{"id":1745,"date":"2023-08-07T10:00:25","date_gmt":"2023-08-07T09:00:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/?p=1745"},"modified":"2023-07-15T09:04:50","modified_gmt":"2023-07-15T08:04:50","slug":"drill-music-and-epistemic-injustice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/drill-music-and-epistemic-injustice\/","title":{"rendered":"Drill Music and Epistemic Injustice"},"content":{"rendered":"

What are the legitimate ways of interpreting a musician\u2019s work and words? This might seem like an abstract philosophical question, but it isn\u2019t. This question matters because sometimes music is used to justify interferences with freedom, or used as evidence of criminality in trials that might lead to serious punishment. For example, in some cases, drill \u2013a subgenre of\u00a0 hip hop, renowned for its violent lyrics (for more information about drill see here<\/a>) \u00a0\u2013 \u00a0is being used as evidence of a propensity to violent and reprehensible behaviour, based on the content of the lyrics and videos in drill music. In other cases, drill artists (drillers) have been given Criminal Behaviour Orders that restrict their freedom to perform and disseminate drill music.<\/p>\n

Part of the issue concerns the authority that musicians \u2013drillers, in this case\u2014have over their words. In recent work<\/a>, I have argued that the way drillers\u2019 words are treated can amount to an epistemic injustice. Here I outline two types of epistemic injustice \u2013testimonial injustice and contributory injustice\u2014 and discuss how the treatment of drill constitutes both.<\/p>\n

Drill Music and Testimonial Injustice <\/strong><\/p>\n

Testimonial injustice occurs when someone is treated as less believable than they ought to be treated due to prejudice about a social group they belong to (Fricker, 2007).<\/p>\n

Drillers\u2019 testimonies are often assigned deflated credibility due to prejudice. Drillers often explicitly label their work as fictional and explain that their use of violent lyrics is merely to sell their music, but they are not believed (see here<\/a> and here<\/a>). This shows how the assumption that drill music causes, precipitates or glorifies crime is at odds with how those within the drill scene view it. Nevertheless, their testimonies receive a reduced level of credibility. We often think that authors are the authorities about the meanings of their works, but in the case of drill, drillers are not seen as authorities of their drill. Moreover, stereotypes about the criminality and believability of black boys and men produce these deflated credibility assignments. The driller is not believed because they are stereotyped by hearers \u2013court officials, police officers and media agents\u2014 as violent criminals.<\/p>\n

For example, Owusu-Bempah (2022) describes a case in which judges took lyrics to be evidence of gang membership and intent to use violence despite the musician asserting that the lyrics were fictional and motivated by commercial concern; other drillers have said that their work is non-autobiographical, but a fiction constructed for advancing their music careers; and others have made clear that their drill portrays a story of their surroundings in response to restrictions and censorship. These are not unusual narratives in the context of music \u2013but drillers are not believed when they assert them.<\/p>\n

Some drillers who are subject to restrictive measures and censorship have made it clear that their work is non-autobiographical and a way of \u201cgetting out.\u201d For instance, AM and Skengdo received a nine-month suspended sentence for breaching their CBO when they performed \u201cAttempted 1.0,\u201d which allegedly incited gang violence, despite there being no evidence of gang membership in the lyrics (Fatsis, 2019). When they appeared on the BBC to discuss their injunctions, they made clear the fictional nature of their drill. When asked by BBC 1Xtra\u2019s Twin B what they want people to take away from their music, AM responds he wants people \u201cto appreciate\u2026 the way it\u2019s portraying a story of where we have come from\u201d (1xtra, 2019). These cases show that despite how some drillers view and describe their artistry\u2014fictional, reflective of their surroundings and an opportunity to sell more music\u2014their views are not assigned credibility, and this scrutiny is based in negative identity prejudices about black believability and criminality, constituting a testimonial injustice.<\/p>\n

Drill Music and Contributory Injustice <\/strong><\/p>\n

Contributory injustice occurs when the kind of ideas or concepts some people use are not a good \u201cfit\u201d for capturing the experiences of others \u2013and the fact that these ideas or concepts are pervasive can make it harder for those other people to articulate and explain their experiences (Dotson, 2012).<\/p>\n

