Um...
'Academics' across t'pond have 'discovered' the 'revealing' 'news' that 'people' are more likely to 'like' something if they're 'told' to like it before 'listening' to it. Y'know, 'music'.
Scientists - we assume not the really clever ones working to make our world a better, safer, more friendly kinda place - at Colombia Univeristy polled some 14,000 people via a website-type thing. The result: that bands can become popular without people actually having heard them.
The process is all very complicated, so basically what happened is as follows: person listens to band and rates band for others to see; band goes to number one on recommendations as well as downloads/listens; sometimes band goes to the top of the virtual charts without receiving x-amount of plays necessary to be there, achieving success through a sheep-like following of the leader. Or something.
Momentum breeds success, in a nutshell, and momentum from other people recommending new music is a powerful tool indeed.
"It suggests that even if an act creates high quality music, you might not be successful," was the opinion of chief science man, sociologist Matthew Salganik.
Um...
is this a shock?
It's kind of the point of music journalism, right?
actually
no... it's a bit more complicated than that. To quote the original paper:
"as social influence increases ... which particular products turn out to be regarded as good or bad becomes increasingly unpredictable ... We conjecture, therefore, that experts fail to predict success not because they are incompetent judges or misinformed about the preferences of others, but because when individual decisions are subject to social influence, markets do not simply aggregate pre-existing individual preferences."
Arctic monkeys?
Case In Point
Arctic Monkeys.
but this "research" is fairly obvious. if someone tells you something is good, then you're more likely to focus on positives about the band's music than the negatives.
can you change the picture to
Pinky and the Brain? Thanks.
it's actually a good paper
The way this has been written up in the press isn't particularly accurate, but the original paper is pretty good. Probably the best summary is on the New Scientist website:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8702
Although if you're really interested there are more details on my blog:
http://rgl.livejournal.com/38860.html
I'm not very science-minded
hence me struggling to relate the findings, above.
Thanks for posting links.
sorry...
Didn't mean to sound like I was getting at you - when I first read the press articles I thought it was pretty uninteresting too (and I'm a mad scientist by training), but luckily I work somewhere where I can read the original.
the last bit
about being good news for small bands....sort of leads to suggest that its ok...you can still make it, good music or not....just concentrate on promoting yourself.
still. as i am having to listen to sean paul on repeat coming through my ceiling from my loud italian upstairs neighbours any science is a good thing. im going to have to leave now before i attack someone italian with a hastily crafted bunsen
the last bit of the new scientist article...*sorry*
.
Didn't
everybody know this anyway?
What the fuck are you banging on about, exactly?
The New Scientist's article is incredibly interesting and slightly more substantial than just reiterating the assumption that people are 'sheep'.
It's similar to Milgram's study of authority and obedience - in that influence and peer presseure can affect a person's decisions. Of course, taking that in would've got in the way of your delightfully ironic use of quotation marks.
lets try it out
i've been hearing a lot of great things about this guy
www.myspace.com/powerupup
oh god
kill me now
TATU are awesome
everyone check them out, i've heard great things about them!
TATU are awesome
I heard they were 14 when that video was filmed
Shouldn't there be an equally unnecessary paragraph there citing Limp Bizkit?
well i've been telling people...
that these are great and you should listen to them...
www.myspace.com/thesugars
thats spooky
i know them, like as mates and stuff
Ooh
But are sociologists 'scientists'? Controversial! A whole debate in the Philosophy of Social Science! :P