4 ms·
It's not meant to be an all-encompassing statement on talent, it's a statement based on what becomes most popular on social media. I'm pretty sure most will ag
by winternett 3y ago
It's not meant to be an all-encompassing statement on talent, it's a statement based on what becomes most popular on social media.
I'm pretty sure most will agree that what becomes most popular on social media, TV, and radio in this era, is far from what most people truly see as top talent.
Our favorite musicians and bands now more than ever rarely make it to public consciousness, often making it to public consciousness involves massive levels of funding, while even the most popular artists usually end up in terribly exploitive contracts (like TLC for example). Most of the modern musicians we know and love have no health insurance and, more often than not, aren't anywhere near wealthy from their work.
Taylor Swift & Beyoncé are also artists that rose to prominence prior to this new era of Social Media influence (as a footnote).
- piva00 3y agoPopularity and talent are not the same thing. Some of the most popular stuff is not really a product of being extraordinarily talented (to me Taylor Swift is an example of that). Having some talent is the bar to become popular but even way before social media era it doesn't mean the most talented are actually the most popular, and that's fine, I just don't like to see those conflated as the same thing.
- twiceaday 3y agoI think this topic is the ultimate application of Goodheart's law with popularity being the measure. It is clearly too easy to game, and it was just a happy accident that it used to be a meaningful signal for quality, because not enough agents whose interests differ from yours were gaming it.