Last week, The Gazelle published an interactive article, Around the World in 80(ish) Rap Tracks. This was the brainchild of deputy features editor Paula Dozsa, with whom sophomore Asyrique Thevendran and I had worked to incorporate an interactive element in the piece. Granted, the article was delayed by an issue or two, but its long-awaited publication was quite exciting. Having spent a substantial amount of hours on it, we were looking forward to hearing what readers would think.

The feedback was interesting, to say the least. There were generally a lot of positive reactions to it. However, there seemed to be a number of negative reactions too. Now, I didn't expect that everyone would love it. However, my problem with the critiques is that some people did not understand the basis of the article. Paula was generous enough to include a short opening paragraph to explain it, but I guess everyone was like, too short, won't read. So, here's my personal idea behind the article and the purpose I think it serves.

First of all, the reason for the article. Paula, the main author, is a hip-hop aficionado, not a scholar of genre. The reason behind this article came from a simple idea: hey, the student body here represents a really large percentage of the world — why don't we get people to give us a few hip-hop records from where they're from or from where they've lived? It's as simple as that. The article was in no way a dissertation on the rap genre. It was simply showing what students — the ones who were so kind to fill out the much publicized Google form — were listening to. This meant that any recognized hip-hop artist had a place in the article.

The problem arises when we begin to feel that certain artists should not have been included because they didn’t represent a region or country. Well, you can discuss that when you're writing your hip-hop thesis with 9th Wonder. This was not, however, what this article was going for. It simply aimed to show you what rap songs other students are listening to. So, as long as y'all don't share the same brain, given that we aren't all carbon copies, one shouldn't expect to click on the circle representing their country and see a copy of their iPod playlist.

Another issue I have with the flak the article has been getting is the bizarre expectation that the article would be an academic analysis of the current hip-hop scene. Honestly, as a student of hip-hop myself, I would love to write such a paper. But think about it, what fun is that? You might as well go to Billboard and check the rap charts. They have the research, as they continuously watch the market, the Nielsen music sales and the RIAA. That’s easier than reading an article quickly stitched together the night before, based on three or four Google searches. Furthermore, Billboard, and any analysis based on it, will probably feed you mainstream, radio-concentrated, pop-shit dance records.

This of course brings up the argument of what is mainstream or underground. Which in turn propagates another issue: real hip-hop is not mainstream, is it? Say that the article showed you all the artists that were getting radio airplay. Wouldn't it just be a recreation of the Billboard 100? It’s no news that Billboard prioritizes airplay and record sales over records that actually sound like hip-hop. So, certain artists' place in the article would have to come into question, because are they really hip-hop artists? Then you’d have Iggy Azalea sitting comfortably in there, while Logic or Run The Jewels or even Wu-Tang Clan — Wu-Tang motherfuckin’ Clan, yo — would barely get an honourable mention. I am not saying there’s anything wrong with an article on mainstream rap but honestly, there's nothing new in it. How about we show you what your peers are listening to? I would think that it’s more interesting to check an article, see a new artist you never considered and hopefully expand your music taste.

Another issue I think should be addressed is the assumption that the article would accurately portray hip-hop sounds across various regions. I guess I could understand the misunderstanding, but I'd like to explicitly state that the article does not, by any measure, claim to do that. The artists were placed in their respective circles due to their place of origin. This is especially important for the US-based artists. Please be aware that the authors are fully aware of the very diverse hip-hop sounds of different regions. But let's be honest, those barriers were broken when icons like Eminem and Kanye West had people on both coasts enjoying their records with neither side able to claim them. Kanye West, for example, took the New York boom-bap, added synth to it, mixed it with grime and put in a touch of soul.

Don't get me wrong, I am still a big fan of pure coastal sounds. I listen to Nas all the time. And N*ggaz With Attitude. But that doesn't mean I can't listen to OFWGKTA or Kendrick Lamar or even Allan Kingdom. Its fine to respect coastal differentiations, but in 2015, you have to admit that the only person that still follows that rule is DJ Premier — and even then, not all the time.

In my opinion, the contention surrounding the article was just an opportunity for all of us to show off our own knowledge and passion in the subject — which I actually think is really nice. I myself have a strong affinity for the genre. I've been doing this shit since Afrika Bambaataa. Nevertheless, I think it would be nicer and more considerate if in situations like this, we weren’t so quick to lash out just because what we see is not what we expected. I too would have loved to see more of certain names in the article: more 2pac, more Mos Def, more Q-Tip, even more Drake. But the article wasn’t written by me, or even the stated author. It was by the community. And by the time I had read the list, it was too late to complain.