[Repo]

Honestly, both are fairly safe. That said, Taylor switching genres is a risk, if a calculated one, that could have backfired since she did have a lot of country fans.

On the other hand, Katy's never taken a single risk in her entire career. So this is really, really easy

[Repo]

Also, since people are arguing about why IKAG and Dark Horse are risks, I'll explain why they aren't:

IKAG-
1. Katy was NOT an established artist. She had, legitimately, nothing to lose. This does bad? She's no worse off and can try again with a new sound. It does well? She becomes a huge star. That's not a risk, she's losing nothing by doing this.
2. Lesbianism/bicurious were not exactly unheard of or insanely controversial at this point, especially just girls kissing
3. The song isn't actually about either of the above anyways. It's a straight girl kissing another girl cause she's drunk and straight dudes think lesbos = hot.
4. She doesn't even kiss a girl in the music video when the song is about it JUST because she's worried it might hurt performance or stop it from airing on MTV or something

Dark Horse
1. Super popular and voted promo single
2. Was already doing well when made official single. Guaranteed hit

[2AM]

Both are safe.
But Taylor's safer.
DH and IKAG prove that.

[Repo]

Originally posted by 2AM

Both are safe.
But Taylor's safer.
DH and IKAG prove that.

Neither are even close to risks, ESPECIALLY the already hugely successful pre-single-release Dark Horse. Explained why above

People on ATRL don't get what safe/risk mean

[Remixed]

Katy. There is zero diversity there. All completely pop friendly songs.

[halcyonday]

Originally posted by Repo

2. Was already doing well when made official single. Guaranteed hit

Lol. The same with Taylor and moving to pop. She released songs like We Are Never, I Knew You Were Trouble and 22 and they were successful, so she made a full pop album, because it gave her money.

Nothing risky about moving from sweet country-pop by 50% pop album "Red" that gave her security that pop will make her money, to a full pop record.

It's even more safer than sticking to country-pop forever.

[Dollas n Diamonds]

Originally posted by Repo

Also, since people are arguing about why IKAG and Dark Horse are risks, I'll explain why they aren't:

IKAG-
1. Katy was NOT an established artist. She had, legitimately, nothing to lose. This does bad? She's no worse off and can try again with a new sound. It does well? She becomes a huge star. That's not a risk, she's losing nothing by doing this.
2. Lesbianism/bicurious were not exactly unheard of or insanely controversial at this point, especially just girls kissing
3. The song isn't actually about either of the above anyways. It's a straight girl kissing another girl cause she's drunk and straight dudes think lesbos = hot.
4. She doesn't even kiss a girl in the music video when the song is about it JUST because she's worried it might hurt performance or stop it from airing on MTV or something

Dark Horse
1. Super popular and voted promo single
2. Was already doing well when made official single. Guaranteed hit

OMG i totally forgot the only reason DH was even a single is cause Katy was FORCED (we all know she hates it lol) to release because of how well it did as a buzz single. how you could argue that was a risk when it was already successful before it was official

The only risky thing she's ever done as described herself is the Birthday video
its strange how the Kats don't claim such an obvious example

[Dollas n Diamonds]

Originally posted by halcyonday

Lol. The same with Taylor and moving to pop. She released songs like We Are Never, I Knew You Were Trouble and 22 and they were successful, so she made a full pop album, because it gave her money.

Nothing risky about moving from sweet country-pop by 50% pop album "Red" that gave her security that pop will make her money, to a full pop record.

It's even more safer than sticking to country-pop forever.

Too bad the industry disagreed

everyone was speculating if she would be successful or not

country radio was talking about how she would regret her choice and come running back a la Leann Rimes (who destroyed her career doing this very thing)

In fact we talked about it here on atrl everyone was rejoicing at her potential demise

Her label feared for her success and asked her to put three country songs on it just in case and she said no mam!

P.S when did you absorb Prince High's soul?

[halcyonday]

Originally posted by Dollas n Diamonds

Too bad the industry disagreed

everyone was speculating if she would be successful or not

country radio was talking about how she would regret her choice and come running back a la Leann Rimes (who destroyed her career doing this very thing)

In fact we talked about it here on atrl everyone was rejoicing at her potential demise

Her label feared for her success and asked her to put three country songs on it just in case and she said no mam!

P.S when did you absorb Prince High's soul?

