Pop Music Addictive For Our Young

Post Reply New Topic

Anyone else think/wonder about pop music being addictive for our young. I am not talking about all music, I am talking about the specific genre that employs such artists as Britney Spears, Lady Gaga, and more and more Taylor Swift(though I thought she was supposed to be country). Much of the most popular songs in the electronic genre are vocal tunes that incorporate a catchy electronic track behind pop like vocals.

As a genre, pop music is very eclectic, often borrowing elements from other styles including urban, dance, rock, Latin and country;[1] nonetheless, there are core elements which define pop. Such include generally short-to-medium length songs, written in a basic format (often the verse-chorus structure), as well as the common employment of repeated choruses, melodic tunes, and catchy hooks.[1]

It seems they make pop music to corrupt our young. The catchiness brings them in and doesn't let them go unless they are strong and willing to listen to more than just pop music. Many of these pop artists are changed to suit the record industry at times. Without her producer Britney Spears might have become Adele or a white Diana Ross. But they wanted catchy songs so they created her persona and wrote Oops I did it again.

For all pop lovers this thread is not about whether pop music is good or bad. Though I would hope their are pop artists who do write their own material. Just wondering what are people's thoughts.

Well, music in general is addictive. We use it to feel better. It's sorta like, an emotional food, if you will. Try not listening to music for a week. Hard as hell, right? Pop music has been around, for, well, ever. Even ret*d songs about nothing, just for the sake of partying/etc have been around forever. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leck_mich_im_Arsch Mozart wrote that, for example. So, nothing new under the sun...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOswjwx1QKw
There's a pop song from the 50s, pre-rock music.

I fail to see how it's more like, deep or artistic than say, "Call Me Maybe" I guess in some ways it is, and obviously Dean Martin is like, better, but still, pop music is pop music. Songs about love, stuff like that.

I think the only way it has a negative effect on the youth is first off the subject matter of the music and the image of the recording artist, and the image is probably more of a positive or negative effect than the actual music subject matter, thanks to the advent of music videos, or just people generally knowing more about an artist than just seeing the face on an album cover (websites and twitters and all that fun newfangled technology.) In this case, I really do believe pop music has gotten worse in both those regards. The musical content has on the whole gotten raunchier and more blatant, and things that would possibly be innuendos before are now just blatantly obvious in the lyrics.

It comes down I think in some ways to this, a lot of times raunchier songs would more or less be like "secret" music, if you would. You'd have to seek it out. Even in the era of Sinatra, Como, Dean Martin, all those people, there were songs that were raunchy and nasty as all hell, just you'd have to seek them out. You wouldn't just turn on the radio and hear them. http://www.cracked.com/article_17625_7- ... blush.html Here's some examples. So there was just a higher degree of self censorship back then, so all we as the general public remember is the Comos and Sinatras of that era. Also, one thing to keep in mind, we've pretty much only been able to listen to recorded music for about a hundred years. It was about 1880 or so when the phonograph was invented, iirc.

I could go on and on, but I think you get the point. Those are my beefs with pop music. The fact that it's catchy? Who cares! Good music should be memorable. The only issue with pop music in that regard is that sometimes people will be left uncultured regarding music, but people can become narrowminded and uncultured with any type of music they choose, not just pop music. And as far as if Britney Spears could have become Adele (I don't see why people think she's so great, but OK) or Diana Ross? Well, nobody abducted her (well maybe it was a Masonic New World Order plot, but that cannot be proved or disproved) if she didn't wanna sing what she was singing, she could have just...not sang it.

So the fact that good musicians get "stolen" for pop music, well, maybe so, but would they have gone on and made anything of more artistic merit if they didn't make pop music? The other thing too, regarding the artistic merit of pop music, it's all in the eye of the beholder with that sorta thing. Art is entirely subjective, without much objective standards in the judging of it. But, for a neat example to me, italodisco is one of the pop music styles I like a lot. I've shown this on here before, but Miko Mission, italodisco artist. This song is from the 80s, and was a popular song and likely made him some cash.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPA6uYNdOTs

This song here is from 2011.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DVT6qzGxkY
No difference really between it and 1980s. Why? Because he likes it. Nobody really likes italodisco anymore, it's pretty much for all intents and purposes a dead genre. That video has like 36K views, whereas his old song has like 200K. But he decided to make a new song anyway. He could have moved on to "better things" but he legitimately liked italodisco, and stubbornly stuck to making it.

So I dunno, long rambly post by me, but I hope you get my points.

Pop music is evil.

Pop music is not evil.

It is evil now, just look at the manufactured rubbish being spewed out today.....

Not in and off itself, it's evil because of the industry that makes it. So Pop music is evil.

I never really enjoyed it........I like some bands that would have been considered 'pop' in the 60's but most of those would be bands considered rock of some sort. I don't really see how people can tolerate the sort of music described in this thread for long enough to become addicted to it.

What is wrong with the industry?

Freemasonry.

You don't know?

A lot of the artists songs are not written by them. Pop music would be more highly valued or thought of if said artists wrote their own songs. Also there are artists that are auto tuned. If you don't sound good to people when doing an acoustic show then your music has been edited in some way.

One other thing that helps addict our young are the Kids Bop cd's. Most of the songs they cover are pop, same with the Now cd's.

What would you suggest an alternative to pop music be?

Let's ban pop music! Oh, hang on, where do they ban pop music in the world?

And I really hate pop music too. Really hate it.

All I was saying is that cd helps make our youth addicted to pop music. One thing that helped me not become addicted to that music was that I really only listened to oldies from the 50's and 60's till I was in 6th grade. And then I heard Green Day.

I don't know, my parents forced me to listen to oldies and nothing else and I completely resent many "oldies" for that reason now. I also listened to ret*d rap music and the like in rebellion to my parents.

And Green Day is just pop-rock/punk. What is so deep and artistic about Green Day? I mean I like them and all, but I don't see the point you're trying to make. Are you saying kids should listen to classical, jazz, and opera?