His argument is laughable and typical of smart dumb dudes. White people are not a monolith, just as black people aren't a monolith. I tend to apply Occam's Razor to shyt like this and look for the simplest explanation, which in this case is that Kendrick released a dope album that critics like. Just as D'Angelo released a dope album that critics like. Both albums came out during particularly tense times in terms of racial issues, and I think that played a role in the reception.
The other point I'd make about critics is that the white critic response has been similar to the black critic response. Remember, Pitchfork's review was written by a black guy. And not just any black guy mind you, but Craig Jenkins - a very well respected music journalist.
There's a weird paranoid aspect to this idea that receiving praise from white people suggests you are being used. It's sucker shyt and frankly it's the type of anti-intellectual nonsense that plagues a lot of so called black voices today. Ta-Nehisi Coates receives a lot of praise from white critics too, is he an agent of the devil too?
Honestly the only interesting point he made seems to be skipped over, as it contradicts one of the dumbest hip hop rumors: that a bunch of white execs decided to make gangsta rap the dominate genre of rap, and also decided to kill the genre's pro black acts. That is bullshyt. As Banner said, execs care about one thing: money. If Tribe sold as well as NWA there would be more Tribes than NWAs. Execs are not concerned about the message of music, nor are they sitting around thinking "haha, the black man will never rise up to stop us mwuahahaha."
I've been in music exec meetings and literally watched Jimmy Iovine shyt on the most ignorant of rap demos because he didn't think it could sell. Likewise I've seen execs cosign positive shyt because they thought it could sell. It's about money. There is no conspiracy there, nor is there some type of union between execs and "the media" to sell negative rap. Negative rap sells itself.
