Originally posted by FMF
With the internet having clearly been a major game-changer, and the bewildering range and quality of music now readily available and marketed independently, in what way is the question of whether 'commercial music today is worse now than 30 years ago' significant?
You're right - "commercial music" and the "commercial radio" that supports it are probably becoming obsolete like buggy whips.
But one of the charms of "commercial music" is that it provided a certain basis of cultural common ground - every decade had certain songs and certain artists and bands that everyone listened to and was familiar with. Those songs might not have been the greatest things ever written, but they usually had some sort of melody, and were often about someone with a specific name, or about a specific place or event.
But now, it's becoming more and more a world where everyone has their own iPod. It seems like the amount of common ground is becoming smaller and smaller - and the songs that occupy that ground are becoming more and more indistinguishable from each other.
I see the Super Bowl halftime show as an illustration of this. In the past few years (since the "Wardrobe Malfunction" ), they have trotted out the great graybeards from the 1960's. And you get the sense that these are the only acts remaining that could appeal to the wide audience that views the Super Bowl. Is there anyone out there under the age of 50 that could do this?
But maybe this common ground thing is overrated. The 21st century will be all about small niche acts that appeal to small audiences and perform in small venues. Commercial radio will eventually abandon music completely and no one will miss it. The large record companies will fold as well and no one will miss them either. And all of this may be a good thing.