Originally Posted by Trollheart

Comments like "do you understand now?" can only be seen as a thinly veiled arrogance: it translates to "why don't you understand/are you thick?"

Also, you were NOT specific in your OP. You never said "artistes like Nicky Minaj, Taylor sSwift et al". Had you done so, then I wouldn't have had to clarify the point with you.

Anyhoo, if you're talking about artistes like the ones mentioned (and as I say, mainstream does not conform to what you want it to, it refers to any artiste working now and still popular) then it's obvious: issues in pop music don't sell, so the artistes would either be told or know not to be too "deep", as all they want to do is appeal to a younger generation who are more interested in "woo girl I wanna dance" etc than "isn't it terrible what's happening in Somalia" or whatever. It doesn't pay them to go into those issues, and anyway, they may not be interested in or even know of them. Also, they don't want to risk alienating any fans or more importantly sponsors by being too edgy or controversial, and they certainly don't want to damage their airplay chances. So they play safe. Simple as that.

If you want singers singing about issues, look outside the mainstream, but don't complain that the ones you listed don't do deep; it's just not something that's profitable to them, and for artistes like that, the bottom line is the dollar.

Originally Posted by Zyrada

Isn't this moving the goal posts a bit? You said you wanted an example of a current mainstream musician making a stand on a social issue, but you never said anything about whether or not you personally had to find it effective or genuine.

As for the question of whether or not musicians should take advantage of their cultural position to promote a socio-political stance, I don't think they're obligated. Is it nice if they find a way to do so that doesn't involve awkwardly shoehorning a hamfisted aesop into a song? Sure, but at the end of the day, their job is to entertain.

As a side point, I'd argue that part of the problem with arguing over this topic is precisely what qualifies as "mainstream", "current", and "relevant". The idea of a "universal audience" is less applicable than it's ever been, so trying to find an artist that's "important enough" and has a high enough platform to truly make a difference is tricky at best. Trollheart bringing up figures like Springsteen and U2 really illustrates my point. I'll admit that they're mainstream, but they don't have any particular importance or relevance in my own musical sphere, and I'd say the same sentiment carries for a significant chunk of my generation.

Originally Posted by elphenor

I'd vote for Trump

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls

It's beyond a lack of social-political consciousness, most of the artists you put up for discussion don't say anything in their songs. There is no intended message, it's not uplifting, it's fun.

Originally Posted by elphenor

I'd vote for Trump

Originally Posted by Soulflower

My point was that a lot of the old school artists sung about social issues even artists that are not as big as U2 or the Rolling Stones. They still made songs that discussed social issues and its odd why these things can still not occur today. We still have social problems and events today that could be discussed in songs.

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls

We've gone over this in other threads many times: It won't sell as good.

Originally Posted by Soulflower

But it sold it the 70s, 80s, and 90's, why cant it sell today?

Originally Posted by elphenor

I'd vote for Trump