New topic
Printablewhatsgoingon said: Najee said: The point whatsgoingon is making is at that time Michael Jackson was more viably accepted with white music buyers than he was in the soul market. No one is arguing that MJ was not the most known or regarded recording artist in the world at that time. However, you are confusing that with whether MJ's music was being played in soul music formats in the late 1980s and early 1990s. At that time, MJ's music was almost exclusively played on top 40/pop formats. [Edited 10/4/07 7:26am] Exactly. I think peeps are getting the hype surrounding Michael during the release of albums like Bad and Dangerous with how popular the music actually was within certain demographics in the long run. The fact is after the initial hype of Bad and the fanfare surrounding it, the album wasn't something you would hear at lots of parties and clubs and it definitely wasn't played to death on black radio.What kept that album in the public conscious in general is the fact that he release half of the singles off the album and the world tour, take that away and the album would have probably faded into oblivion. Compare that to Thriller which inspite of less fanfare on release and no world tour it still lived on into the public's conscious well into 1985, 3 years after it was release. And to a lesser extent I could say the same for Off The Wall, the actual music of the album was still making waves long after it had been released. I remember going clubbing around the time Bad and Dangerous were release, and if they did play Michael Jackson at all, it was usually from Off The Wall or the Jacksons era. Couldn't get out of that one could you? lol. Even with Najee's lukewarm assistance. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
whatsgoingon said: And I don't think Bad has sold anywhere near 50million. And if you look at Bad record sales there were only a few places in Western Europe it sold more than Thriller, and it wasn't by that much, and one of them was UK. Every where else Thriller has sold more, including other parts of the world like Japan. So this myth that Bad sold more than Thriller in every part of the world except for America is a load of crap.
[Edited 10/4/07 10:59am] By the end of 1992 Thriller has sold around 50 mio copies worldwide, about 22 million in the US! So that makes around 28 million in the rest of the world! Bad at around the same the time was at around 28 million albums, about 7 million in the US! So that makes around 21 million in the rest of the world! At that time Thriller was 10 times platinum in the UK, while Bad was 13 times platinum! And in many other territories, I'm not saying in all, Michael did peak with Bad, not Thriller! Just look at the chart positions for both albums and singles! And when he didn't peak, he was at least close! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mrsnet said: lilgish said: MJ existed in his own musical landscape. He would get standing ovations for merely walking on the stage, which still does happen. Janet was coming into her own, had massive radio hits. With MJ, it was no longer about music, he was a commodity unto his own, and he was treated as such. Janet's first two albums had the street, house parties and such. So between 86 - 89 her music was played more. But everyone knew the songs off of Bad, they knew the videos, the commercials, MJ was still releasing singles from the album in 89. MJ back then could promote an album for 3 years. MJ existed in his own musical landscape, much like Madonna, Prince had lost that status in the late 80's.
JJ was hot as all shit!!!! The other girls, possibly just as talented, but didn't have the name, producers, charisma or history. Janet had the street and parties. MJ was on rarefied air. [Edited 10/3/07 21:11pm] Well 'Control' was released in '86, but when 'Bad' came out ('88)it took center stage. It racked up No.1 hit after hit on BET countdown. We're talking BET, not MTV. Donny Simpson jokingly blamed Bad's success for Jermaine's album's lackluster performance. While Janet became a huge crossover artist, Michael lost more of his White audience than Urban during BAD, but still broke records with 5 no.1 songs! The '80s and early '90s, competition for Michael at the Black Awards was like going against Denzel for Best Actor. Michael ALWAYS won. Janet never won any Black awards during this period. And at the end of the day, it is Michael Jackson who all of the young Black artists pay homage to - from Kanye West to Chris Brown; even the girls - from Ciarra to Beyonce, list Michael as their no1 inspiration. Well Bad came outin 87, not 88. And by that time Michael had already been around for almost 20 years. By the time we had Dangerous he had been around for 25 years so it's makes sense that black artists and BET would acknowledge him and give him awards for the mere fact that he has achieved so much over a long period of time. That still hasn't got anything to do with the fact back in the late 80s, if you went to a black club you were more likely to hear Janet than anything from Bad, and in the same sense it was a similar scenario on black radio. It had very little to do with awards or whether Usher or Chris Brown were inspired by Michael. That was just the way it was back in the late 80s when it came urban music. Within the urban community Janet's music was popular, regardless whether Michael won more awards than she did, that had nothing to do with it. [Edited 10/4/07 11:52am] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PatrickS77 said: whatsgoingon said: And I don't think Bad has sold anywhere near 50million. And if you look at Bad record sales there were only a few places in Western Europe it sold more than Thriller, and it wasn't by that much, and one of them was UK. Every where else Thriller has sold more, including other parts of the world like Japan. So this myth that Bad sold more than Thriller in every part of the world except for America is a load of crap.
