I really don't care whether she becomes popular or not. I like to use her as an example because she is one of my favorites at the moment and she is a current artist that goes against the ideals of what is popular right now. I admire what she represents which is why I cite her but I really do not care whether she becomes more or less popular because I am always going to be a fan regardless.

My was point was that if Janelle can chart at no. 5 without the industry backing than she surely can top the chart if the industry chose to market her. Her success despite her lack of marketing proves as well as shows that she is "interesting" and marketable.

If Prince, David Bowie, Boy George, Rolling Stones etc were popular in the 80's how come someone like Janelle Monae can't be popular now?

I think the general public accepts what the industry markets. I believe if the industry started to market more variety, the public would accept it like they do all these other boring acts.


I don't care about other's perception. I am just making a obvious observation when it comes to popular music and popular trends. Janelle Monae is an artist that deserves to be a superstar and I believe if she had the backing she would be.

She is not going through hardships. This is a music forum and I am just giving my opinion.


My point was that in previous decades popular music was never this bland and it actually had more variety in terms of acts, music and genre. There was objectively more creativity and more experimentation compared to what is going on now.

Would you say Prince and David Bowie were not interesting in the 80's?

I just asked since you are implying popular music has always been just catchy and not risk taking which I completely disagree with.

I'm pretty sure people have already answered those questions over and over again over the course of the last 10 pages.

It's like nothing sinks in.

@ Soulflower - So what exactly is this agenda you keep vaguely alluding to? If the record companies aren't just doing what they're doing for the sake of money, then what are they doing it for?

If she can hit #5 without their backing, why would they back her? She seems to be doing pretty well without their support.

I think they are purposely only choosing to market specific pop stars. They want to over-saturate the market with these specific pop stars only because their package is what the industry only wants to promote. The industry wants to promote hyper-sexual female pop stars. Yes, it is about money but this is also an agenda. They want to fool the public into believing these are the best of the best of what is out now and that is not true.

If you overexpose one particularly thing over and over and over and over again of course people will begin to believe "Oh this must be great" if that is the only they they are choosing to market.

Because it has the most commercial appeal.
What is it you don't get about that?

So... exactly what we've all been saying this entire time: there is no agenda other than making money in the safest way they feel possible. It's not a conspiracy. Just boring corporate economics.

I get that sex has an appeal and has a market.

However, the industry is marketing this hyper and "overly" sexual female and that does not settle right with me. It almost makes women appear animalistic and submissive.

I don't like this whole "I will do anything to please a man" image that the industry projects to young girls and even young boys.


I know sex has an appeal but it has become really over the top now.

I think that is something they choose to market not necessarily because people want to see hypersexual pop stars with hypersexual lyrics.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v8...takethat08.jpg

Take That 20 years ago when boy bands were what were selling in huge numbers.

What's your point?

Why is it so far fetched the industry would not have an agenda?

I don't even know who the group is in the above photo. Boy bands were not hyper sexual 20 years ago and if they were that most certainly not the only thing they were selling.

Everything that we see and everything that is marketed to us sends subliminal messages or overt messages. Any where from a president speech all the way down to a hair commercial advertisement.

The message that I get from the industry is they want us to accept these mediocre hyper sexual pop stars that make bland music.

We are force to accept these as the best of the best when it comes to pop music because the industry only chooses to market those specific pop stars.