J Balvin
TEOGRAPH*J Balvin’s music video for “Perra” in collaboration with Tokischa was removed from YouTube over the weekend, Billboard has learned.
The track that fuses Balvin’s edgy reggaeton beats with Tokischa’s dembow premiered on Sept. 10 and forms part of Balvin’s José album, which earned him his fourth No. 1 on Billboard’s Top Latin Albums chart. “Perra” debuted at No. 48 on Hot Latin Songs. With a chorus that says: “I am a female dog in heat/ I'm looking for a dog to hit it/ Hey, you're a hot dog in heat/ And you are looking for a dog to hit it,” the raunchy street-slang lyrics describe two people who desire each other.
The music video, directed by Raymi Paulus, Tokischa’s manager, shows the Colombian artist entering “el bajo mundo,” where he meets up with the Dominican newcomer. The visual shows Balvin tugging at two Black women on leashes, a group of Black people that were made up to look like dogs, and Tokischa posing on all fours inside a doghouse.
On Sunday, the music video was removed from Balvin’s YouTube channel. Neither Balvin nor Tokischa have released an official statement.
The removal of the music video also came less than a week after Colombia’s vice president and chancellor Marta Lucía Ramírez said the visual was “sexist, racist, machista, and misogynistic."
“In his video, the artist uses images of women and people of Afro-descendants -- population groups with special constitutional protection -- whom he presents with dog ears,” she wrote in an open letter published on Oct. 11. "In addition, while walking, the singer carries two Afro-descendant women tied with neck chains and crawling on the floor like animals or slaves. As if this were not enough, the lyrics of the song have direct and openly sexist, racist, machista, and misogynistic expressions that violate the rights of women, comparing them to an animal that must be dominated and mistreated."
In the letter, she publicly encouraged Balvin and the music industry to sign a petition that “includes various commitments for the promotion of women's rights in music and prevention of violence against them.”
Although the audio track for “Perra” is still live on YouTube, Billboard cannot confirm if the official music video was taken down by the artist or the video-sharing platform.
Billboard reached out to YouTube for comment but did not hear back at press time.
NEWS
No matter what you thought of the Kendrick Lamar and Drake battle, there was only one undisputed winner by the end of it all: the reaction community in the worlds of streaming and YouTube. Your favorite content creators broke down the bars, reacted to all the most shocking moments, and helped this showdown become one of hip-hop's most culturally significant and resonant moments in a long time... For better or worse. See, the battle's technically not over yet, but only because the 6ix God's idea of victory is clearly quite different. In his federal defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group – his label – for releasing K.Dot's "Not Like Us," he named various content creators who allegedly helped boost the track's widespread popularity and, as a result, its supposedly defamatory nature.
Furthermore, the specific allegation that Drake brings up in this highly controversial lawsuit is that UMG "whitelisted" copyright claims for YouTubers, streamers, etc. concerning "Not Like Us." This means that they would be able to monetize their content without facing a copyright claim from UMG over "Not Like Us," and this isn't really an allegation because various creators have backed this up. But a few important (alleged) caveats that people are talking about online need to be clear. First, "whitelisting" supposedly happens on behalf of a record label behind a song like the West Coast banger, and UMG is instead the distributor of that track. Secondly, as rapper and online personality ScruFaceJean brings up as seen in the post below, tracks like "Push Ups" were also "whitelisted" by its team.
Along with Jean, many other of your favorite content creators spoke out against this Drake lawsuit. Zias! and B.Lou, for example, spoke with their lawyer about the possibility of countersuing for emotional distress, as they found the Toronto superstar's accusations and his implication of them very disturbing and misguided. NoLifeShaq also dragged The Boy through the mud, calling him "soft" and positing that, whether "whitelisting" happened or not, they would react to "Not Like Us" accordingly as they did to his own tracks.
In addition, it's important to bring up that many others fans have pointed to how Drake excitedly used streamers to generate hype and reaction clips for his own diss tracks against Kendrick Lamar. The most direct example is with Kai Cenat, whom he texted to "stay on stream" before dropping "Family Matters." Ironically, the Twitch giant appears in this clowned-upon defamation lawsuit as an example of what the OVO mogul's accusations and implications are. And one more thing: there is no direct link between monetization and algorithmic boosting on sites like YouTube. With all this in mind, content creators seem to feel almost insulted at the idea that they only reacted to the two biggest rappers in the world beefing with each other because one of them would allow them to make money. If Drizzy knew the first thing about the reaction community, maybe he wouldn't have included this...