[Edited 10/4/07 10:59am] By the end of 1992 Thriller has sold around 50 mio copies worldwide, about 22 million in the US! So that makes around 28 million in the rest of the world! Bad at around the same the time was at around 28 million albums, about 7 million in the US! So that makes around 21 million in the rest of the world! At that time Thriller was 10 times platinum in the UK, while Bad was 13 times platinum! And in many other territories, I'm not saying in all, Michael did peak with Bad, not Thriller! Just look at the chart positions for both albums and singles! And when he didn't peak, he was at least close! The only two places in the western wolrld where Bad sold better were Germany and the UK and it wasn't by that much. Everywhere else from Canada to Australia to France to Japan Thriller outsold Bad. Infact in most places Bad halves the sales of Thriller. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Well, didn't "Thriller" sell over 100 million copies?   | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: Well, didn't "Thriller" sell over 100 million copies?
And according to America stats it's only sold 27mill there, then it must have sold 73 mill everywhere else!
But I am not even basing my sales on the 100mil figure. I am basing it on the initial 55mil plus and even taking that into account with the exception of a few countries Thriller still outsold Bad almost everywhere. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whatsgoingon said: Timmy84 said: Well, didn't "Thriller" sell over 100 million copies?
And according to America stats it's only sold 27mill there, then it must have sold 73 mill everywhere else!
But I am not even basing my sales on the 100mil figure. I am basing it on the initial 55mil plus and even taking that into account with the exception of a few countries Thriller still outsold Bad almost everywhere. I would agree, I only know "Thriller" having been outsold by "Bad" only in England, I think. But again I ask ain't this about how urban America took to Janet? LOL | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: whatsgoingon said: And according to America stats it's only sold 27mill there, then it must have sold 73 mill everywhere else!
But I am not even basing my sales on the 100mil figure. I am basing it on the initial 55mil plus and even taking that into account with the exception of a few countries Thriller still outsold Bad almost everywhere. I would agree, I only know "Thriller" having been outsold by "Bad" only in England, I think. But again I ask ain't this about how urban America took to Janet? LOL Yea, but someone had to bring up the myth how Michael sold more of Bad than Thriller outside America, and I refuse to allow that myth to go unchallenge, because it ain't true. As for Janet she sure was more popular than MJ in the urban community in the late 80s, why can't people just accept that instead of bringing up awards and standing ovations, what's that got to do with what people were dancing to in clubs? [Edited 10/4/07 13:15pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
alphastreet said: Was Janet Jackson loved by everyone among the urban crowd and/or teenagers from the 86 to 92 period? Or were there people who thought Jody Watley, Karyn White, Pebbles and the like shit all over her? It seems to me like people thought there were better female artists than her in the 90's, though they were all licking her behind during the Janet. album.
