as far as the stones getting airplay in current times - nickleback are the biggest rock band by default, if anyone partially as charismatic or talented as the stones were making music now, they'd have NO problem being the top dogs of rock.

God I hate David Brooks.

"It’s considered inappropriate or even immoral for white musicians to appropriate African-American styles."

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Moron.

I thought Rock and Roll died in the 80s (certainly) and late 70s, was it reborn in the 90s?

I hated listening to the radio, and now I don't have to. I can listen to what I want wherever, and that's a problem for anyone other than the record companies? We didn't all love the same music, the payola was such that we had to listen to the same stuff non-stop.

Some old fart with more sense wrote this same article a year ago (pitchfork?). Some balls to say that, just because you don't like it, it's dead.

To the extent that any song writer draws from a shallow pool of influence, I agree that fact will appear in the resulting song. But the author's quarrel appears to lie with song writers failing to seek out, or at least be effected by, a wide range of influences.

So, assuming "fragmentation" has occurred, wouldn't that tend to broaden the potential pool of influences from which song writers may draw? And wouldn't monolithic artistic output tend to reduce the number of potential influences?

The real complaint here seems to be that with the end of the era when record labels and radio stations were cultural gatekeepers that determined what music the public had access to, it's much harder for them to enjoy blockbuster sales like they did back when they had a virtual monopoly on music distribution.

As to the absence of new acts with the staying power of the Stones/U2/Metallica, I've been hearing this song since the early 90's. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the labels themselves and their abandonment of long-term strategies once practiced by their A&R departments.

Back in the day, the labels cultivated their artists over the course of many years, grooming them for superstardom. Springsteen's early career is a good example of this. This model was abandoned roughly, oh say a year or two before the first reports of the death of the superstar began to surface. Years and years of slash-and-burn agriculture and the yields start dropping.

I really don't give a damn if I'm one of 39 Americans who likes, oh, Kemialliset Ystävät, although I will champion them in print or in your ear if I get the chance. But, ultimately, who cares if millions of bland motherfuckers don't share my enthusiasms? Fragmentation is fine with me. The masses usually have crap taste, anyhow, and are generally ineducable/apathetic.

The gatekeepers--mostly baby boomer music critics, whoever's programming commercial radio and running the major labels--have gotten progressively more shit-brained and conservative.

However, it's never been easier to ignore the traditional gatekeepers and blaze your own trail. The catch is, there's way more great music being made now than any one person can consume and digest, unless one possesses unlimited time and resources with which to do so. There's also way more lousy and mediocre music around now clogging the portals; as we are mostly our own gatekeepers, we have our work cut out for us.

Also, "Smell Yo Dick" is hilarious.