ABSTRACT
In 2006 and 2008 Lupe Fiasco, one of hip-hop’s most interesting artists released two of the more critically-lauded albums of the genre in Food & Liquor and The Cool (Fiasco, 2006, 2008). Both Food & Liquor and The Cool reached top ten positions on Billboard’s “Hot 100” chart, and received nominations and positive reviews. One of those rare artists that receives both critical praise and laudable sales numbers, Fiasco seemed positioned for a lengthy career of regular releases and tours as he finished his third album that was slated to be released in 2009. Yet 2009 passed and there was no new Fiasco release. 2010 came and went with no new Fiasco record delivered to retailers. It wasn’t because Fiasco hadn’t created new material. In fact, Lupe Fiasco began performing songs from what was to be a new release and had turned in a new album of material to his label, Atlantic Records, in late-2009. In 2010 Fiasco claimed that Atlantic’s delay was due to a perceived lack of “hit singles.” Even though he had been offered a number of what the label thought would be hit recordings by producers and writers, Fiasco turned them down noting that if he had agreed to the terms offered, he would not own any of the publishing rights. Fiasco’s complaint was not an unusual one. Disputes between musicians and the producers about what should and should not be on an album are not unusual. What was unusual was the emergence of an online petition assembled by Fiasco’s fans demanding the label release the album for retail (Reid, 2010). Fiasco explained he was delighted with this display of fan power: “It was dope to see that. I didn’t fall back on them to do that, they did that themselves and protested in the streets to get my record released. It was also humbling, because it makes me think about my responsibility when I go to make records” (Carroll, 2011, p. 6). Fiasco’s third record was finally released almost two years after its recording. The release was partially attributable to the power and dedication of Fiasco’s fans. The deep connection he had with his fans, his willingness to reach out and communicate with them online, and their ability to communicate with him and each other made Fiasco too attractive to ignore. However, this fan devotion cut two ways. Fiasco discovered that his fans’ loyalty was so coveted by his label that it would become a source 155of significant dispute. The initial problem, that his album lacked singles, had quietly receded into the background and Fiasco’s dispute with Atlantic now turned on his resistance to a new set of contractual terms. Fiasco’s initial deal was a variation on what the industry used to call a “standard deal.” However, the deal was made in the mid-2000s when these standard deals started to lose favor with labels. Instead, Atlantic wanted to renegotiate Fiasco’s contract and have him sign what has become known as a “360 deal” (Carroll, 2011). Without this new type of contract in hand Atlantic had one leverage point left and effectively shelved any new product he could release. As Fiasco put it, “I don’t have a 360 deal, so that put me in a different priority list” (Koha, 2011, p. 7).