The critical scrutiny of drill constitutes a contributory injustice since there are readily available frameworks sufficiently influenced by drillers to adequately interpret their work. These frameworks \u201chighlight the importance of local knowledge and familiarity with people and places to interpret the threat levels in online communications\u201d (Ilan, 2020, p. 998). We can identify contributory injustice here because drillers have the necessary ideas and concepts to make sense of their violent lyrics, but these interpretations are shunned. This meets the required components of contributory injustice, since agents are maintaining and utilising street-illiterate, structurally prejudiced ideas and concepts in seeing the music as violent autobiographies. This thwarts drillers\u2019 ability to contribute to shared knowledge.<\/p>\n

The use of drill lyrics and videos in criminal courts constitutes a form of contributory injustice since prosecutors are presenting evidence in street-illiterate ways, such as \u201cautobiographical confessions to crimes, threats of violence or proof of gang affiliation\u201d (Rymajdo, 2020). Where those within the drill scene stress the need for familiarity with rap\u2019s genre codes, so that criminal justice actors do not conflate a violent musical persona with a driller sitting on the dock, their interpretations aren\u2019t taken on board by the prosecution and jury members.<\/p>\n

The censorship of drill constitutes a form of contributory injustice because extreme measures are being used to prevent drillers and those within the drill scene from contributing to shared knowledge. This injustice is intensified since agents are not just insisting that the music is violent and so resisting \u201cstreet literate\u201d interpretive resources but are also using state force to limit drill, as in the case of AM and Skengdo, who received a nine-month suspended sentence for breaching their CBO. This means important knowledge is unavailable for the shared interpretive resources, such as how drillers\u2019 social contexts influence their lyrics.<\/p>\n

To conclude, I have said a bit about how drill music is scrutinised by the Met and system of courts, and how this scrutiny constitutes two types of epistemic injustice: contributory injustice and testimonial injustice. Familiarity with the nuances of drill music, along with philosophical analyses, can help us to form more informed judgements about when and why these interferences with important freedoms are wrong \u2013in particular, because it is based on failures to treat others as knowers, specifically in relation to their own artistic content.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

1xtra, B. R. (2019, April 25). Skengdo and AM Talk Injunctions and Censorship<\/em>. Retrieved from YouTube: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=lgmobkQeEWU&t=252s<\/a><\/p>\n

Dotson, K. (2012). A Cautionary Tale: On Limiting Epistemic Oppression. University of Nebraska Press<\/em>, 24-47.<\/p>\n

Fatsis, L. (2019). Policing the Beats: The Criminalisation of UK Drill and Grime Music by the London Metropolitan Police. The Sociological Review<\/em>, 1300-1316.<\/p>\n

Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic Injustice .<\/em> New York: Oxford University Press.<\/p>\n

Ilan, J. (2020). Digital Street Culture Decoded: Why Criminalizaing Drill Music is Street Illiterate and Counterproductive. British Journal of Criminology<\/em>, 994-1013.<\/p>\n

Owusu-Bempah, A. (2022). Prosecuting Rap: What Does the Case Law Tell Us. Journal of Popular Music<\/em>, 427-455<\/p>\n

