This thread is a mess...

vainandy said:

trueiopian said:

The Beatles are far more widespread than MJ.

Stop acting like a child and face the music!

I like Michael Jackson but I'm no huge fan of his. However, I have never seen anyone more widespread than Michael Jackson. He's even got Elvis beat. Both Elvis and The Beatles are absolutely huge giants but Michael Jackson was and still is a giant among every single race, every single age group ranging from toddlers to senior citizens, and every single class of people.

I've never seen anything like it. I got into him as a teenager but I noticed through the years that small children were watching and loving Michael Jackson like he was their Barney or Big Bird or something. Hell, that became one of my turnoffs with him later because it sure as hell ain't cool to like something that kids like. Also, parents and grandparents loved him as well. That was another turnoff for me too because it's also not cool to like what old folks like either. Remember, Elvis and The Beatles were huge too but parents and grandparents hated them.

And there is no way The Beatles are more widespread than Michael Jackson. Millions of black people love Michael Jackson. I know very few black people that like even one song from The Beatles. You can't be more widespread than Michael Jackson unless you have every single race and age group on the planet going crazy over you and neither The Beatles nor Elvis did. Michael lost a lot of his popularity when he started looking and acting like a loony toon but just look at how huge it was when he died. It's like he was just as popular as he was during the "Thriller" era all over again. It was the top story on every newscast and 24 hour news channels were broadcasting every single aspect of his death 24 hours a day for damn near an entire month and this is during the cable era where there are mulitiple news channels but every single one of them (well I don't know about the FOX news channel which has always been a racist ass channel) but all the others were broadcastng it 24/7. Poor Farrah (who I absolutely loved in the 1970s) only got about five minutes of coverage but that just goes to show how huge he was.

Hell, even the org still has a damn sticky that has been going on since his death. What's it now....Part 153 or something?

You know that black people are in the minority (21% of the world population), right? Just putting that out there...

trueiopian said:

Unholyalliance said:

Yes because, your comparisons of a studio album that a musical act abandoned to a greatest hits album that actually made it to CD for the first time ever totally made sense and weren't poorly thought out at all.

Abandoned? Invincible was promoted - $25 million budget for promotion. I was comparing the two because they were released around the same time... I don't see how it's poorly thought out. I think you're just upset.

[img:$uid]http://i146.photobucket.com/albums/r276/Mullet2000/derp.gif[/img:$uid]

Both are albums, but 1 was the first time the Beatles had a compilation actually available on CD ever and it was released on the 30 year anniversary after they had broken up. These circumstances were not anywhere near close for MJ at that time. Also, I think we can all agree that the lack of singles from Invincible is proof enough that the project was, eventually, abandoned. I think your example lacks any real thought.

[Edited 1/26/11 18:54pm]

Unholyalliance said:

Both are albums, but 1 was the first time the Beatles had a compilation actually available on CD ever and it was released on the 30 year anniversary after they had broken up. These circumstances were not anywhere near close for MJ. I think your example lacks any real thought.

You're just an upset stan

If anything MJ had more of a leverage over the Beatles; they released a compilation while he released an album with brand new songs.

According to Soundscan, the Beatles were #2 on the Top 50 best album artist of the 00's. MJ was #22. So what's your excuse for that? MJ passed away in 2009 so I'd expect him to be much higher since you think he's far more widespread.

[Edited 1/26/11 19:11pm]

Not to mention his first full-lengthed album in 10 years. Like I said before, you can't win this battle. It's pointless.

Start a fight with Elvis. There's no one superior to the Beatles. No one, including Michael Jackson.

midiscover said:

This thread is a mess...

vainandy said:

I like Michael Jackson but I'm no huge fan of his. However, I have never seen anyone more widespread than Michael Jackson. He's even got Elvis beat. Both Elvis and The Beatles are absolutely huge giants but Michael Jackson was and still is a giant among every single race, every single age group ranging from toddlers to senior citizens, and every single class of people.

I've never seen anything like it. I got into him as a teenager but I noticed through the years that small children were watching and loving Michael Jackson like he was their Barney or Big Bird or something. Hell, that became one of my turnoffs with him later because it sure as hell ain't cool to like something that kids like. Also, parents and grandparents loved him as well. That was another turnoff for me too because it's also not cool to like what old folks like either. Remember, Elvis and The Beatles were huge too but parents and grandparents hated them.

