3 ms·
> That we are in the midst of this shift in taste might help explain our larger mood of instability and paranoia (or is it just me?). It's just you. There's al
by malvosenior 9y ago
> That we are in the midst of this shift in taste might help explain our larger mood of instability and paranoia (or is it just me?).
It's just you. There's always been a mainstream and an underground. Now the underground is much larger and more diverse and arguably the mainstream is a bit better (due to said diversity).
Source: I lived through the 90s and was basically forced by Clear Channel to listen to Ozzy Osbourne 24/7 on every station on the dial.
- pjc50 9y agoIt seems to me that there are no more undergrounds any more - it's very hard for something to be both "popular" and "undiscovered", and there's an entire industry of trend-hunters looking to monetise new scenes the second they're discovered. Similarly the mainstream is not so big any more. Back in 1977 half the UK, 28 million people, watched the Morecambe and Wise Christmas Show live. That was our peak mainstream, a shared set of jokes everyone could be expected to know. Now peak programmes reach about half that audience.
- bazzlexposition 9y agoGreat point, they didn't have algorithms deciding our music in the 1990s, instead you had Clear Channel. Radio in the 1990s was the same 40-60 songs played over and over. Then for TV you basically had the 4 major networks,FOX Friday Night, Must See TV, TGIF, and all the rest. People don't remember how much that sucked.
- dragonwriter 9y agoActually, in the 1990s was the peak of major commercial broadcast networks with 6, not 4 (the old big 3, plus Fox, plus UPN And The WB.)
- bazzlexposition 9y agoAh yes, the Wayans Brothers channel and the Star Trek Voyager channel