happened, should we in the media be hamstrung just because the topic is controversial or politically incorrect?

The answer is simple — no. The media has a duty to the truth, and that duty takes precedent well above any societal pressure to be politically correct. The simple fact of the matter is that Nas wished to name his album Nigger, and no politically correct sugarcoating of the truth is going to get around that objective fact.

Another popular American rapper of a younger generation, Akon, put it best when defending Nas’ original title: “That’s intelligent. If you teach our new generation that it don’t mean nothing, then it won’t be nothing. It’s just a word. That’s all it is.”

So take your pick from two different philosophers of two very separate eras. Take to heart either what up-and-coming rapper Akon notes poetically, or hark back to the Enlightened prose of Pascal. Either way, what matters is simple — words have different meanings to different people, and as a newspaper, we are but the medium to getting the information across.

Michael Silicz may disapprove of what you have to say, but will defend to the death your right to say it.