When Janet came out with Control and Rhythm Nation, No one could touch her. Not Jody, Not Pebbles and not Karyn White, Not disrespect to these women because I like them all. I even bought all their albums. But Janet ruled.And were they more into MJ or JJ in this time period? Or both? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whatsgoingon said: Rodya24 said: But this is within the urban community. In the rest of the world, the Bad and Dangerous eras were huge. Like lilgish said earlier, Michael Jackson could promote Bad well into 1989 because of its popularity around the world. Just because Bad was not well-received within the urban community does not mean it would have faded into oblivion without the fanfare surrounding it. From what I have read, seven out of the nine songs from Thriller were released; and I am sure the Victory helped its sales as well. Just because you and your friends did not like the songs off Bad does not mean that the songs were not well-received among other people around the world. In East Asia, songs from these eras are often considered to be signature Michael Jackson songs. And this is true for Europe to a lesser extent as well. Fanfare alone would not have accounted for almost 50-60 million copies of these albums to have been sold. I personally believe without the huge success of Thriller, which set up the hype and the kind of promotion Bad was afforded, the world tour of Bad and the constant release of singles from the Bad album it would have faded into oblivion. And I don't think Bad has sold anywhere near 50million. And if you look at Bad record sales there were only a few places in Western Europe it sold more than Thriller, and it wasn't by that much, and one of them was UK. Every where else Thriller has sold more, including other parts of the world like Japan. So this myth that Bad sold more than Thriller in every part of the world except for America is a load of crap. [Edited 10/4/07 10:59am] I am not arguing that Bad sold 50 to 60 million copies. I am arguing that Bad and Dangerous combined sold 50 to 60 million copies. I never said Bad sold more than Thriller. And this is ironic that I am writing this to you since you are the one that always berates Michael Jackson fans for going on and on about album sales. I am arguing that around the world the Bad and Dangerous eras were huge not based on albums sales alone but also based on the tours and the cultural impact of Western popular music outside of the US. And of course, the success of Thriller had much to do with his Bad and Dangerous successes. Just like the success of Thriller was based on the success of The Jackson 5, The Jacksons, and Off The Wall. Just because Thriller sold more than Bad in South Korea or Japan does not mean that the former era was more important than the latter. Again album sales are not the sole indicator of impact. And the point is that the Bad era did not fade into oblivion. Its songs were WELL-RECEIVED outside of the urban community in the US. An album can have mass promotion but in the end, fanfare alone cannot account for the success of Bad and Dangerous. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whatsgoingon said: Timmy84 said: I would agree, I only know "Thriller" having been outsold by "Bad" only in England, I think. But again I ask ain't this about how urban America took to Janet? LOL Yea, but someone had to bring up the myth how Michael sold more of Bad than Thriller outside America, and I refuse to allow that myth to go unchallenge, because it ain't true. As for Janet she sure was more popular than MJ in the urban community in the late 80s, why can't people just accept that instead of bringing up awards and standing ovations, what's that got to do with what people were dancing to in clubs? [Edited 10/4/07 13:15pm] Who brought up the myth that Bad sold more than Thriller around the world? Also, impact is not based on album sales alone as you have pointed out several times in other threads. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: Rodya24 said: But this is within the urban community. In the rest of the world, the Bad and Dangerous eras were huge. Like lilgish said earlier, Michael Jackson could promote Bad well into 1989 because of its popularity around the world. Just because Bad was not well-received within the urban community does not mean it would have faded into oblivion without the fanfare surrounding it. From what I have read, seven out of the nine songs from Thriller were released; and I am sure the Victory helped its sales as well. Just because you and your friends did not like the songs off Bad does not mean that the songs were not well-received among other people around the world. In East Asia, songs from these eras are often considered to be signature Michael Jackson songs. And this is true for Europe to a lesser extent as well. Fanfare alone would not have accounted for almost 50-60 million copies of these albums to have been sold. But that's what this whole topic is about: THE URBAN COMMUNITY. Fuck the world for a minute. I realize that. I am frustrated with a particular orger for downplaying the impact of Bad around the world just because it was not well-received within the urban community. Look at lilgish's posts contradicting her argument that Thriller was the peak of his popularity worldwide. I am not the only one who disagrees with this particular orger. Again album sales are not sole indicator of impact. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Rodya24 said: Timmy84 said: But that's what this whole topic is about: THE URBAN COMMUNITY. Fuck the world for a minute. I realize that. I am frustrated with a particular orger for downplaying the impact of Bad around the world just because it was not well-received within the urban community. Look at lilgish's posts contradicting her argument that Thriller was the peak of his popularity worldwide. I am not the only one who disagrees with this particular orger. Again album sales are not sole indicator of impact. LMAO! Well we're never gonna come to an understanding compromise about anything. And first of all this wasn't even about how much Mike sold worldwide. We know the truth is that Michael Joseph Jackson sold 500 million records or some shit, that's more than you and I will ever see in check books, dawg! So what's the use when sales talk is only a bunch of bullshit if no facts are really presented, estimated, scanned, sold, shipped, whatnot, etc. It's fucking insane, really. And again, this is about Janet being a big deal on urban radio and the clubs, not how much Michael Jackson sold. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
We all know why some people try to downplay MJ's achievments after Thriller. And it's got nothing to do with music...you know what I'm saying?  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Well defending it ain't working. Just brush the dirt off the shouldas and move on.