And there is no way The Beatles are more widespread than Michael Jackson. Millions of black people love Michael Jackson. I know very few black people that like even one song from The Beatles. You can't be more widespread than Michael Jackson unless you have every single race and age group on the planet going crazy over you and neither The Beatles nor Elvis did. Michael lost a lot of his popularity when he started looking and acting like a loony toon but just look at how huge it was when he died. It's like he was just as popular as he was during the "Thriller" era all over again. It was the top story on every newscast and 24 hour news channels were broadcasting every single aspect of his death 24 hours a day for damn near an entire month and this is during the cable era where there are mulitiple news channels but every single one of them (well I don't know about the FOX news channel which has always been a racist ass channel) but all the others were broadcastng it 24/7. Poor Farrah (who I absolutely loved in the 1970s) only got about five minutes of coverage but that just goes to show how huge he was.

Hell, even the org still has a damn sticky that has been going on since his death. What's it now....Part 153 or something?

You know that black people are in the minority (21% of the world population), right? Just putting that out there...

Well yeah, if you combine all the non-English speaking countries that probably have entirely different pop culture icons than we do and even they know who Michael Jackson is.

trueiopian said:

Unholyalliance said:

Both are albums, but 1 was the first time the Beatles had a compilation actually available on CD ever and it was released on the 30 year anniversary after they had broken up. These circumstances were not anywhere near close for MJ. I think your example lacks any real thought.

You're just an upset stan

[Edited 1/26/11 19:03pm]

That's not how you win an argument. If anything, it only makes you look worse.

vainandy said:

midiscover said:

This thread is a mess...

You know that black people are in the minority (21% of the world population), right? Just putting that out there...

Well yeah, if you combine all the non-English speaking countries that probably have entirely different pop culture icons than we do and even they know who Michael Jackson is.

I'm black and I sure as hell know the Beatles. The Motown artists sure knew who they were too. I'm just laughing at the notion not a lot of black folks know even a single Beatle. Or don't choose to but that's their prerogative I guess.

Sesame Street

MickyDolenz said:

Sesame Street

Now THAT'S a pop culture icon!

smoothcriminal12 said:

trueiopian said:

You're just an upset stan

[Edited 1/26/11 19:03pm]

That's not how you win an argument. If anything, it only makes you look worse.

I'm not trying to win an argument. The other user is acting like a crazed stan instead of pointing out why he disagrees with my post. So I'm calling him out But of course I see why you would feel indifferent...

Timmy84 said:

vainandy said:

Well yeah, if you combine all the non-English speaking countries that probably have entirely different pop culture icons than we do and even they know who Michael Jackson is.

I'm black and I sure as hell know the Beatles. The Motown artists sure knew who they were too. I'm just laughing at the notion not a lot of black folks know even a single Beatle. Or don't choose to but that's their prerogative I guess.

I'm an African American black negro myself and gosh golly do I know about the Beatles and their impact. My dad, an African American black negro as well understands who they are too and agrees that they can't be topped. And he's a hardcore Michael fan, I'm talking about pretty much all his life.

The Beatles, Michael - in that order.

musicjunky318 said:

Timmy84 said:

I'm black and I sure as hell know the Beatles. The Motown artists sure knew who they were too. I'm just laughing at the notion not a lot of black folks know even a single Beatle. Or don't choose to but that's their prerogative I guess.

I'm an African American black negro myself and gosh golly do I know about the Beatles and their impact. My dad, an African American black negro as well understands who they are too and agrees that they can't be topped. And he's a hardcore Michael fan, I'm talking about pretty much all his life.

The Beatles, Michael - in that order.

I'm thinking at this point, if anyone is of ANY COLOR and they don't know who either the Beatles or Michael are, get out the cave they came out of! Hell if they don't know Elvis, same damn thing.

vainandy said:

midiscover said:

This thread is a mess...

You know that black people are in the minority (21% of the world population), right? Just putting that out there...

Well yeah, if you combine all the non-English speaking countries that probably have entirely different pop culture icons than we do and even they know who Michael Jackson is.

Everyone knows the Beatles

Timmy84 said:

musicjunky318 said:

I'm an African American black negro myself and gosh golly do I know about the Beatles and their impact. My dad, an African American black negro as well understands who they are too and agrees that they can't be topped. And he's a hardcore Michael fan, I'm talking about pretty much all his life.

The Beatles, Michael - in that order.

I'm thinking at this point, if anyone is of ANY COLOR and they don't know who either the Beatles or Michael are, get out the cave they came out of! Hell if they don't know Elvis, same damn thing.

I know. It's basic stuff. 2 + 2 = 4. It's like not knowing who this is:

musicjunky318 said:

Not to mention his first full-lengthed album in 10 years. Like I said before, you can't win this battle. It's pointless.

Start a fight with Elvis. There's no one superior to the Beatles. No one, including Michael Jackson.

