Idolator

iTunes made it okay for dad to repurchase his Beatles collection in a new-fangled format. That's all. Any independent artist that uses iTunes is missing the point, which is that Apple doesn't care about you. They care about the Timberlake-listening, Seger-popin, bare-nakedin crowd. Which I guess might include you but if it does, why are you reading this?

iTunes Top 10 lists won't be as honky once the internet in general isn't as honky. I'm not sure this day will ever come.

*insert huge debate about internet access, Western class issues, people deluded into thinking the internet is an accurate sampling population, etc.*

This is the world we live in Post-Survivor:Cook Island. Until the "Raro" tribe wins an immunity challenge this is the revenge that will inflicted upon us.

Of course it's an accurate sampling population, if you're not on the Net you are dead to the world! (Happily my parents have recently come back from the dead.)

People who regularly pay for music on Itunes are sort of people who will tell you about it, and who they judge as the artists who 'deserve our money'-
The sort of people who buy organic food because its morally superior and watch The OC because its 'pop'.

That list is so honky, Timberlake made it twice. Assuming that accounts for both a "clean" and a "dirty" version of the same record--or a "sexy" and "not so sexy" version--his numbers must be off the charts. I guess he really did bring sexy back after all.

What?! Cee Lo and Danger have been dislodged from the Top 10? How perfectly imperfect! Did hell freeze over, or are that many people really buying Bob Seger?