Rymajdo, K. (2020, December 8). Prosecuting Rap: How a UK Legal Project is Fighting the Use of rap Lyrics in Court<\/em>. Retrieved from DJMag: https:\/\/djmag.com\/longreads\/prosecuting-rap-how-uk-legal-project-fighting-use-rap-lyrics-court<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Image by Richard Cejas<\/a>\u00a0 from\u00a0 Pixabay<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"What are the legitimate ways of interpreting a musician\u2019s work and words? This might seem like an abstract philosophical question, but it isn\u2019t. This question matters because sometimes music is […]","protected":false},"author":1319,"featured_media":1751,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"@TareeqJalloh \"Drill Music and Epistemic Injustice\" on Open for Debate","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[19],"tags":[176,407],"custom_author":[406],"class_list":["post-1745","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-open-for-debate","tag-epistemic-injustice","tag-music","custom_author-jalloh-tareeq"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8KPlM-s9","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":2082,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/transmitting-understanding-of-indigenous-genocide-and-historical-hermeneutical-injustice\/","url_meta":{"origin":1745,"position":0},"title":"Transmitting Understanding of Indigenous Genocide and Historical Hermeneutical Injustice","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"September 2, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"A Mexica, or Aztec, scribe communicated part of his experience of the Spanish conquest of Tenochtitlan, modern-day Mexico City, as follows: Along the roads the splintered javelins lie, scalps are strewn around. Roofless are the houses and bright red their walls. Vermin swarm in the streets and in the squares\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2024\/09\/Maya_hierogliphs.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":646,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/objectification-knowledge-and-pornography\/","url_meta":{"origin":1745,"position":1},"title":"Objectification, Knowledge, and Pornography","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"April 8, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Objectification is treating or depicting a person as a mere thing. What does this involve? By now we\u2019re all familiar with the idea that it\u2019s an aspect of women\u2019s subordinate status in society that they are sexually objectified: they are treated and depicted as sex objects. Practices such as sex\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/03\/aleksandar-radovanovic-10295-unsplash-1-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/03\/aleksandar-radovanovic-10295-unsplash-1-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/03\/aleksandar-radovanovic-10295-unsplash-1-scaled.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/03\/aleksandar-radovanovic-10295-unsplash-1-scaled.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/03\/aleksandar-radovanovic-10295-unsplash-1-scaled.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/03\/aleksandar-radovanovic-10295-unsplash-1-scaled.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1617,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/testimonial-injustice-in-healthcare-an-alternative-diagnosis\/","url_meta":{"origin":1745,"position":2},"title":"Testimonial injustice in healthcare \u2013 an alternative diagnosis","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"January 23, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The common patient complaint of not feeling listened to is familiar to many and well tracked throughout various channels. Whether it be the UK governments 2020 report on endometriosis care that describe women who speak of the difficulty of getting healthcare professionals to take their pain seriously and not \u201cthink[ing]\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/jon-tyson-vVSleEYPSGY-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/jon-tyson-vVSleEYPSGY-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/jon-tyson-vVSleEYPSGY-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/jon-tyson-vVSleEYPSGY-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/jon-tyson-vVSleEYPSGY-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/01\/jon-tyson-vVSleEYPSGY-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1693,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/a-case-against-the-argument-from-collective-amnesia-and-forgetting\/","url_meta":{"origin":1745,"position":3},"title":"A Case against the Argument from \u201cCollective Amnesia\u201d and \u201cForgetting\u201d","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"May 15, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The term collective amnesia is often used to analyse cases or states in which morally, socially and politically pertinent knowledge, such as knowledge about historical injustices, is (arguably) absent or unavailable in a society\u2019s collective memory. I find this both epistemically inaccurate and problematic and instead propose putting the analytical\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/05\/Altanian_382136-2025423656.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/05\/Altanian_382136-2025423656.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/05\/Altanian_382136-2025423656.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/05\/Altanian_382136-2025423656.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/05\/Altanian_382136-2025423656.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":663,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/epistemic-injustice-whose-job-is-it-to-end-it\/","url_meta":{"origin":1745,"position":4},"title":"EPISTEMIC INJUSTICE: WHOSE JOB IS IT TO END IT?","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"May 6, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Epistemic injustice refers to a category of harms that affect people specifically in their capacity as knowers, inquirers or communicators as opposed to fellow citizens, members of the moral community or rational agents more broadly. Examples include but are not limited to unwarranted distrust and denial of intelligibility with respect\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/05\/Radoilska_Blog-image_-Feb19-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/05\/Radoilska_Blog-image_-Feb19-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/05\/Radoilska_Blog-image_-Feb19-scaled.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/05\/Radoilska_Blog-image_-Feb19-scaled.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/05\/Radoilska_Blog-image_-Feb19-scaled.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/05\/Radoilska_Blog-image_-Feb19-scaled.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1773,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/exploratory-epistemic-justice-and-question-making-practices\/","url_meta":{"origin":1745,"position":5},"title":"Exploratory Epistemic Justice and Question-Making Practices","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"September 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"In questioning practices, people not only ask questions but also contemplate how their questions can be precisely expressed and attempt to discover a right question. For instance, we may confront situations that compel us to wonder, \u201cHow can I express what I want to tell?\u201d or \u201cWhy only me?\u201d in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/09\/Poster.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"meta_box":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/08\/microphone-gf8906a02e_1280.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1745","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1319"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1745"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1745\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1752,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1745\/revisions\/1752"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1751"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1745"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1745"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1745"},{"taxonomy":"custom_author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/custom_author?post=1745"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}