|
Discussion: Why does ATRL discredit Britney's impact?
Member Since: 3/2/2014
Posts: 4,837
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Vin
Because Britney Spears is the biggest popstar since Madonna and Michael Jackson,
and it just KILLS 'em that their fave isn't, and never will be, part of Pop Royalty.
...Vin
|
Basically !
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/2/2014
Posts: 4,837
|
Quote:
Originally posted by 4AM.
Save for the fact that Circus sold more than Blackout, sure, but let me put this into the perspective that I feel is more appropriate: Michael Jackson before his death was not nearly as successful as he once was. Janet after NipGate dropped off the radar nearly. Madonna's last album sold less than a fifteenth what TIC sold. And yet, they're still MJ, Janet, and Madonna, see? Nobody - not a single stan - will tell you Britney's #1 right now. But to say she's the Princess and that she's accomplished more than almost any future or current pop girl will is entirely accurate. The past may be the past, but it's just as important as the present and future.
|
 
Exactly. The past is history but at least she has a history on her own and in pop culture / music.
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 5,905
|
We don't "discredit her impact", it's just that for the average person it gets tiring to constantly talk about her album sales from 11-15 years ago in 2014. Like, it's cute and all that she achieved what she did, but there are plenty of actual legends who've achieved considerably more and/or had more of an impact, who don't need to have it mentioned everyday on ATRL, as it goes without saying (ie: Mariah, Whitney, Madonna, Janet, etc).
Britney striking hard and fast for about the first five years of her career, only to later find herself being used for the occasional single with great production and a vocal double doesn't warrant any more respect than some of her peers, who've also had successful eras 10 or more years ago, but can STILL sell albums today (2014). Her lack of success compared to them simply exposes her for what she was; a short-lived fad who rode off of being extremely marketable and "in" for a period of time, then became less "cool" and faded behind the majority of her contemporaries professionally.
She gets as much as she deserves on ATRL, if not more to be quite honest. There is no talent, longevity or anything else worth mentioning, and her impact on music is significantly less than her remaining stans would have you believe  Madonna at the very least, was the one who created the modern sexual female pop idol archetype, which the pop girls including Britney are following now. Janet Jackson (who was Britney's biggest influence) did the same thing as well, in addition to popularizing things like dance breaks, for example, which again, Britney followed. Britney didn't cause/lead the teen pop/bubblegum phase like some claim; it was already being done by the Spice Girls, Backstreet Boys and NSYNC before her, and by Christina Aguilera at the exact same time. Was she successful? Absolutely. Was she popular? Undeniably. But that doesn't = impact.
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/12/2002
Posts: 21,317
|
TRL is why ATRL is here...
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 9,488
|
ATRL doesn't discredit her impact at all. Her recent music flopped, but her earlier music had a lot of impact. I hate Britney Spears and even I will acknowledge that.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 14,942
|
If anything y'all overrate her here. Yes, she was big 10 years ago...and so were others...who are still big now. Britney came out in the right time. Let's not act like if any of the other major girls would have came out at the same time, they wouldn't have sold a **** ton then. People refuse to admit the change in the musical climate. Only a select lucky few in todays time will only ever be able to see Britney's sales from 1999 - 2001. But that shouldn't discredit the bigger popstars of today who are accomplishing things Britney hasn't. So yes, she kicked ass. She was awesome. 10 yrs ago. And just because all the Britney stans have is the past doesn't mean everyone else wants to live back there with them.
Ch...If I could I would though. Y'all know how cheap gas was back then? 
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/4/2014
Posts: 4,690
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Bey_Rihstan
Because she's currently underperforming
It's happening to Gaga, Happened Bey in 2011, Xtina in 2010 - Now, etc.
|
Basically. ATRL's a big bunch of "WHAT'S HOT NOW!!" obsessed losers. So I commend everyone who stan for flops, has-beens and never-beens. Hang in there.
Quote:
Originally posted by Alejandrawrrr
We don't "discredit her impact", it's just that for the average person it gets tiring to constantly talk about her album sales from 11-15 years ago in 2014. Like, it's cute and all that she achieved what she did, but there are plenty of actual legends who've achieved considerably more and/or had more of an impact, who don't need to have it mentioned everyday on ATRL, as it goes without saying (ie: Mariah, Whitney, Madonna, Janet, etc).
Britney striking hard and fast for about the first five years of her career, only to later find herself being used for the occasional single with great production and a vocal double doesn't warrant any more respect than some of her peers, who've also had successful eras 10 or more years ago, but can STILL sell albums today (2014). Her lack of success compared to them simply exposes her for what she was; a short-lived fad who rode off of being extremely marketable and "in" for a period of time, then became less "cool" and faded behind the majority of her contemporaries professionally.
She gets as much as she deserves on ATRL, if not more to be quite honest. There is no talent, longevity or anything else worth mentioning, and her impact on music is significantly less than her remaining stans would have you believe  Madonna at the very least, was the one who created the modern sexual female pop idol archetype, which the pop girls including Britney are following now. Janet Jackson (who was Britney's biggest influence) did the same thing as well, in addition to popularizing things like dance breaks, for example, which again, Britney followed. Britney didn't cause/lead the teen pop/bubblegum phase like some claim; it was already being done by the Spice Girls, Backstreet Boys and NSYNC before her, and by Christina Aguilera at the exact same time. Was she successful? Absolutely. Was she popular? Undeniably. But that doesn't = impact.
|
Wait at this fresh brew!! 
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/12/2012
Posts: 8,464
|
"Why does ATRL discredit Britney's impact?"
LMFAO.
80% of her impact has NOTHING to do with music. That stop in 2004.  ....No one discredits her non-music impact.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/10/2010
Posts: 6,255
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Alejandrawrrr
We don't "discredit her impact", it's just that for the average person it gets tiring to constantly talk about her album sales from 11-15 years ago in 2014. Like, it's cute and all that she achieved what she did, but there are plenty of actual legends who've achieved considerably more and/or had more of an impact, who don't need to have it mentioned everyday on ATRL, as it goes without saying (ie: Mariah, Whitney, Madonna, Janet, etc).
Britney striking hard and fast for about the first five years of her career, only to later find herself being used for the occasional single with great production and a vocal double doesn't warrant any more respect than some of her peers, who've also had successful eras 10 or more years ago, but can STILL sell albums today (2014). Her lack of success compared to them simply exposes her for what she was; a short-lived fad who rode off of being extremely marketable and "in" for a period of time, then became less "cool" and faded behind the majority of her contemporaries professionally.