We are talking icon status though. They are not as commonplace in pop culture as Michael is. I know too many people that only found out about the Beatles in adolescense. The image/music isnt as well known to as big an audience simply because they are not talked about as much. I did not hear about them growing up and I've always been a pop culture freak. And it has nothing to do with them not being as modern as Michael, as Elvis was someone I'd always heard about too. People go on about MJ stans being delusional with his status, but I think Beatles fans take the cake.

musicjunky318 said:

Timmy84 said:

I'm black and I sure as hell know the Beatles. The Motown artists sure knew who they were too. I'm just laughing at the notion not a lot of black folks know even a single Beatle. Or don't choose to but that's their prerogative I guess.

I'm an African American black negro myself and gosh golly do I know about the Beatles and their impact. My dad, an African American black negro as well understands who they are too and agrees that they can't be topped. And he's a hardcore Michael fan, I'm talking about pretty much all his life.

The Beatles, Michael - in that order.

Yeah, but that's two people. Go out on a street corner and ask some black folks of any age....Michael Jackson or The Beatles?....and see what answer you get.

trueiopian said:

Unholyalliance said:

Both are albums, but 1 was the first time the Beatles had a compilation actually available on CD ever and it was released on the 30 year anniversary after they had broken up. These circumstances were not anywhere near close for MJ. I think your example lacks any real thought.

You're just an upset stan

If anything MJ had more of a leverage over the Beatles; they released a compilation while he released an album with brand new songs.

[Edited 1/26/11 18:54pm]

Compilations of extremely popular dead/defunct acts always sell really well, especially better than that of a once popular act that was no where near his peak, especially one who abandoned their project at the time. Guess it took too much thought to come to such a simple conclusion.

A better example would be One and Number Ones, but guess I gotta be a MJ stan to think of the obvious. =/

vainandy said:

musicjunky318 said:

I'm an African American black negro myself and gosh golly do I know about the Beatles and their impact. My dad, an African American black negro as well understands who they are too and agrees that they can't be topped. And he's a hardcore Michael fan, I'm talking about pretty much all his life.

The Beatles, Michael - in that order.

Yeah, but that's two people. Go out on a street corner and ask some black folks of any age....Michael Jackson or The Beatles?....and see what answer you get.

black folks do not care about the beetles... Yeah I said it....

now im going to go out in hiding.....

trueiopian said:

I'm not trying to win an argument. The other user is acting like a crazed stan instead of pointing out why he disagrees with my post. So I'm calling him out But of course I see why you would feel indifferent...

You just made a silly comparison, that's all. I didn't agree or disagree with you. That wasn't the point of my posts. I don't think that my posts are even that hard to comprehend.

TotalAlisa said:

vainandy said:

Yeah, but that's two people. Go out on a street corner and ask some black folks of any age....Michael Jackson or The Beatles?....and see what answer you get.

black folks do not care about the beetles... Yeah I said it....

now im going to go out in hiding.....

Now you know you can't generalize because some folks will take you seriously as if you meant absolutely every single black person on the planet. I've learned that the hard way through the years. You have to always cover yourself by using words like "most". It's like being a politician around here sometimes, you have to proofread your posts before you hit that "send" button.

See, I had to edit my post already.

.

.

.

[Edited 1/26/11 19:31pm]

Unholyalliance said:

trueiopian said:

You're just an upset stan

If anything MJ had more of a leverage over the Beatles; they released a compilation while he released an album with brand new songs.

[Edited 1/26/11 18:54pm]

Compilations of extremely popular dead/defunct acts always sell really well, especially better than that of a once popular act that was no where near his peak, especially one who abandoned their project at the time. Guess it took too much thought to come to such a simple conclusion.

A better example would be One and Number Ones, but guess I gotta be a MJ stan to think of the obvious. =/

Now you're just making excuses. Once again, I was comparing the two because they were released around the same time. But if you want to make the 1 and Number Ones comparison go right ahead. The Beatles still sold more. Another excuse... waits for it ...

BTW, I understand that MJ is easily one of the most recognizable names in the world. Like I've said already I think he's a bigger pop culture icon because his name is synonymous with many things and he's basically the poster child of the term 'Pop icon'. BUT the Beatles take the cake for being far greater widespread artist. Their influence is greater and they're far more respected. There's just no denying that. They didn't need an image or music videos to become iconic.

vainandy said:

musicjunky318 said:

I'm an African American black negro myself and gosh golly do I know about the Beatles and their impact. My dad, an African American black negro as well understands who they are too and agrees that they can't be topped. And he's a hardcore Michael fan, I'm talking about pretty much all his life.

The Beatles, Michael - in that order.

Yeah, but that's two people. Go out on a street corner and ask some black folks of any age....Michael Jackson or The Beatles?....and see what answer you get.

No fucking duh.

But like I give a fuck about that? Of course it's gonna be Michael. HELLO!

But I bet if you ask them about the Marvelettes or Miracles, they won't know shit. So I can't rely my knowledge on people I know in the hood. Hell people in the hood probably big up Lil Wayne where I'm at now. So much for the black youth.