May make threads shorter. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Rodya24 said: whatsgoingon said: I personally believe without the huge success of Thriller, which set up the hype and the kind of promotion Bad was afforded, the world tour of Bad and the constant release of singles from the Bad album it would have faded into oblivion. And I don't think Bad has sold anywhere near 50million. And if you look at Bad record sales there were only a few places in Western Europe it sold more than Thriller, and it wasn't by that much, and one of them was UK. Every where else Thriller has sold more, including other parts of the world like Japan. So this myth that Bad sold more than Thriller in every part of the world except for America is a load of crap. [Edited 10/4/07 10:59am] I am not arguing that Bad sold 50 to 60 million copies. I am arguing that Bad and Dangerous combined sold 50 to 60 million copies. I never said Bad sold more than Thriller. And this is ironic that I am writing this to you since you are the one that always berates Michael Jackson fans for going on and on about album sales. I am arguing that around the world the Bad and Dangerous eras were huge not based on albums sales alone but also based on the tours and the cultural impact of Western popular music outside of the US. And of course, the success of Thriller had much to do with his Bad and Dangerous successes. Just like the success of Thriller was based on the success of The Jackson 5, The Jacksons, and Off The Wall. Just because Thriller sold more than Bad in South Korea or Japan does not mean that the former era was more important than the latter. Again album sales are not the sole indicator of impact. And the point is that the Bad era did not fade into oblivion. Its songs were WELL-RECEIVED outside of the urban community in the US. An album can have mass promotion but in the end, fanfare alone cannot account for the success of Bad and Dangerous. Firstly, someone did say outside America Bad sold more. and moreover some people have said Michael peak was Bad as opposed to Thriller and that is not true even outside America. The problem is too many people try and make Thriller an American phenomenon, solely. And that was not the case. Secondly, I never said the success of Bad was based solely on fanfare, I said the fanfare and the hype contributed to to the successes, much more than it did to the success of Thriller. And I still believe without that the hype, fanfare, world tour and the succes of Thriller that afforded so much hype that surrounded subsequent albums, I doubt very much they would have lived on in the public conscious. And when you come think of it even in Europe when people refer to "vintage Michael Jackson" they mainly are refering to Off The Wall/Thriller/Jacksons. Even on mainstream radio your more likely to hear songs from the Triumph and Destiny albums than post-Thriller albums. Thirdly, the topic is about the urban community and the popularity of Janet in the late 80s, and what some people can't accept is that in the urban community at least, Janet's music was more popular than Michael's at that particular time on the dance floor. [Edited 10/4/07 14:30pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Why does every thread that involves MJ become a long dragged out flaming mess? I thought this one was pretty open and shut. Been gone for a minute, now I'm back with the jump off | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JackieBlue said: Why does every thread that involves MJ become a long dragged out flaming mess? I thought this one was pretty open and shut.