She gets as much as she deserves on ATRL, if not more to be quite honest. There is no talent, longevity or anything else worth mentioning, and her impact on music is significantly less than her remaining stans would have you believe  Madonna at the very least, was the one who created the modern sexual female pop idol archetype, which the pop girls including Britney are following now. Janet Jackson (who was Britney's biggest influence) did the same thing as well, in addition to popularizing things like dance breaks, for example, which again, Britney followed. Britney didn't cause/lead the teen pop/bubblegum phase like some claim; it was already being done by the Spice Girls, Backstreet Boys and NSYNC before her, and by Christina Aguilera at the exact same time. Was she successful? Absolutely. Was she popular? Undeniably. But that doesn't = impact.
|
What sort of flawless post?! If only ATRL had karma instead of warning points....
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/18/2013
Posts: 5,288
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr.Link
The real question would be why does ATRL overrates her achievements like she's some kind of untouchable goddess of her own league?
|
This. Her impact was huge from 1999 until 2003 maybe, like she truly was the pop princess back then. But unfortunately she never got back to old form after her "crisis".
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/2/2012
Posts: 7,546
|
Quote:
Originally posted by JesusORGod
"Why does ATRL discredit Britney's impact?"
LMFAO.
80% of her impact has NOTHING to do with music. That stop in 2004.  ....No one discredits her non-music impact.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 10/18/2003
Posts: 3,119
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Alejandrawrrr
We don't "discredit her impact", it's just that for the average person it gets tiring to constantly talk about her album sales from 11-15 years ago in 2014. Like, it's cute and all that she achieved what she did, but there are plenty of actual legends who've achieved considerably more and/or had more of an impact, who don't need to have it mentioned everyday on ATRL, as it goes without saying (ie: Mariah, Whitney, Madonna, Janet, etc).
Britney striking hard and fast for about the first five years of her career, only to later find herself being used for the occasional single with great production and a vocal double doesn't warrant any more respect than some of her peers, who've also had successful eras 10 or more years ago, but can STILL sell albums today (2014). Her lack of success compared to them simply exposes her for what she was; a short-lived fad who rode off of being extremely marketable and "in" for a period of time, then became less "cool" and faded behind the majority of her contemporaries professionally.
She gets as much as she deserves on ATRL, if not more to be quite honest. There is no talent, longevity or anything else worth mentioning, and her impact on music is significantly less than her remaining stans would have you believe  Madonna at the very least, was the one who created the modern sexual female pop idol archetype, which the pop girls including Britney are following now. Janet Jackson (who was Britney's biggest influence) did the same thing as well, in addition to popularizing things like dance breaks, for example, which again, Britney followed. Britney didn't cause/lead the teen pop/bubblegum phase like some claim; it was already being done by the Spice Girls, Backstreet Boys and NSYNC before her, and by Christina Aguilera at the exact same time. Was she successful? Absolutely. Was she popular? Undeniably. But that doesn't = impact.
|
YOU SAID IT ALL
BIG THANK YOU
Watch and learn Britney stans....
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/18/2010
Posts: 18,082
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Alejandrawrrr
We don't "discredit her impact", it's just that for the average person it gets tiring to constantly talk about her album sales from 11-15 years ago in 2014. Like, it's cute and all that she achieved what she did, but there are plenty of actual legends who've achieved considerably more and/or had more of an impact, who don't need to have it mentioned everyday on ATRL, as it goes without saying (ie: Mariah, Whitney, Madonna, Janet, etc).
Britney striking hard and fast for about the first five years of her career, only to later find herself being used for the occasional single with great production and a vocal double doesn't warrant any more respect than some of her peers, who've also had successful eras 10 or more years ago, but can STILL sell albums today (2014). Her lack of success compared to them simply exposes her for what she was; a short-lived fad who rode off of being extremely marketable and "in" for a period of time, then became less "cool" and faded behind the majority of her contemporaries professionally.
She gets as much as she deserves on ATRL, if not more to be quite honest. There is no talent, longevity or anything else worth mentioning, and her impact on music is significantly less than her remaining stans would have you believe  Madonna at the very least, was the one who created the modern sexual female pop idol archetype, which the pop girls including Britney are following now. Janet Jackson (who was Britney's biggest influence) did the same thing as well, in addition to popularizing things like dance breaks, for example, which again, Britney followed. Britney didn't cause/lead the teen pop/bubblegum phase like some claim; it was already being done by the Spice Girls, Backstreet Boys and NSYNC before her, and by Christina Aguilera at the exact same time. Was she successful? Absolutely. Was she popular? Undeniably. But that doesn't = impact.
|
!!! /end thread
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/26/2012
Posts: 33,881
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Alejandrawrrr
We don't "discredit her impact", it's just that for the average person it gets tiring to constantly talk about her album sales from 11-15 years ago in 2014. Like, it's cute and all that she achieved what she did, but there are plenty of actual legends who've achieved considerably more and/or had more of an impact, who don't need to have it mentioned everyday on ATRL, as it goes without saying (ie: Mariah, Whitney, Madonna, Janet, etc).
Britney striking hard and fast for about the first five years of her career, only to later find herself being used for the occasional single with great production and a vocal double doesn't warrant any more respect than some of her peers, who've also had successful eras 10 or more years ago, but can STILL sell albums today (2014). Her lack of success compared to them simply exposes her for what she was; a short-lived fad who rode off of being extremely marketable and "in" for a period of time, then became less "cool" and faded behind the majority of her contemporaries professionally.
She gets as much as she deserves on ATRL, if not more to be quite honest. There is no talent, longevity or anything else worth mentioning, and her impact on music is significantly less than her remaining stans would have you believe  Madonna at the very least, was the one who created the modern sexual female pop idol archetype, which the pop girls including Britney are following now. Janet Jackson (who was Britney's biggest influence) did the same thing as well, in addition to popularizing things like dance breaks, for example, which again, Britney followed. Britney didn't cause/lead the teen pop/bubblegum phase like some claim; it was already being done by the Spice Girls, Backstreet Boys and NSYNC before her, and by Christina Aguilera at the exact same time. Was she successful? Absolutely. Was she popular? Undeniably. But that doesn't = impact.
|
Britney stans need to observe this post.