And this generalizing is stupid. If black folks "didn't know", you think none of us would've said anything about them about now?

Jesus, what planet am I living on?

Timmy84 said:

vainandy said:

Yeah, but that's two people. Go out on a street corner and ask some black folks of any age....Michael Jackson or The Beatles?....and see what answer you get.

No fucking duh.

But like I give a fuck about that? Of course it's gonna be Michael. HELLO!

But I bet if you ask them about the Marvelettes or Miracles, they won't know shit. So I can't rely my knowledge on people I know in the hood. Hell people in the hood probably big up Lil Wayne where I'm at now. So much for the black youth.

It doesn't have to be youth. You can ask plenty over 40. Everyone knows who The Beatles are but if you ask them to list some songs (I'm not saying they have to like the songs, I'm saying to simply list some songs....that shows just how much they have been exposed to them or have cared to be exposed to them), a lot of them may name 3 or 4 Beatles songs and maybe 15 Michael Jackson songs. Come to think of it, I think the results would still be in Michael Jackson's favor if you asked a lot of white people to do the same thing also. People of all races have just been much more exposed to and have more knowledge of Michael Jackson than The Beatles, especially since the 1980s.

TotalAlisa said:

black folks do not care about the beAtles...

I'm black, and the Fabs were one of the first groups I liked. I even have Magical Mystery Tour (their Graffiti Bridge) on DVD. I used to have it on videotape before that. Also, if blacks don't care about the group, how come so many of them covered Beatle songs?

vainandy said:

musicjunky318 said:

I'm an African American black negro myself and gosh golly do I know about the Beatles and their impact. My dad, an African American black negro as well understands who they are too and agrees that they can't be topped. And he's a hardcore Michael fan, I'm talking about pretty much all his life.

The Beatles, Michael - in that order.

Yeah, but that's two people. Go out on a street corner and ask some black folks of any age....Michael Jackson or The Beatles?....and see what answer you get.

Oh I know what answer I'll get. You don't have to ask me that. We'll say Michael but the reality is we aren't the only people on the planet. This is a different discussion.

If you asked the black community, Aretha Franklin or Madonna, who do you think would win? Ciccone wouldn't have a chance in hell. However, if you polled England, if you polled Brazil, if you polled Japan, and then add it up, Madonna is dominant.

And that's what I'm trying to get people to understand. It wasn't until recently did I begin to truly understand the scope of the Beatles impact but after doing research on their achievements it's an undoubted fact. They are the #1 act in the world. From the U.S., all over Asia, the entire European continent, South America, Australia, they are unrivaled. MJ only defeats them in African markets. They're billions and billions of people on this earth.

MickyDolenz said:

TotalAlisa said:

black folks do not care about the beAtles...

I'm black, and the Fabs were one of the first groups I liked. I even have Magical Mystery Tour (their Graffiti Bridge) on DVD. I used to have it on videotape before that. Also, if blacks don't care about the group, how come so many of them covered Beatle songs?

THANK YOU!!!!!!

vainandy said:

TotalAlisa said:

black folks do not care about the beetles... Yeah I said it....

now im going to go out in hiding.....

Now you know you can't generalize because some folks will take you seriously as if you meant absolutely every single black person on the planet. I've learned that the hard way through the years. You have to always cover yourself by using words like "most". It's like being a politician around here sometimes, you have to proofread your posts before you hit that "send" button.

See, I had to edit my post already.

.

.

.

[Edited 1/26/11 19:31pm]

at this point... i have nothing to lose, people on the org ALWAYS over analyze my post anyways... I can say the exact same thing another person says... but my posts will be targeted... So its like I don't care. Im used to the popularity and fans on here...

Lets watch and see how many people reply to this posts and the one I made before...

vainandy said:

musicjunky318 said:

I'm an African American black negro myself and gosh golly do I know about the Beatles and their impact. My dad, an African American black negro as well understands who they are too and agrees that they can't be topped. And he's a hardcore Michael fan, I'm talking about pretty much all his life.

The Beatles, Michael - in that order.

Yeah, but that's two people. Go out on a street corner and ask some black folks of any age....Michael Jackson or The Beatles?....and see what answer you get.

That's like asking them Luther Vandross or Johnny Cash?

MickyDolenz said:

TotalAlisa said:

black folks do not care about the beAtles...

I'm black, and the Fabs were one of the first groups I liked. I even have Magical Mystery Tour (their Graffiti Bridge) on DVD. I used to have it on videotape before that. Also, if blacks don't care about the group, how come so many of them covered Beatle songs?

Michael Jackson included!

I'm sure the same people that think the Beatles made little impact on black people/music are the same ones that think Bob Dylan made little impact too.

[Edited 1/26/11 19:47pm]