Because people looooove to pitch a bitch. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whatsgoingon said: The only two places in the western wolrld where Bad sold better were Germany and the UK and it wasn't by that much. Everywhere else from Canada to Australia to France to Japan Thriller outsold Bad. Infact in most places Bad halves the sales of Thriller. Well, I'm not from Japan, Canada and Australia.. so I can't tell you much about that, but I can tell you about Europe! Germany and the UK are two of the biggest European markets! Bad did almost match Thriller in e.g. Switzerland and Austria (I will probably look up some more countries on the weekend to give you more details... but then again, since this thread is only about Janet I probably won't tell you what I'll find!).... the peak positions sometimes were better than those for Thriller and it's acompanying singles! In Germany for example he had his first #1 singles with Earth Song and They don't care about us in '95/'96... more than ten years after Thriller! In Austria Dirty Diana was the most successful single of '88! Earth Song was his biggest single in the UK ever! You have to take in account though, that Thriller has 5 years on Bad, several times it reentered the charts (when Bad was released, when Dangerous was released and when HIStory was released)... also it was first released mainly on vinyl! Bad was one of the first CD's released ever! Thriller is the biggest selling album of all time and is still regarded as the more must have Michael Jackson album due to that fact and that's the reason it still sells that much! So todays sales numbers don't exactly reflect what has happened back in the day! Nobody is saying that Thriller wasn't big (saleswise)! It's just that the Bad, Dangerous and HIStory eras and it's accompanying tours were just as big and important and had a bigger impact in the rest of the world (and definitely in Europe) than they probably had in the US!! And I say that in the public conscious in central Europe his peak was the Bad era, the year 1988! Maybe it has to do with the album and it's singles, maybe it has to do with the tour, but that's the way it is! whatsgoingon said: to to the successes, much more than it did to the success of Thriller. And I still believe without that the hype, fanfare, world tour and the succes of Thriller that afforded so much hype that surrounded subsequent albums, I doubt very much they would have lived on in the public conscious. And when you come think of it even in Europe when people refer to "vintage Michael Jackson" they mainly are refering to Off The Wall/Thriller/Jacksons. Even on mainstream radio your more likely to hear songs from the Triumph and Destiny albums than post-Thriller albums.
That is not true at all! So far I can count the times that I have heard a Jacksons or Jackson 5 or Off the wall song on the radio on the fingers of one hand! It's simply not happening! When people in Europe talk about vintage Jackson they talk mainly about Thriller and Bad... Bad more so than Thriller! Thriller in my opinion was more of an american album and Bad more of an european (or international) album! Less RnB, more pop! The Jackson 5 and Jacksons did not really happen that much in Europe, other than in the UK, not to say though, that no one new them! The songs that are mostly played on radio these days are from Bad, Thriller and to a lesser extent HIStory and Dangerous! [Edited 10/4/07 15:12pm] [Edited 10/4/07 15:14pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
whatsgoingon said: Rodya24 said: I am not arguing that Bad sold 50 to 60 million copies. I am arguing that Bad and Dangerous combined sold 50 to 60 million copies. I never said Bad sold more than Thriller. And this is ironic that I am writing this to you since you are the one that always berates Michael Jackson fans for going on and on about album sales. I am arguing that around the world the Bad and Dangerous eras were huge not based on albums sales alone but also based on the tours and the cultural impact of Western popular music outside of the US. And of course, the success of Thriller had much to do with his Bad and Dangerous successes. Just like the success of Thriller was based on the success of The Jackson 5, The Jacksons, and Off The Wall. Just because Thriller sold more than Bad in South Korea or Japan does not mean that the former era was more important than the latter. Again album sales are not the sole indicator of impact. And the point is that the Bad era did not fade into oblivion. Its songs were WELL-RECEIVED outside of the urban community in the US. An album can have mass promotion but in the end, fanfare alone cannot account for the success of Bad and Dangerous. Firstly, someone did say outside America Bad sold more. and moreover some people have said Michael peak was Bad as opposed to Thriller and that is not true even outside America. The problem is too many people try and make Thriller an American phenomenon, solely. And that was not the case. Secondly, I never said the success of Bad was based solely on fanfare, I said the fanfare and the hype contributed to to the successes, much more than it did to the success of Thriller. And I still believe without that the hype, fanfare, world tour and the succes of Thriller that afforded so much hype that surrounded subsequent albums, I doubt very much they would have lived on in the public conscious. And when you come think of it even in Europe when people refer to "vintage Michael Jackson" they mainly are refering to Off The Wall/Thriller/Jacksons. Even on mainstream radio your more likely to hear songs from the Triumph and Destiny albums than post-Thriller albums. Thirdly, the topic is about the urban community and the popularity of Janet in the late 80s, and what some people can't accept is that in the urban community at least, Janet's music was more popular than Michael's at that particular time on the dance floor. [Edited 10/4/07 14:30pm] I disagree. You listen to certain radio stations and ignore the fact that a number of people around the world do not listen to soul stations alone! The fact that you think that the albums after Thriller would not have lived on in public consciousness without the fanfare is absurd. Michael Jackson was a global icon in the '80s. His albums were anticipated by a