I doubt Janet's losing sleep over that little fact. It's bad enough Michael was obsessed with trophies and charts, and I'm sure she heard plenty of it from him. You know he prob. called her more to congratulate her on making #1 than to just say hi to her.

Rihanna wasn't even born when Control came out, and a kid when Destiny's Child were having hits.

Besides, Janet would prob. call herself an actress or an all around entertainer before calling herself a singer. She was pushed into singing by her dad, wasn't she? Then she took it upon herself to come up with something that would set her apart from her brothers.

I'm glad Katy and Rihanna have success, don't get me wrong. But to get into the whole charting aspect of it is kind of show biz nonsense. Either you like the songs or you don't. Most of the songs we like were never #1.

Who here would say "When Doves Cry" is Prince's best song because it was #1? Enough said..

mjscarousal said:

Unholyalliance said:

I never understood why this is... It's as if there's some insecurity lurking in there somewhere...

You of all people should not be saying this... I like you but just being honest lol I dont see the point you are making with this when you and I both know for a fact how the Prince fans carry on on this site when it comes to specific artists dont even have to be a Jackson.

lol Guess it didn't come off right?

I know that Prince fans like to carry on when it comes to certain artists I think they feel pose as threats of some sort. I mean...I never seen anyone here bat an eye when someone like Chris Brown gets crowned/praised as anything or whatever. But as soon as it's MJ then all hell breaks loose. In that case, I believe it to be insecurity. Example, when I'm even reading an article that's pro-Prince and somewhere in there the author bashes MJ. Like, really? It's as if I'm reading something from a stan rather than an actual music journalist. That's not even necessary. Otoh, I can read a ton of articles about MJ and not once will any of them mention Prince, at all.

It's really weird.

I just find it weird how some fans can bash Whitneys voice or music but throw a hissy fit when someone calls Rihannas music trash... I dont quite understand that logic especially when its backed up with maturely and intelligently unlike most of the criticism towards Whitney which is not even related to the womans music. Its just very biased and pointing that out doesnt show any signs of insecurity.. any artist fans could have been referenced it didnt have to be Prince.

Well, everyone, essentially, has their own opinons, and not all of us are gonna agree. Especially when I think that someone is just being young and dumb. It's not insecure pointing out someone else's hypocrisy. That's the most fun part about good debates. =)

Then again, 20 years from now when Rhianna has passed her prime and is doped up doing some crazy shit and there's a new young girl in town being the hot thing at the moment it'll be the same thing I think. While I may feel that Whitney's singing is far superior even if the way she was singing was kinda screwed up her voice in the long run. =/

dalsh327 said:

I doubt Janet's losing sleep over that little fact. It's bad enough Michael was obsessed with trophies and charts, and I'm sure she heard plenty of it from him. You know he prob. called her more to congratulate her on making #1 than to just say hi to her.

Rihanna wasn't even born when Control came out, and a kid when Destiny's Child were having hits.

Besides, Janet would prob. call herself an actress or an all around entertainer before calling herself a singer. She was pushed into singing by her dad, wasn't she? Then she took it upon herself to come up with something that would set her apart from her brothers.

I'm glad Katy and Rihanna have success, don't get me wrong. But to get into the whole charting aspect of it is kind of show biz nonsense. Either you like the songs or you don't. Most of the songs we like were never #1.

Who here would say "When Doves Cry" is Prince's best song because it was #1? Enough said..

Preach it.

Unholyalliance said:

mjscarousal said:

lol Guess it didn't come off right?

I know that Prince fans like to carry on when it comes to certain artists I think they feel pose as threats of some sort. I mean...I never seen anyone here bat an eye when someone like Chris Brown gets crowned/praised as anything or whatever. But as soon as it's MJ then all hell breaks loose. In that case, I believe it to be insecurity. Example, when I'm even reading an article that's pro-Prince and somewhere in there the author bashes MJ. Like, really? It's as if I'm reading something from a stan rather than an actual music journalist. That's not even necessary. Otoh, I can read a ton of articles about MJ and not once will any of them mention Prince, at all.

