Depends where this is going 2040's and 2050's. The average fan of Taylor Swift would be in their 50's and 60's by then.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Will Taylor Swift still be popular in 30 years?
- Thread starter nd2023
- Start date
I'm part of the "lost generation" as far as the Beatles are concerned: I'm too young to have been into them when they were together, my parents are too old to have liked them and I didn't have older siblings or friends that were fans. Additionally, I wasn't born when President Kennedy was assassinated, so my question is this: is there a correlation between the Beatles' popularity in the United States and the death of JFK? Could it have been that U.S. kids were thirsting for something new that could get their minds off the situation here, and the Beatles were convenient?
I hope Beatles fans won't give me the business because this is a legit question. I remember David Eduardo saying that CCR was more popular than the Beatles in one of the South American countries where he lived. Were the Beatles popular in non-English speaking countries?
I hope Beatles fans won't give me the business because this is a legit question. I remember David Eduardo saying that CCR was more popular than the Beatles in one of the South American countries where he lived. Were the Beatles popular in non-English speaking countries?
They were popular in Germany before they came to the US. Once they became popular, they toured Japan, The Philippines, Sweden, France, Spain, Italy, and Australia. They never toured Central or South America or Africa. However, they only did those kinds of world tours for three years before they broke up.
Last edited:
This coming from someone who thinks do-wop will live forever.
Landtuna should try singing and dancing for three hours solid like Taylor does nightly - I bet he’d drop after about 5 minutes.
But if TS would do the Charleston, like back in Landtuna's day... 23 skidoo and Tyler too!
I meant to say they only did world tours for three years before they stopped touring altogether.
The record industry was going through a creative lull in 1963, both feeling the effects of the payola investigation a few years before and a certain lack of "something new" to follow up on the huge impact of Elvis, Buddy Holly, Little Richard and the like. Instead, we got Chubby Checker, the Bristol Stomp and Bobby Vinton. Not bad records, but not trend-setting.
We not only got the British Invasion in the mid-60's, but also Motown and the beginning of hard rock. Exciting music.
The effect of the Kennedy assassination was not so enduring as to change the overall mood of teens and young adults. More weighting on those turning 18 was the draft and Vietnam and those factors did influence a lot of music.
I was "on the air" at WCUY in Cleveland when Kennedy was assassinated. I was 17, member of the school political club and the debate society and a subscriber to Newsweek, Time, Tiempo (Mexico) El Universal (Mexico) and the WSJ. I was very affected by the assassination, but after it became "old news" and we went back to worrying about the Russians, Castro, the growing Viet Nam conflict and the Tammany style politics of Johnson, the event stopped being top of mind..
Of course, the "happy" and exciting music of the Beatles and all the other British Invasion artists was welcome. But it was even bigger in the UK where Kennedy had not been their leader and the threat of a Viet Nam war was not a weight on their minds.
Tough to say for sure, as it always is when it comes to predicting several decades ahead. But given what she has accomplished so far and continues to do to cement herself as the artist of my generation (I'm 24), I'm going to say yes. Aside from the most ardent critics, I feel like most people around my age who are familiar with her have at least one or two songs of hers they like.
I can't say I'm a fan of her music, but I respect her talent and her devotion to her fans. She also seems to finally outgrowing her youthful immaturity (read: writing songs that badmouth her previous boyfriend). I can see her being this generation's version of Cher and Dolly Parton in the next decades. Both have been around for almost 60 years and are still superstars. Taylor Swift will still be a big star long after I'm gone.
Even though I'm not a fan of her music I could see her still being popular way in the future. I would love for her to be way more popular than someone like Drake in 30 years. Hopefully by then all his gross behavior becomes more known. And maybe people will see just how bland his music really is
OTOH Ginger Rogers and/or Fred Astaire would put Swifty to shame.
Performing is like gun fighting; there's always someone faster/better.
I was in Japan and Vietnam when the Beatles broke big but not necessarily a big fan. I liked some of their stuff and disliked others. They were perhaps the most versatile band ever, performing well in several very different genre's.
I was in the Navy on 22 November 1963 when JFK was killed. The only feeling I can remember distinctly (also among my shipmates) was one of shock and also how bad "President Johnson" sounded. I have no recollection of how the assassination affected music. The single song I can recall was "Matthew, Martin and John" but that was later. In six months I was on my way to Vietnam arriving there just before the "Gulf of Tonkin" incident and my focus was obviously on more important and immediate things. We got very little pop music from the States during my two years there but I do recall a decided shift to "protest rock" which was much more popular when I returned in 1966 (living in the political hotbed of the SF Bay Area).
"Abraham, Martin and John," sung by Dion DeMucci (of the Belmonts) and released in 1968, after the assassination of Bobby Kennedy. One of the writers of that song was Richard Holler, the very definition of a versatile songwriter -- a couple of years earlier, he had co-written another chart-topper, "Snoopy vs. the Red Baron"!
The Beatles broke up in 1970. 30 years later in 2000, they were still selling millions of records. New compilations and remastered versions were being issued. Boomers and younger fans continued to find their music.
Taylor Swift obviously has passionate fans, but Social Media distorts her importance. It's impossible to know if she will be "popular" in 30 years. She could retire from touring or be doing a daytime talk show. Her current fans will be in their 50s by then and out of the "desirable demos" that advertisers covet. Some other younger artist will have replaced her by then anyway...
Taylor Swift obviously has passionate fans, but Social Media distorts her importance. It's impossible to know if she will be "popular" in 30 years. She could retire from touring or be doing a daytime talk show. Her current fans will be in their 50s by then and out of the "desirable demos" that advertisers covet. Some other younger artist will have replaced her by then anyway...
But she's already got a leg up on the Fab Four in terms of global popularity. We know now that millions upon millions of South Americans are fans of hers, an audience that, as David has told us, never cared much about the Beatles. With the global marketing of her music and its much more rhythmic -- hence, universal -- nature, I wouldn't be surprised to find that her popularity in continental Europe is greater than the Beatles' was, as well. Do the billions of Asians and Africans know who she is? Not sure, but again, I wouldn't be surprised if she also were bigger there than the Beatles were.
The Beatles had pretty solid worldwide popularity. There was no Internet back then to help them.
Here's a thought. Why doesn't some TV network schedule a LIVE Taylor Swift concert in the exact same time slot as the Super Bowl (6-9pm Eastern Time). See which one gets higher ratings. If she can win that, then give her the Crown...
Precisely. After the doom and gloom of the assassination, The Beatles on the Ed Sullivan show was welcome relief
The networks can't afford her
Why didn't some Hollywood studio release a film of a Super Bowl game the same weekend as "Taylor Swift -- The Eras Tour" and see which one filled more theater seats?
- Status