number of people. Of course, the mass marketing and the world tours helped. The fact that his tours sold out worldwide and the fact that his singles and albums did well around the world support the argument that the music was also WELL-RECEIVED. And the fact that you think on European mainstream radio one is "more likely to hear vintage" Michael Jackson music tells me how biased you are. Have you been to countries in East Asia, South America, and Western and Eastern Europe? Russia? Africa? Australia? Not only in the '80s, but throughout the '90s and '00s. You told me before you lived in both Africa and UK. But when? I am younger than you, and can tell you that in East Asia (in particular in Japan and South Korea), people of my generation do not know much about The Jackson 5 or The Jacksons. They know songs like "Thriller," "Beat It," "Bad," "Smooth Criminal," "Black Or White," and "You Are Not Alone." And as Patrick's post demonstrates, in the UK this seems to be the case to a lesser extent. Music from Bad is not forgotten. And what is "vintage" Michael Jackson music to you might not be "vintage" to people who are younger or are from different countries. As you have often complained, a number of people on Michael Jackson forums have no interest in albums before Thriller. You always play down the success of Michael Jackson, with statements like: his post-Thriller albums without fanfare would have "faded into oblivion." Ridiculous! Just because you do not like his post-Thriller albums does not mean the rest of the world agrees with you! Some might. But others do not. The fact that the Bad, Dangerous, and HIStory tours did well, and the albums were a success, support the argument that there was fantastic marketing AND that the music was well-received if not by the soul audience then by the pop audience! And of course, I realize that Janet Jackson's music much more well-received by the urban audience in the late '80s. But others seem to think that because of this fact, Michael Jackson also suffered a huge loss of popularity in the world. Absurd! [Edited 10/4/07 16:00pm] [Edited 10/4/07 16:03pm] [Edited 10/4/07 16:04pm] [Edited 10/4/07 16:59pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
LightOfArt said: We all know why some people try to downplay MJ's achievments after Thriller. And it's got nothing to do with music...you know what I'm saying?
I know! It is so frustrating! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: Rodya24 said: I realize that. I am frustrated with a particular orger for downplaying the impact of Bad around the world just because it was not well-received within the urban community. Look at lilgish's posts contradicting her argument that Thriller was the peak of his popularity worldwide. I am not the only one who disagrees with this particular orger. Again album sales are not sole indicator of impact. LMAO! Well we're never gonna come to an understanding compromise about anything. And first of all this wasn't even about how much Mike sold worldwide. We know the truth is that Michael Joseph Jackson sold 500 million records or some shit, that's more than you and I will ever see in check books, dawg! So what's the use when sales talk is only a bunch of bullshit if no facts are really presented, estimated, scanned, sold, shipped, whatnot, etc. It's fucking insane, really. And again, this is about Janet being a big deal on urban radio and the clubs, not how much Michael Jackson sold. I know! But some people in this thread have been downplaying his post-Thriller success! I am turning into Patrick with my use of exclamation points! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PatrickS77 said: whatsgoingon said: The only two places in the western wolrld where Bad sold better were Germany and the UK and it wasn't by that much. Everywhere else from Canada to Australia to France to Japan Thriller outsold Bad. Infact in most places Bad halves the sales of Thriller. Well, I'm not from Japan, Canada and Australia.. so I can't tell you much about that, but I can tell you about Europe! Germany and the UK are two of the biggest European markets! Bad did almost match Thriller in e.g. Switzerland and Austria (I will probably look up some more countries on the weekend to give you more details... but then again, since this thread is only about Janet I probably won't tell you what I'll find!).... the peak positions sometimes were better than those for Thriller and it's acompanying singles! In Germany for example he had his first #1 singles with Earth Song and They don't care about us in '95/'96... more than ten years after Thriller! In Austria Dirty Diana was the most successful single of '88! Earth Song was his biggest single in the UK ever! You have to take in account though, that Thriller has 5 years on Bad, several times it reentered the charts (when Bad was released, when Dangerous was released and when HIStory was released)... also it was first released mainly on vinyl! Bad was one of the first CD's released ever! Thriller is the biggest selling album of all time and is still regarded as the more must have Michael Jackson album due to that fact and that's the reason it still sells that much! So todays sales numbers don't exactly reflect what has happened back in the day! Nobody is saying that Thriller wasn't big (saleswise)! It's just that the Bad, Dangerous and HIStory eras and it's accompanying tours were just as big and important and had a bigger impact in the rest of the world (and definitely in Europe) than they probably had in the US!! And I say that in the public conscious in central Europe his peak was the Bad era, the year 1988! Maybe it has to do with the album and it's singles, maybe it has to do with the tour, but that's the way it is! whatsgoingon said: to to the successes, much more than it did to the success of Thriller. And I still believe without that the hype, fanfare, world tour and the succes of Thriller that afforded so much hype that surrounded subsequent albums, I doubt very much they would have lived on in the public conscious. And when you come think of it even in Europe when people refer to "vintage Michael Jackson" they mainly are refering to Off The Wall/Thriller/Jacksons. Even on mainstream radio your more likely to hear songs from the Triumph and Destiny albums than post-Thriller albums.