|
|
|
Member Since: 4/4/2014
Posts: 13,522
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Alejandrawrrr
We don't "discredit her impact", it's just that for the average person it gets tiring to constantly talk about her album sales from 11-15 years ago in 2014. Like, it's cute and all that she achieved what she did, but there are plenty of actual legends who've achieved considerably more and/or had more of an impact, who don't need to have it mentioned everyday on ATRL, as it goes without saying (ie: Mariah, Whitney, Madonna, Janet, etc).
Britney striking hard and fast for about the first five years of her career, only to later find herself being used for the occasional single with great production and a vocal double doesn't warrant any more respect than some of her peers, who've also had successful eras 10 or more years ago, but can STILL sell albums today (2014). Her lack of success compared to them simply exposes her for what she was; a short-lived fad who rode off of being extremely marketable and "in" for a period of time, then became less "cool" and faded behind the majority of her contemporaries professionally.
She gets as much as she deserves on ATRL, if not more to be quite honest. There is no talent, longevity or anything else worth mentioning, and her impact on music is significantly less than her remaining stans would have you believe  Madonna at the very least, was the one who created the modern sexual female pop idol archetype, which the pop girls including Britney are following now. Janet Jackson (who was Britney's biggest influence) did the same thing as well, in addition to popularizing things like dance breaks, for example, which again, Britney followed. Britney didn't cause/lead the teen pop/bubblegum phase like some claim; it was already being done by the Spice Girls, Backstreet Boys and NSYNC before her, and by Christina Aguilera at the exact same time. Was she successful? Absolutely. Was she popular? Undeniably. But that doesn't = impact.
|

|
|
|
Member Since: 4/20/2011
Posts: 26,993
|
Quote:
Originally posted by mdnazn
if i were a Britney stan i would be embarrassed to brag that Britney inspires "artists" such as selena gomez who are as talentless as her like gworl.......
and let's not get started when they brag that britney is a legend like 
Britney's only musical impact is inspiring talent less, privileged "artists" who have no musical talent in their bodies to pursue a career in music.

|

|
|
|
|
|