People were criticizing MJ because he was very likely a child molester. Taylor Swift has about as good of an outward public image as you can get.
Super Bowl Halftime
- Thread starter gamecockcat
- Start date
They absolutely were, I agree. But my point is that MJ was clearly being abused, mishandled (he was killed) and was clearly mentally unstable. I suppose I poorly articulated that.
I was coming to say this. Music success is tracked by streams these days. Not many people are buying physical music in 2025, and this has been true for at least a decade.
Back in the day a no name could go gold or platinum off one hit single. These days, only superstars (usually older than 40) have platinum album sales.
These are also stadium dates in NFL or MLB stadiums. Probably aren’t going to North Dakota, West Virginia or Maine to do a show in an AAA baseball stadium for an act that big.
When an artist becomes too big to play arenas, that artist has made a huge impact culturally. I say that as someone who thinks Swift’s music sucks and I wouldn’t choose to listen to it on any occasion.
Someone up in here using AI summaries when we can't even count on auto correct to be accurate?
L
O
L
L
O
L
I haven't bought a CD in 20+ years and probably been about 15-20 years since I even bought an mp3.
I pay for Spotify now as a responsible, law abiding adult.
Like you, I haven’t bought physical music in at least a decade and a half, and I never have paid for an MP3 because I learned to steal those in 1999. Lol.
That clearly is you projecting your TDS into his comment. Nobody gives a **** about her politics. All any of us know is that she said she was voting for a Harris. Don't you realize that we all know "Hollywood entertainers" get cancelled if they come out as Republicans. She inspired how many 14yo girls to vote for Kamala? BFD Your sneaking suspicion is BS.
I didn't watch this because I knew it wouldn't appeal to me. I know he's super famous and a great rap artist but for whatever reason I haven't heard his songs. Or maybe I have and didn't know the name of the artist.
I loved the Eminem and 50 cent and snoop and dre one and the usher one. J lo and Shakira were just eye candy. They can't appeal to everyone every halftime show. Different folks like different things.
I loved the Eminem and 50 cent and snoop and dre one and the usher one. J lo and Shakira were just eye candy. They can't appeal to everyone every halftime show. Different folks like different things.
There was some Russian website I found at one point where you could buy mp3s for pennies, and it had practically everything somehow. And I can listen to some pretty obscure stuff. It was very likely illegally hosted at those prices but it best dealing with Napster, Limewire, etc.
How about just random common sense....? When Michael Jackson was king... You had 10 radio stations per town (avg), 5 tv channels (local), 36 cable channels (where I lived), 2 music channels on cable.... Jackson was getting played on 2 or 3 of the radio stations, was getting mentions on every tv channel and was being mentioned on half the cable channels and was the single biggest star on the 2 music channels. He had fans across every age group, male and female, all races, creeds and religions on every single continent....
I would hope you agree that Taylor Swift's fans are roughly 10yo to 35 yo white females. Probably 95% of her fans are in that demo. I can't name more than 2 songs she's done. Most people I know can't name more than 2 songs she's done. If you can't see why my opinion is what it is then we just don't work the same with deduction. It's a numbers game to me. She is by far a better businesswoman than he was, but he was by far a bigger star.
The whole point of SB halftime show is to appeal to as many people as possible. Somehow, we quit worrying about that. LOL
RFK jr was just confirmed as HHS secretary.... He's talked about ssri's and childrens mental health. I'll make you a deal. If they do a real study with legit data.... If I'm wrong, I will say I'm wrong. If the study comes out how I think it will... Where you gonna be?
You were wrong before. You posted that 80% of all shooters were on ssri. You had two links. The first said that kids who had been at school when a shooting took place ( in other words the VICTIMS and not the SHOOTER) were prescribed sari’s after the shooting. You either failed to read the article or you lack reading comprehension. The second link was absolute trash as it was from an org that basically is a front for the Church of Scientology. Furthermore in the article it never used the statistic of 80%. Myself and others pointed this out and you never were able to source your 80% claim. Either you completely made it up or it was from some bullsh!t FB post. Feel free to include that link now. You won’t because it doesn’t exist and you will divert the conversation in another direction. A lot of what you post is bullsh!t. You find a tweet or something else out there and lack the awareness to realize there is a lot of crap out there. Same w your asinine argument about Taylor Swift not really being all that big. Go back and look at the thread…. No one supported you.
Agreed. That is why I said you can't find good data on it. If you want to go further into it.... California listed something like 170 school shooting in '22" I think it was.... Not going to look this up again because I don't care enough to keep looking up the same data... But I think you would agree that what we were discussing as "school shootings".... California didn't have 170 of those. They count all shootings within a certain radius of a school, no matter the reason, as a school shooting.
RFK jr will hopefully do a real study with real fbi data and find out definitively. I will accept the outcome of a full investigation, but I have a feeling you will disappear and not have a change of mind.
And can we also admit why you first got pissed at me over this? I said that muslims on terrorist watchlist had entered the country illegally and that illegal immigrants had started 1 and possibly 2 of the fires in California. I think it was you that said "Either you completely made it up or it was from some bullsh!t FB post. Feel free to include that link now. You won’t because it doesn’t exist and you will divert the conversation in another direction. A lot of what you post is bullsh!t." something close to this correct?
I posted 2 sources for you. You said those sources were ****. So I was still a liar... So I posted 3 more sources... I think LA times and NY times were 2 of them and then you just focused in on the ssri thing because I had already said that there isn't any really good studies on it. Congrats. So will you admit that an illegal alien was arrested in California with a lighter and a blowtorch in an area that was experiencing fires? Now we can obviously argue if he actually started any fires or just loved carrying around a lighter and blowtorch for the cool visual.... But quit acting like you owned me because you are just pissed you don't watch news. I literally heard those stories from KTLA live news while on the treadmill in the mornings. "Of course he doesn't. Guy is a clown who believes anything posted on the Internet. Uses the words rumor and heresay and thinks it had to have happened. " The "rumor" was KTLA on the street reporters talking to firemen, policemen and paramedics on the ground. You didn't ask any of those questions though... you just attacked me, which 100% your right to do.
I would argue you need to adjust your view on what is a legit source. I posted the first sources that came up with the right answer. You didn't want a "right answer".... You wanted an approved source. So if an approved source lies to you, I take it that you would gobble that up. If an unknown source gave you the right answer you would reject it. I hope you see the problem with this.
You are exhausting. You go on these binges and post things as if they are the gospel truth. I’ll stand by my statement when I said a lot of what you post is ******** because it is just that… I could start posting tweets all the time and we would have the same outcome. Some of it would be true and a lot would be crap. My issue w you is that you have convinced yourself that because it is out there, and it supports your views, then it has to be true. Some times it may be, but other times it is not. Don’t be surprised when people call you out on the crap. I certainly have not been the only one to do so
So on 2 issues in question... I was 100% right on one and on the other I said there wasn't clear data on, and you choose to focus on that one to say I'm a liar. OK. My point still stands though. You'd take a lie from a source you trust over a truth from a source you don't. You don't do any reading into anything on your own. You want to be spoon fed "the right answer". At least I will admit when I'm wrong or post a **** X post.... Still waiting for you to admit an illegal alien was arrested for carrying a lighter and blowtorch in an area that was experiencing wildfires.... If we are calling people out.
You were 1 of 3. Congrats. 80% of shooters are not on ssri’s. That number came from your head. Don’t give me the clear data crap. Those numbers don’t exist. Secondly your comments about TS weren’t even close to being on target. Care to try and name a bigger act than her in the last ten years?