That is not true at all! So far I can count the times that I have heard a Jacksons or Jackson 5 or Off the wall song on the radio on the fingers of one hand! It's simply not happening! When people in Europe talk about vintage Jackson they talk mainly about Thriller and Bad... Bad more so than Thriller! Thriller in my opinion was more of an american album and Bad more of an european (or international) album! Less RnB, more pop! The Jackson 5 and Jacksons did not really happen that much in Europe, other than in the UK, not to say though, that no one new them! The songs that are mostly played on radio these days are from Bad, Thriller and to a lesser extent HIStory and Dangerous! [Edited 10/4/07 15:12pm] [Edited 10/4/07 15:14pm] Exactly! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Rodya24 said: Timmy84 said: LMAO! Well we're never gonna come to an understanding compromise about anything. And first of all this wasn't even about how much Mike sold worldwide. We know the truth is that Michael Joseph Jackson sold 500 million records or some shit, that's more than you and I will ever see in check books, dawg! So what's the use when sales talk is only a bunch of bullshit if no facts are really presented, estimated, scanned, sold, shipped, whatnot, etc. It's fucking insane, really. And again, this is about Janet being a big deal on urban radio and the clubs, not how much Michael Jackson sold. I know! But some people in this thread have been downplaying his post-Thriller success! I am turning into Patrick with my use of exclamation points! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JackieBlue said: Why does every thread that involves MJ become a long dragged out flaming mess? I thought this one was pretty open and shut.
Because there are those who dislike his music post-Thriller and those who appreciate the entire span of his career. Nothing wrong with either opinion as long as one side does not belittle the opinion of the other. Music is music. What appeals to me might not appeal to another person. But in this thread I question how some misrepresent the impact of his post-Thriller music, in particular outside of the United States. As for other Michael Jackson threads, the answer is obvious since topics on his appearance, sexuality, and public behavior generate discussion even amongst people who are apathetic to his music. [Edited 10/4/07 17:13pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Please keep the thread on its original focus: Michael Jackson's presence in soul music in the late 1980s and how did his presence compare to Janet Jackson's. Anything else is immaterial. THE TRAFFIC JAMMERS, The Org's house band: VAINANDY -- lead singer; NAJEE -- bass; THE AUDIENCE -- guitar; PHUNKDADDY -- rhythm guitar; ALEX de PARIS -- keyboards; Da PRETTYMAN -- keyboards; FUNKENSTEIN -- drums. HOLD ON TO YOUR DRAWERS! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Najee said: Please keep the thread on its original focus: Michael Jackson's presence in soul music in the late 1980s and how did his presence compare to Janet Jackson's. Anything else is immaterial.
People have run "off the wall" on this MJ world sales bullshit. No offense, Rodya, but DAMN! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: Najee said: Please keep the thread on its original focus: Michael Jackson's presence in soul music in the late 1980s and how did his presence compare to Janet Jackson's. Anything else is immaterial.
People have run "off the wall" on this MJ world sales bullshit. No offense, Rodya, but DAMN! I apologize! But this all started on the first page when someone questioned their comparative success in Europe. Then Patrick, whatsgoingon, and I kept responding to each other. The usual suspects... LOL. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |