Latest on MJJC

Do you think anyone can be bigger then Michael Jackson is / was ?

NO NEVER ON EARTH Michael is too Famous he is someone very exstrodinery nobody can top him. NEVER GONNA HAPPEN MICHAEL FOREVER
 
mjscarousal said:
Well said and completely agree. Ignorant comments like below are the main reasons why there is arguements, bitching, cutting,cursing and anything that is immature and can be avoided because of immature posters who fail to listen to other people and OPEN up their brain for a different opinion AND fail to think about what they type before they type.




and as for you, I'd been done with you and you have been ridiculous throughout this entire thread. Snapping at people because they feel differently then you. Labeling people as things, for what? Your the one taking everything personal. NOBODY never said that Michael was the music industry and I'd be more than happy to give artists credit who exactly DESERVE it and I did. I mention Stevie Wonder and Marvin Gaye... I also mention current ones such as Erykah Badu and Jill Scott. Just because im not giving credit to someone YOU like doesn't mean I feel Michael is the pineapple of the music world because his not BUT he has made a big contribution to it and thats a fact.


What I don't understand is how can you listen to Michael Jackson's music and have no knowlegde of music and the industry. You talk and your so quick to correct someone but you know nothing about real music and entertainers but you listen to michael jackson and claim chris brown and beyonce make classic music ??? you need to sit down and listen to some real music and stop correcting people when its just opinions.
Click to expand...

Hilarious. You're one to talk about "snapping".

You are absolutely ridiculous. And I never ONCE said that Beyonce or Chris Brown make "CLASSIC MUSIC". Quote me, where I EVER said that. QUOTE ME! I said that Chris Brown is a superstar in his own right, and that he is WORKING HARD. I said Beyonce is talented and is a superstar, and is WORKING HARD. Again, I'm not even a fan of these two artists...but unlike some people, I can acknowledge the talent and hard work of others without having to be a fan of their work.

You're one of these fans who cling to Michael as if he were the gospel. The end-all, be-all of music. Newsflash, Michael wasn't the first (musical revolutionist), and he won't be the last.

Like I said, I'm done with you. I'm sick of your pro-Michael, anti-everyone else bullish agenda.

Poof! Be gone.
 
Cinnamon234 said:
I mean you HAVE to take into account the fact that we live in different times now. 15 or 20 years ago, there was no such thing as illegal downloading. Illegal downloading has had a big effect on the industry and album sales. I mean when is the last time any album sold 10 million+? EVERY YEAR album sales seem to be going DOWN. The days of huge album sales are pretty much over. Artists are lucky if they can sell 2 million these days!!! This is why it's unrealistic to think that any artist today can come close to Michael's achievements in that sense because it just aint gonna happen! Like I said, we are living in different times now. Album sales are not what they used to be. Music video's are no longer vital to artists careers. Things are different.

So, can someone come along and top Michael one day? Certainly!

Is it gonna happen anytime soon? Hellz NO! lol. That's not being a deluded, obsessed fan either. That's just being realistic.
Click to expand...

well said cinnamon! that's exactly the point i am trying to drive at :clapping:
 
Cinnamon234 said:
I mean when is the last time any album sold 10 million+? EVERY YEAR album sales seem to be going DOWN. The days of huge album sales are pretty much over. Artists are lucky if they can sell 2 million these days!!! This is why it's unrealistic
Click to expand...
again, look at Amy Winehouse and Coldplay. she's selling over 9 million and rising (and staying on charts since two years of release), and they've already sold 5 million in two months of release.

i'm as realistic as anyone else who sees how mass Pop quality has gone DOWN. but i really do think some of you guys take the "miserable-industry" thing too far.

there is hope, and talents like Winehouse and Coldplay are proving it.

and also, how much you CAN sell doesn't affect your Pop appeal, which is what's in question here. you can stil sell in a bruised industry and yet also become massive with an impact similar to Michael's (one which we obv haven't seen since). i see no argument against this happening in the (near) future. the biggest problem in the current business practice, imo, is that big boy labels are not taking the risks they used to with creative/unique artists.
 
just as a side-note, i think i have a great example as 'proof' for what i said above:

arXter said:
the biggest problem in the current business practice, imo, is that big boy labels are not taking the risks they used to take with creative/unique artists.
Click to expand...
i'm going to again use Lauryn Hill as an example (this is Hill month for me). last month Rolling Stone did a cover article on the 10th anniversary of her massive album, 'The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill' and they revelaed a lot about its background.

when Lauryn went to SONY to propose the album, they called it "coffee table music" and told her to get her ish out of there.

she pushed and pushed for it and it took a lot of out her, and so the album was finally made. it went on to win 5 Grammys out of 11 nominations and sold 422,600 copies its first week — a record for best-selling debut week for a female artist.

i don't think any artist needs to stress themselves so much in order to get the right thing done. it's up to the labels to do this stuff and they're simply not doing it.

but there is hope, as i outline in my previous post.
 
The three biggest names in the music world have to be in no particular order,

elvis
freddie mercury
michael jackson

no one will come close to either 3
 
^ In your opinion.

Oh god don't even get me started with Elvis.
 
Elvis is only popular in the US and europe. Here in the middle east, they literally have no idea who is elvis even in africa too.
 
I honestly believe....NO

Michael's fame is once in a lifetime. No one will come close, especially these days when individuality and originality are considered these days in the music industry. Artists like Michael, Prince, Stevie, George, Marvin, and Freddie are non existant these days
 
hyptronicmusic said:
Hi there,


Do you think their will be an singer/performer/producer/musician that can be bigger then M.J. is / was ?
Be honest.


Take Care
Click to expand...

Don't know if you defined 'bigger' anywhere in the thread as I didn't read the whole thread... I stoped reading where the bickering started to be honest.

If bigger is meant to be about Michaels fame, as being the most famous person in the world...

then I say, yes there can be someone bigger. Just I don't think there will be someone as famous as him.
Ppl will have the advantage of getting well known everywhere on the planet through the internet... but as a result of that there will be more ppl using it etc. So yes there could be someone, but I personally don't think there will be someone getting as big.


If bigger is meant to be about album sales etc.... honestly I don't think there will ever be a fair reliable and valid statisti about this which I will buy anyways. All statistics are manipulated so easily for someones agenda, better know that.
My personal conclusion is that I simply really don't care about such proclaimed sales etc.... doesn't matter to me.
Second I don't think someone ever will have the same circumstances Michael had... so a comparison simply doesn't make any plausible sense.


Do I think there can be someone with the same talent?
No certainly not with the same unique mixture of talent Michael has and also with the same willingness to work hard to use it the best way. I mean Michael is not only talented music wise and/or dance wise... he also shows a great amount of talent business wise etc.

Do I think there can be/will be someone with as much talent?
Yes sooner or later there will be someone amazing ppl as much... maybe it will be a different kind of talent... but sooner or later there will be someone... it's the nature of life... ppl think of records only as long as someone comes along to break the last one.
Sooner or later there will be someone famous for their unique talent, sucessfull and in the public interest for the same or and even longer amount of time... that's possible... and I'm sure it will happen sooner or later.
 
What people have to realize is, right now, and I'm not just saying this to boost Michael up or something because it's the truth, Michael is statistically determined to be known by over 99% of the world's human population, meaning that in order for anyone to be more famous then him, 100% of the world's population would have to know who they are, and that is technically impossible, since new people are born every day. So in actuallity, it's not possible to be MORE famous. As famous, yes, but not more. The world's population will keep going up and if someone were to come along who reaches the same level of fame as Michael, more people would maybe be aware of them, though that doesn't really pan out either since Michael will ALWAYS be known for as long as human beings exsist and thus his fame will extend to each new generation, but percentage wise, in terms of how far reaching the fame is, it's not possible to be more widely known then Michael.
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
What people have to realize is, right now, and I'm not just saying this to boost Michael up or something because it's the truth, Michael is statistically determined to be known by over 99% of the world's human population, meaning that in order for anyone to be more famous then him, 100% of the world's population would have to know who they are, and that is technically impossible, since new people are born every day. So in actuallity, it's not possible to be MORE famous. As famous, yes, but not more. The world's population will keep going up and if someone were to come along who reaches the same level of fame as Michael, more people would maybe be aware of them, though that doesn't really pan out either since Michael will ALWAYS be known for as long as human beings exsist and thus his fame will extend to each new generation, but percentage wise, in terms of how far reaching the fame is, it's not possible to be more widely known then Michael.
Click to expand...

Nope lol sorry... but there's an exact number hiding behind the 99%.
Considering world population is rising someone more famous would have to be known 'only' by more ppl than those 99% were expressing whenever that statistic you're talking of (btw when was it done? and let me see the tools, source etc. please :cheeky: if possible) was done.
And that is possible... maybe not likely to happen... but it's possible.
 
I don't have it with me, but I've been told by another person that a study was done in the late 90s which states that 99.9% of the world population knew of or has heard about Michael. And you missed my point. While the human population will go up, and more people may perhaps know of another person then Michael, (and that point can be argued as well because, while the world's population goes up, Michael's fame will not fade, he will still be known as long as the human race exsists) percentage wise, it is impossible to be more WIDELY recognized, meaning the percentage of humans who know of any one person cannot be larger then it currently is for Michael.
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
I don't have it with me, but I've been told by another person that a study was done in the late 90s which states that 99.9% of the world population knew of or has heard about Michael. And you missed my point. While the human population will go up, and more people may perhaps know of another person then Michael, (and that point can be argued as well because, while the world's population goes up, Michael's fame will not fade, he will still be known as long as the human race exsists) percentage wise, it is impossible to be more WIDELY recognized, meaning the percentage of humans who know of any one person cannot be larger then it currently is for Michael.
Click to expand...

i remember that. isnt mike behind jesus lol
 
michaelsson said:
i remember that. isnt mike behind jesus lol
Click to expand...

well thinking of where they all must have been to question ppl to really have the guts to talk about world population... it would be really interesting to see how they did these statistics. :laugh: Did they go into the jungle of the amzonas to interview natives there?
Well no... seriously probably they took a sample... then again I'd like to see how they took it, where they took and how it turned out in its constellation, I'd like to read about it, their examination tool etc.

See speaking of statistics always sounds sooooo powerfull... then when you took a closer look... it shows often up as a balloon with a small open whole losing air.
Not saying it's not true... I'm likely to believe the result you guys are talking about... I do think Michael is the most famous person alive at least... but then again I've seen no prove yet.
 
Well that's like saying everything is up to opinion and standards do not apply. You have to have standards to lend value to anything. You have to have faith in certain sciences and give room for assumption and interpratation in everything, otherwise all of the world's "facts" would crumble in to dust. There's no point in being so nit picky when you know it to be the truth. You can call EVERYTHING in to question if you want to be a big enough ass. Not calling you an ass, just people in general who take on that attitude.
 
I've heard that MJ is the third-most well-known person on earth. I would suspect that number bounces between the U.S. president and the pope, but I don't know. Then again, it's probably highly impossible to have much of an exact number, statistically, percentage-wise, etc. But maybe he is number one, really, if he's top three, it seems plausible that with a margin of error he could also be number one.

What I do know is that in terms of popularity, his popularity is astounding and I will never say never. Why? Katherine Jackson said it herself when she said that when she held MJ as a baby, she never would have believed what would he would become. We may never get a superstar like MJ again, or we could get one tomorrow, in ten years, in fifty years or two hundred years.

Nobody knows.
 
They did that list, actually, with the Pope at number one and Queen Elizabeth at number two. I don't want to come across as though I HAVE to have Michael at number one, because that's not the case, I'm just trying to put this in to persepctive. The Pope and Queen Elizabeth are figureheads, more symbols then individuals and there is persistently a NEW one. A new Pope, a new Queen Elizabeth, it's generational and they are seen as representing something more so then as a recognizable person. If the Pope walked down the street in regular street cloths, or Queen Elizabeth, do you think many people would recognize either of them? No. If Michael walked down the street in regular street cloths, everyone would recognize him. See my point?
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
Well that's like saying everything is up to opinion and standards do not apply. You have to have standards to lend value to anything. You have to have faith in certain sciences and give room for assumption and interpratation in everything, otherwise all of the world's "facts" would crumble in to dust. There's no point in being so nit picky when you know it to be the truth. You can call EVERYTHING in to question if you want to be a big enough ass. Not calling you an ass, just people in general who take on that attitude.
Click to expand...

lol you have to have some understanding for such asses like me who have just studied statistics and do very much differ between what they believe and what is a fact means to prove.
As a matter of fact (lol sorry for my wording) facts do not crumble as easy as 'just someone talking hot air'. Because there's not much faith in sciences while there's indeed a lot of proving and facts.
But yeah you have to have faith to have the patience and finally find prove.
So to me there's a strong point indeed only if you can back up what you're saying.
 
There's a WHOLE lot of faith in science. Factually, the sun will rise in the east tomorrow, right? Uhh, wrong. Past pattarns SUGGEST that it will, and we have FAITH that it will, but in actuallity, we don't for sure KNOW that it will. Water boils at 212 degrees, and that's a fact, right? Uh, NOPE. Past patterns SUGGEST that it will, and we again have faith that it will boil at just that temputure, but we don't know for SURE that it will. Get my drift?
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
There's a WHOLE lot of faith in science. Factually, the sun will rise in the east tomorrow, right? Uhh, wrong. Past pattarns SUGGEST that it will, and we have FAITH that it will, but in actuallity, we don't for sure KNOW that it will. Water boils at 212 degrees, and that's a fact, right? Uh, NOPE. Past patterns SUGGEST that it will, and we again have faith that it will boil at just that temputure, but we don't know for SURE that it will. Get my drift?
Click to expand...

So now we're discussing science?! lol

How likely do you think it is that the sun gets up somewhere else than in the east when of hundred tries it did hundred times get up in the east??? rotfl

You can prove a certain likelihood with some validity and reliability with tries and repeating results while doing experiments and statistics.

Anyways let's shorten this... I suppose you don't really know the statistics which you quote with its result that Michael is on second, third or first as most famous?

That's bad... I'd really be interested. Well maybe I'll google it myself.
 
You basically just admitted I'm right, lol. You don't KNOW that the sun will rise in the east, but statistically, and according to past pattarns, it PROBABLY will. Just like according to those same unreliable, says you, statstics, Michael is PROBABLY the most famous human being on the planet. Same process of elimination and pattarns determine both things, with some faith needed. I do know Michael is the most famous because it's been averaged several times that he is, the scientific process. I already explained, correctly I feel, why the Pope and Queen Elizabeth are ahead on that list. Like Coke A Cola, they are more a representation of something, a religion or a leadership, but not so recongniable as individual people. I don't even really know what Queen Elizabeth looks like and if the Pope walked down the street dressed in regular attire, I would think he was just some crusty old dude.
 
wannabestartinsomthin21 said:
You basically just admitted I'm right, lol. You don't KNOW that the sun will rise in the east, but statistically, and according to past pattarns, it PROBABLY will. Just like according to those same unreliable, says you, statstics, Michael is PROBABLY the most famous human being on the planet. Same process of elimination and pattarns determine both things, with some faith needed. I do know Michael is the most famous because it's been averaged several times that he is, the scientific process. I already explained, correctly I feel, why the Pope and Queen Elizabeth are ahead on that list. Like Coke A Cola, they are more a representation of something, a religion or a leadership, but not so recongniable as individual people. I don't even really know what Queen Elizabeth looks like and if the Pope walked down the street dressed in regular attire, I would think he was just some crusty old dude.
Click to expand...

lol you got that wrong. I know the sun will go up in the east tomorrow. :yes:

but you know I've just googled the most famous ppl.

without that it seems too easy to define famous... (would you give ppl a list of ppl to chose or would you better ask them who first comes to their mind as being probably most famous... lots of possibilities etc) it seems pretty hard to prove Michael is still up their in the peak of ppls concious.
I've found nothing like that yet... lots of different lists... lots of statistics done... but no results even close to what you and me assume to be true! *shrugs*
 
Well if I had the study on hand, I would give it to you. And what makes you think Michael wouldn't be on people's conciousness? Because he isn't as popular as he once was? That doesn't mean he isn't as famous. He's probably more famous. I heard a group of young kids arguing amongst themselves about who the most famous person in the world was the other day, and Michael was one of the people they were talking about.

And no, you don't KNOW that the sun will go up in the east tomorrow, you only assume it will based on the past. You have faith it will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top