It's really weird.

I just find it weird how some fans can bash Whitneys voice or music but throw a hissy fit when someone calls Rihannas music trash... I dont quite understand that logic especially when its backed up with maturely and intelligently unlike most of the criticism towards Whitney which is not even related to the womans music. Its just very biased and pointing that out doesnt show any signs of insecurity.. any artist fans could have been referenced it didnt have to be Prince.

Well, everyone, essentially, has their own opinons, and not all of us are gonna agree. Especially when I think that someone is just being young and dumb. It's not insecure pointing out someone else's hypocrisy. That's the most fun part about good debates. =)

Then again, 20 years from now when Rhianna has passed her prime and is doped up doing some crazy shit and there's a new young girl in town being the hot thing at the moment it'll be the same thing I think. While I may feel that Whitney's singing is far superior even if the way she was singing was kinda screwed up her voice in the long run. =/

lol I did misunderstand your point and my bad for that... I get your point now and I agree.

dalsh327 said:

I doubt Janet's losing sleep over that little fact. It's bad enough Michael was obsessed with trophies and charts, and I'm sure she heard plenty of it from him. You know he prob. called her more to congratulate her on making #1 than to just say hi to her.

Rihanna wasn't even born when Control came out, and a kid when Destiny's Child were having hits.

Besides, Janet would prob. call herself an actress or an all around entertainer before calling herself a singer. She was pushed into singing by her dad, wasn't she? Then she took it upon herself to come up with something that would set her apart from her brothers.

I'm glad Katy and Rihanna have success, don't get me wrong. But to get into the whole charting aspect of it is kind of show biz nonsense. Either you like the songs or you don't. Most of the songs we like were never #1.

Who here would say "When Doves Cry" is Prince's best song because it was #1? Enough said..

If that was his reason for calling Janet, it's an adapted behaviour from his father *ahem* role model in early life, besides both Jacksons ARE competitive and had to be to get where they are. He didn't keep trophies around his house, but he enjoyed what he was doing and it was hard work that paid off, not buying his fame like some people today can easily do with a few clicks and spending a few cents or dollars compared to before. Right now is an age where singles appeal to people more than albums, so to even get a lot of number ones off an already great selling album is an honor the way it was for mj, janet, madonna, mariah and witney. Rihanna has gotten high single sales but not album sales. Britney on the other hand had high album sales for years, but not many number ones or top 10's

mjscarousal said:

dalsh327 said:

I doubt Janet's losing sleep over that little fact. It's bad enough Michael was obsessed with trophies and charts, and I'm sure she heard plenty of it from him. You know he prob. called her more to congratulate her on making #1 than to just say hi to her.

Rihanna wasn't even born when Control came out, and a kid when Destiny's Child were having hits.

Besides, Janet would prob. call herself an actress or an all around entertainer before calling herself a singer. She was pushed into singing by her dad, wasn't she? Then she took it upon herself to come up with something that would set her apart from her brothers.

I'm glad Katy and Rihanna have success, don't get me wrong. But to get into the whole charting aspect of it is kind of show biz nonsense. Either you like the songs or you don't. Most of the songs we like were never #1.

Who here would say "When Doves Cry" is Prince's best song because it was #1? Enough said..

But again this is the same old issue everytime i see a Rihanna thread. Look im not coming to defend her as anything more than todays pop star, thats it, thats all she is, and times are very different and you cant compare 2 artists work in totally different eras and with totally different worlds and surroundings, just like you cant compare how Prince was when he was 25 and now that he is 52, alot of people want that old Prince back but be real, he is a 52 year old man, you cant think like a 25 year old anymore.

With Rihanna i put it into baseball terminolgy, you cant compare a home run hitter like Barry Bonds to Hank Aaron. Yes Bonds hit more, but he also played in a whole new world than Hank did, the homerun hitters of today are all jacked up on excercise and weights and whatever, but back in the day u didnt have those things, you had to compete with the pitcher and get your pitch to hit. Now they talk about someone like Albert Pujols, hitting a 400ft hr? really, back in the day a 400ft shot was a fly out to centerfield, so i cant look at Albert hitting 500 homeruns or A-rod hitting 600 quicker than any player before because there are so man new variables, small parks, different dimensions, weight programs, suppliments that are allowed in, strike zone adjustments etc...but to say A-rod is better than a guy that played 30 years ago because he hit more quicker is fucking foolish.

Which is why Rihanna's chart feat is nothing more than a number in her time, not relevant to anything but HER TIME case closed.

NaQu said:

We Found Love is her 11th #1 single.

I don't like Rihanna's music, but this is still funny to me.

[Edited 11/2/11 11:29am]

Why are people surprised by this? Look at her fan base - teen/college aged females and males from different ethnicities and backgrounds with some adults thrown in for those rare loveable jams like Rude Boy and Umbrella.

I know most on here can't stand her voice but the chick is highly marketable and appealing. If she ever gets a reality show then all the Beyonce's, Gaga's, Britney's and Katy's can just sit down.

And the music industry is no more skewed today than it was in Janet's day. I love Miss Jackson but some of her #1s weren't all that and her voice is no better or worse than Rihanna's.

I agree with the skewed part somewhat, Janet was robbed of some hits. It's hard to believe Pleasure Principle was not a top 10, and If & Alright weren't #1. Rhythm Nation, Come Back to Me and Anytime, Anyplace were VERY close to the #1 position.

And I'm one of the few who doesn't think her voice is that terrible, it's just not always used the way it could be. Or maybe it went down with time, who knows. I think she sounded cute on her first 2 albums, and kind of flat after that.

HotGritz said:

Why are people surprised by this? Look at her fan base - teen/college aged females and males from different ethnicities and backgrounds with some adults thrown in for those rare loveable jams like Rude Boy and Umbrella.

I know most on here can't stand her voice but the chick is highly marketable and appealing. If she ever gets a reality show then all the Beyonce's, Gaga's, Britney's and Katy's can just sit down.

And the music industry is no more skewed today than it was in Janet's day. I love Miss Jackson but some of her #1s weren't all that and her voice is no better or worse than Rihanna's.

Its not gonna make her sing any better. She can have all of the reality shows and product endorsements in the world.

Her career is manufactured. The difference between her and Beyonce and Lady Gaga is that THEY CAN SING. In a few years, the org will be buzzing about some other cute little 19 year old who has taken her place. Selling records has nothing to do with talent. The pop music game is an image game. It has been for a long time now.

BlaqueKnight said:

HotGritz said:

Why are people surprised by this? Look at her fan base - teen/college aged females and males from different ethnicities and backgrounds with some adults thrown in for those rare loveable jams like Rude Boy and Umbrella.

I know most on here can't stand her voice but the chick is highly marketable and appealing. If she ever gets a reality show then all the Beyonce's, Gaga's, Britney's and Katy's can just sit down.

And the music industry is no more skewed today than it was in Janet's day. I love Miss Jackson but some of her #1s weren't all that and her voice is no better or worse than Rihanna's.

Its not gonna make her sing any better. She can have all of the reality shows and product endorsements in the world.

Her career is manufactured. The difference between her and Beyonce and Lady Gaga is that THEY CAN SING. In a few years, the org will be buzzing about some other cute little 19 year old who has taken her place. Selling records has nothing to do with talent. The pop music game is an image game. It has been for a long time now.

That's why I said she's (Rihanna) is highly marketable and appealing. In the music industry, its not just about talent but about how many people can relate to you in some way - its about likeability AND sex appeal. Rihanna doesn't offend (like Gaga might), she doesn't make girls feel unpretty or boys feel like they don't have a chance with her (the way Beyonce might). Rihanna has that girl next door appeal/it factor which goes a long way in the entertainment industry. Hell look at Justin Beiber! Can he vocally compare to any of the top male singers from the last decade and can he even dance like an Usher or Chris Brown or even Justin Timberlake? Hell nah! But the girls sure do like him and the boys think they can do just as well if not better than him. Oh, and the parents are alright with him too. You can play his music at the dinner table.

dalsh327 said:

I doubt Janet's losing sleep over that little fact. It's bad enough Michael was obsessed with trophies and charts, and I'm sure she heard plenty of it from him. You know he prob. called her more to congratulate her on making #1 than to just say hi to her.

Rihanna wasn't even born when Control came out, and a kid when Destiny's Child were having hits.

Besides, Janet would prob. call herself an actress or an all around entertainer before calling herself a singer. She was pushed into singing by her dad, wasn't she? Then she took it upon herself to come up with something that would set her apart from her brothers.

I'm glad Katy and Rihanna have success, don't get me wrong. But to get into the whole charting aspect of it is kind of show biz nonsense. Either you like the songs or you don't. Most of the songs we like were never #1.

Who here would say "When Doves Cry" is Prince's best song because it was #1?

Enough said..

Amen to that! RiRi is all looks no talent.Even though "Rude Boy" is my fav song by her.Even Prince likes it. He added to his playlist live in his w2a tour its a name he used to have sans my avatar...I like Riri songs more than Beyonces teeny booper songs.

[Edited 11/5/11 16:16pm]

KCOOLMUZIQ said:

dalsh327 said:

I doubt Janet's losing sleep over that little fact. It's bad enough Michael was obsessed with trophies and charts, and I'm sure she heard plenty of it from him. You know he prob. called her more to congratulate her on making #1 than to just say hi to her.

Rihanna wasn't even born when Control came out, and a kid when Destiny's Child were having hits.

Besides, Janet would prob. call herself an actress or an all around entertainer before calling herself a singer. She was pushed into singing by her dad, wasn't she? Then she took it upon herself to come up with something that would set her apart from her brothers.

I'm glad Katy and Rihanna have success, don't get me wrong. But to get into the whole charting aspect of it is kind of show biz nonsense. Either you like the songs or you don't. Most of the songs we like were never #1.

Who here would say "When Doves Cry" is Prince's best song because it was #1?

Enough said..

Amen to that! RiRi is all looks no talent.Even though "Rude Boy" is my fav song by her.Even Prince likes it. He added to his playlist live in his w2a tour its a name he used to have sans my avatar...I like Riri songs moreb than Beyonces teeny booper songs.

Thats the only thing I give her peoples credit for. While place her as well as Beyonce in the same category as far as music goes and even talent cause the ONLY thing B got are vocals and nothing else. I definitly can see why her music is appealing. Im not a fan at all but her music seems to be more interesting and experimental than her counterparts. Like you know what to expect from a Gaga.. a played out 80's madonna rip of song and you always know what to expect from Beyonce. With Rihanna its completely different as well as her image... it doesnt get old or boring and it doesnt seem like shes trying to rip someone off or copy ex. Gaga-Madonna.. Beyonce- Tina Turner.. etc while it might be just an "image" and not her personality but it still works.

But at the end of the day its just pop and really shouldnt be taken seriously or compared to the pop industry of the past...

HotGritz said:

BlaqueKnight said:

Its not gonna make her sing any better. She can have all of the reality shows and product endorsements in the world.

Her career is manufactured. The difference between her and Beyonce and Lady Gaga is that THEY CAN SING. In a few years, the org will be buzzing about some other cute little 19 year old who has taken her place. Selling records has nothing to do with talent. The pop music game is an image game. It has been for a long time now.

That's why I said she's (Rihanna) is highly marketable and appealing. In the music industry, its not just about talent but about how many people can relate to you in some way - its about likeability AND sex appeal. Rihanna doesn't offend (like Gaga might), she doesn't make girls feel unpretty or boys feel like they don't have a chance with her (the way Beyonce might). Rihanna has that girl next door appeal/it factor which goes a long way in the entertainment industry. Hell look at Justin Beiber! Can he vocally compare to any of the top male singers from the last decade and can he even dance like an Usher or Chris Brown or even Justin Timberlake? Hell nah! But the girls sure do like him and the boys think they can do just as well if not better than him. Oh, and the parents are alright with him too. You can play his music at the dinner table.

i think this is what alot of people are saying about the difference in todays music industry from when janet made her mark. you basically said there is not a difference between janet and rhianna , but just by this post you proved thats not true. janet was a chubby girl dressed in all black when she dropped control, she didnt get love from mtv or pop radio until she had a hit on her hands. control was great music and hard work. rhiana on the other hand didnt have to do much except go in the studio and yoodle, i mean sing the songs (sorry but regardless if you dont think janet can sing or not she is a much better singer then rhiana). i dont understand why its a big deal she passed janet, i mean she also passed stevie but nobody cares long as she passed janet,who gets so much unnecessary shade.

lowkey said:

HotGritz said:

That's why I said she's (Rihanna) is highly marketable and appealing. In the music industry, its not just about talent but about how many people can relate to you in some way - its about likeability AND sex appeal. Rihanna doesn't offend (like Gaga might), she doesn't make girls feel unpretty or boys feel like they don't have a chance with her (the way Beyonce might). Rihanna has that girl next door appeal/it factor which goes a long way in the entertainment industry. Hell look at Justin Beiber! Can he vocally compare to any of the top male singers from the last decade and can he even dance like an Usher or Chris Brown or even Justin Timberlake? Hell nah! But the girls sure do like him and the boys think they can do just as well if not better than him. Oh, and the parents are alright with him too. You can play his music at the dinner table.

i think this is what alot of people are saying about the difference in todays music industry from when janet made her mark. you basically said there is not a difference between janet and rhianna , but just by this post you proved thats not true. janet was a chubby girl dressed in all black when she dropped control, she didnt get love from mtv or pop radio until she had a hit on her hands. control was great music and hard work. rhiana on the other hand didnt have to do much except go in the studio and yoodle, i mean sing the songs (sorry but regardless if you dont think janet can sing or not she is a much better singer then rhiana). i dont understand why its a big deal she passed janet, i mean she also passed stevie but nobody cares long as she passed janet,who gets so much unnecessary shade.

you know what i notice that too, i came across alot of people on social sites like oh she can's sings she's whispers and idk if they referring to the album in the 2000's but i know a guy whose a big janet fan played her greatest hits to those who never really listen to her and they still were like unimpressed i mean look at the singers we have such as Dev who really talking in her songs and kesha and etc

[Edited 11/3/11 20:44pm]

HohnerCatcher said:

All I wanna know is does this mean "Moves Like Jagger" is finally ovah?

Seriously, because I have heard it has been #1 for months.

Sorry that I'm not reading all the other replies, but IMO, neither Janet nor Rihanna are singers so the charts are just for people who care about that sort of thing, not whether they're listening to good voices.

Rihanna's benefiting from Billboard's change to their Hot 100 formula and the weight they give to digital singles sales. If this was the year 2000-2001, acts like Rihanna and Katy Perry would be washouts. Just ask Rhianna's prototype Samantha Mumba.

I think Billboard needs to readjust their charting rules. iTunes is what's killing the industry.

chamber said:

Rihanna's benefiting from Billboard's change to their Hot 100 formula and the weight they give to digital singles sales. If this was the year 2000-2001, acts like Rihanna and Katy Perry would be washouts. Just ask Rhianna's prototype Samantha Mumba.

I think Billboard needs to readjust their charting rules. iTunes is what's killing the industry.

That actually doesn't apply to Rihanna. She gets extended airplay anyway. Artists like Britney benefited most from the change since she never owned radio.

chamber said:

Rihanna's benefiting from Billboard's change to their Hot 100 formula and the weight they give to digital singles sales. If this was the year 2000-2001, acts like Rihanna and Katy Perry would be washouts. Just ask Rhianna's prototype Samantha Mumba.

I think Billboard needs to readjust their charting rules. iTunes is what's killing the industry.

Now see, I think iTunes saved the industry (or at least put it on life support). Killing the single and colluding to keep album prices high is what started the industry's downward spiral, which was then hastened by the rise of Napster. The iTunes Music Store actually got people to start buying music again.

HotGritz said:

NaQu said:

We Found Love is her 11th #1 single.

I don't like Rihanna's music, but this is still funny to me.

[Edited 11/2/11 11:29am]

Why are people surprised by this? Look at her fan base - teen/college aged females and males from different ethnicities and backgrounds with some adults thrown in for those rare loveable jams like Rude Boy and Umbrella.

I know most on here can't stand her voice but the chick is highly marketable and appealing. If she ever gets a reality show then all the Beyonce's, Gaga's, Britney's and Katy's can just sit down.

And the music industry is no more skewed today than it was in Janet's day. I love Miss Jackson but some of her #1s weren't all that and her voice is no better or worse than Rihanna's.

NaQu appears to have some strange thing against Janet. It's kind of disturbing, actually.

lowkey said:

HotGritz said:

That's why I said she's (Rihanna) is highly marketable and appealing. In the music industry, its not just about talent but about how many people can relate to you in some way - its about likeability AND sex appeal. Rihanna doesn't offend (like Gaga might), she doesn't make girls feel unpretty or boys feel like they don't have a chance with her (the way Beyonce might). Rihanna has that girl next door appeal/it factor which goes a long way in the entertainment industry. Hell look at Justin Beiber! Can he vocally compare to any of the top male singers from the last decade and can he even dance like an Usher or Chris Brown or even Justin Timberlake? Hell nah! But the girls sure do like him and the boys think they can do just as well if not better than him. Oh, and the parents are alright with him too. You can play his music at the dinner table.

i think this is what alot of people are saying about the difference in todays music industry from when janet made her mark. you basically said there is not a difference between janet and rhianna , but just by this post you proved thats not true. janet was a chubby girl dressed in all black when she dropped control, she didnt get love from mtv or pop radio until she had a hit on her hands. control was great music and hard work. rhiana on the other hand didnt have to do much except go in the studio and yoodle, i mean sing the songs (sorry but regardless if you dont think janet can sing or not she is a much better singer then rhiana). i dont understand why its a big deal she passed janet, i mean she also passed stevie but nobody cares long as she passed janet,who gets so much unnecessary shade.

So true. I don't know why, but some people just refuse to give her props. Okay, you think she can't sing. Okay, you think she can't dance. Whatever. But you cannot deny the indellible print she's made on music and videos. She's one of the only female pop stars to come to prominence in the '80s that is still around doing her thing.

In what, exactly, is Janet talented? On another note, I love how her stans are quick to claim #1 hits mean nothing. Yet, in the same breath, they stress Janet's charts success.

Rihanna has one over Janet. Both are equally (non) talented, but Rihanna has more success. Therefore, Rihanna is better than Janet. For the low IQ stans (most of them, actually), I'm stating that both are equal in every area of music so we can only see who's better by the one variable in which they are not equal, and that is chart's success. Thus Rihanna is better.

[Edited 11/4/11 4:46am]

ComputerBlueSpain said:

In what, exactly, is Janet talented? On another note, I love how her stans are quick to claim #1 hits mean nothing. Yet, in the same breath, they stress Janet's charts success.

Rihanna has one over Janet. Both are equally (non) talented, but Rihanna has more success. Therefore, Rihanna is better than Janet. For the low IQ stans (most of them, actually), I'm stating that both are equal in every area of music so we can only see who's better by the one variable in which they are not equal, and that is chart's success. Thus Rihanna is better.

[Edited 11/4/11 4:46am]

Do you mean "In what exactly is Janet talented in?"

it's annoying how some people claim janet is non-talented or put her in the same level as rihanna. they're not in the same level. congrats 2 rihanna 4 those #1's but u can only put her in the same level as britney. she doesn't even write her own lyrics. Janet did not just sing her best songs, she co-created them. Most of them timeless classics. I know in the end it all comes down 2 a matter of opinion...but geez if it's so easy 2 give propz 2 rihanna 4 those singles (I give propz 2 the people who actually wrote them...umbrella is a great song...not by rihanna but sung by her..it could be anyone else singing) and yet don't recognize at least the merit of janet's #1's that she helped to create. Even if u hate janet u got 2 give her the credit 2 be better than rihanna as an artist.

not a Ri hater or a Janet stan but i will say Ri hasn't had ONE killer baby-making ballad, let alone a dozen. i get the point about them both vocally, but at least Janet was a trendsetter for female artists (videos, dancers) and was one the few black vocalists dabbling in rock ocassionally (black cat, If, etc.) not to mention a socially conscious themed album (RN) like i said, Ri's chart success doesn't equate to her being able to tour and pack out anything let alone both urban and suburban arena's like Janet at her peak. As has been stated, Ri is definitely a by-product of the current industry. not better than janet when non-chart variables are included, esp. dancing!

I like Rihanna and all, but I haven't seen anything with any artistic depth from her as of yet. Something with a strong theme and message. Now, not all of Janet's albums are like that, obviously. But when Rihanna is #1 with something as strong and meaningful as the "Rhythm Nation 1814" or "Velvet Rope" albums, I'll give her a bit more props. Until that point, it's all just a bit one-dimensional. I still like her though.

ComputerBlueSpain said:

In what, exactly, is Janet talented? On another note, I love how her stans are quick to claim #1 hits mean nothing. Yet, in the same breath, they stress Janet's charts success.

Rihanna has one over Janet. Both are equally (non) talented, but Rihanna has more success. Therefore, Rihanna is better than Janet. For the low IQ stans (most of them, actually), I'm stating that both are equal in every area of music so we can only see who's better by the one variable in which they are not equal, and that is chart's success. Thus Rihanna is better.

[Edited 11/4/11 4:46am]

You are either just trying to get a rise out of some people or incredibly stupid. Either way, Rihanna's having 11 #1s to Janet's 10 does not, in ANY way, shape or form, make her "more successful" or "better" than Janet. I listed some of Janet's achievements on the previous page which attest to her success and TALENT, but if you're too boneheaded to pay attention then that's on you. It is YOUR OPINION that Janet has no talent, but a near-40 year career in the industry, millions of fans, a heap of industry acknowlegements and successes, and an obvious influence on the crop of younger female performers says otherwise.

The fact that Rihanna achieved 11 #1s in such a short time says NOTHING on whether or not she will be able to maintain that success over the coming decades. It also shows that the era in which she obtained that success is fickle and makes it TEN TIMES EASIER for newer artists such as herself to get to the top of the Billboard Hot 100, because of downloading. Saying she's more successful than Janet is not only idiotic (she looks up to Janet, for chrissakes), but it shows that you are speaking from a place of obvious hate. Janet's 10 #1s are much more admirable than Rhianna's 11, or 12, or 25, because not only did she get them without the aide of duets, but she got them over a lengthy span of time and during a period when people had to physically go to a store and buy a disc or a cassette single as opposed to sit behind a computer and download it. So, you see, your point is ridiculous.

If Janet Jackson didn't have talent, or drive, or the "it" factor, then she never would have went on to become a superstar. The end. You're dismissed.