Wasn't We Are Never her biggest hit with the biggest opening sales in a first week of this decade?

What was risky about making the album with 15 songs like this one?

P.S i don't know what are you talking about!

[Redstreak]

You can't have Roar in your discography and NOT be the safest artist on the planet

[chilicheese01]

Originally posted by ultraviolento

IDK why people are ignoring this and praising "but she switched country-pop!1!1!!1"

I mean, DH and IKAG are riskier than any taylor song, DH has literally no chorus and IKAG... while taylor follows the same basic formula everytime, lyrically and structurally...

The Katy stans realized they had no argument so now they're just clinging to Dark Horse and I Kissed a Girl, the latter of which is completely irrelevant to this discussion. At least Taylor writes all her own music, and doesn't rely on any one svengali for all of her singles.

Originally posted by Vlad Spears

taylor is the safest.

katy at least has sexual puns, suggestive videos, suggestive outfits. taylor keeps everything clean and wholesome and boring, hence why she sells

Originally posted by Ressti

Taylor, definitely.

They're both really safe, but Taylor is the kind of artist whos videos you can watch with your muslim parents and some of Katy's work is too suggestive or sexual for that.

And what does this have to do with the question being asked?

Originally posted by halcyonday

Lol. The same with Taylor and moving to pop. She released songs like We Are Never, I Knew You Were Trouble and 22 and they were successful, so she made a full pop album, because it gave her money.

Nothing risky about moving from sweet country-pop by 50% pop album "Red" that gave her security that pop will make her money, to a full pop record.

It's even more safer than sticking to country-pop forever.

So making a pop album like 1989 is even safer than country-pop, you think? Then Katy is automatically the safer artist since she has been making pop and only pop records since One of the Boys. Some "logic" in this thread is so flawed.

[Summerboy95]

Originally posted by Repo

Also, since people are arguing about why IKAG and Dark Horse are risks, I'll explain why they aren't:

IKAG-
1. Katy was NOT an established artist. She had, legitimately, nothing to lose. This does bad? She's no worse off and can try again with a new sound. It does well? She becomes a huge star. That's not a risk, she's losing nothing by doing this.
2. Lesbianism/bicurious were not exactly unheard of or insanely controversial at this point, especially just girls kissing
3. The song isn't actually about either of the above anyways. It's a straight girl kissing another girl cause she's drunk and straight dudes think lesbos = hot.
4. She doesn't even kiss a girl in the music video when the song is about it JUST because she's worried it might hurt performance or stop it from airing on MTV or something

Dark Horse
1. Super popular and voted promo single
2. Was already doing well when made official single. Guaranteed hit

AMAZING logic!

[Redstreak]

And let's be absolutely honest, the only reason non-fans are back tracking and saying going full pop wasn't a risk is because it turned out to be successful.

[Schhh]

I can't believe people are still saying Taylor's switching to pop was risky.

Katy's first album was also pop-rock and then she switched to 100% pop with Teenage Dream. Wouldn't that make here a bigger risk-taker considering Katy wasn't that much established after her first era?

[Kkamjong]

I find it incredibly humorous to see two fanbase arguing about which person makes the safest music. It's not a compliment either way. There is implication that your fave is safe regardless so honestly speaking, isn't that much better than the other.

Both of them stick with sounds and lyrics comfortable with them and ones they know will sell.

[Dollas n Diamonds]

Originally posted by Schhh

I can't believe people are still saying Taylor's switching to pop was risky.

Katy's first album was also pop-rock and then she switched to 100% pop with Teenage Dream. Wouldn't that make here a bigger risk-taker considering Katy wasn't that much established after her first era?

no because pop rock doesn't have a genre, a radio station, a fan base, they merge with pop so essentially its still pop

[chiliam]

So acordinglly to ATRL, release gimmick songs and sing about sex is more risky than change your genre and write an album all by yourself.

Never change ATRL, never change

[JonathanMinaj2]

Idk, im kinda leaning towards Katy.. Taylor did switch genres (even though she already was with Red). I don't really know.

[Stardust.]

Originally posted by Redstreak

You can't have Roar in your discography and NOT be the safest artist on the planet

Shake It Off???

[halcyonday]

Originally posted by Stardust.

Shake It Off???

Oop

Still waiting for answer - what is risky about making the full album with songs like We Are Never and 22 when they gave her money, broke records etc during her previous era?