I was charged with writing a defence of pop music, with the special stipulation of the article being it had to focus on one particular artist, preferably one who typically inspires hatred in the hearts of *Real Music Fans*
…I settled (after much disgruntled mind-raking) on Britney Spears, and decided, in a flash of sheer genius, to title the thing “Defending Pop with Spears”.
The main gist of the article is the point that pop is popular, and we need popular things because they bring us together the most: the more people who know the words the more people will sing along.
If you click the link you’ll notice my editors have retitled it with the palpably weak headline “Britney Spears: Saviour of Pop”. Now, they always rename my pieces at Sabotage Times, and it doesn’t normally bother me, but this seems like a particularly egregious example since it gives a very exaggerated idea of what the article is really about, all for the sake of easy accessibility.
What’s ironic about this whinge, I realised, is that this is precisely the thing I argue on behalf of in the piece- that ease of accessibility is a good thing. I know “Defending Pop with Spears” isn’t exactly a number-one-hit of a title, but my goodness how wet and useless is that other one?
I think I’ll attack pop on my next assignment.