Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Smeenus
DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING!!!!!!!
I have been wondering for YEARS why every pop star is gorgeous to look at. Can't plain people make great music too you FUCKS
So Gangnam Style (well over 18 million YouTube hits) is good? Or was there just production behind it to sexy and sparkle it up and a promotion machine pushing it.
|
They do, you just don't see it anywhere because the uglies are harder to market! (But we had a billion uglies on MTV in the 80s.)
And I'd just like to add my view on why Gangnam Style blew up the way it did. It has a few basic profitable marketing gimmicks:
1. Catchy, repetitive lyrics (popularized mainly for its English lyrics)
2. Silly (though easy to mimic) dance to go with it
3. Main video character in a suit that's easy to recreate (and build memes from)
We've seen this with a number of things throughout the years, most notably this mega-hit from the 90s:
"Gangnam Style" has died down and (the hell is that guy's name again?) Psy (thanks Google) had a follow-up single that bombed in comparison, so he was essentially a one-hit wonder in the states (much like Los del Rio).
The 70s had a less marketable, though wildly popular and successful dance of the decade:
There wasn't as much flash appeal back then because it wasn't necessary. Dancing was still something that a lot of people enjoyed (and everyone wanted to do it after seeing Saturday Night Fever - don't lie! Plus our friends across the pond had Pan's People to emulate, and
you know you did) and though I wasn't around just yet, my money's on the bet that this was played like crazy at roller discos.
A lot of popularity and profitability and how it perpetuates depends on the channels through which it's presented - and the target audience.