Of course, punk rock is well-represented and the article makes mention of punk bands like State Radio, Sick of It All, Against Me!, Dollyrots, NOFX, Kill Radio and Outernational, but questions where the mainstream is in this regard.
Morello was quite critical of mainstream hip hop saying
It's like Public Enemy and N.W.A were warring for the heart of the hip-hop nation, and a gentrified, blingy version of N.W.A won out, You listen to [Public Enemy's] 'Fight the Power' and It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back, and you can hear America changing. Now it's just the relentless booty shake of hollow bling. There's not yet a soundtrack like in the '60s, when the music of the time was the music of revolution.
While Chuck D. attributed the lack of real protests to fear:
Young groups are not paid to take chances, Someone like Neil Young has more references and perspectives from a different time. Young bands are clouded by weapons of mass distraction. But I don't buy that it's apathy: Bands are still looking to be loved, but there aren't a lot who compare themselves to bands who have prospered by saying something that needed to be said, like Green Day or [Public Enemy] or Neil Young. But why take a chance on making music a certain way if they don't believe the media will cover it? People like Neil Young are from a time when you felt one man can make a change, whereas young people in society today feel invisible.
You can check out the article here.






It also takes loads of work to write respectable political lyrics, and not look like a pissed off moron trying to blame society for his problems.