Chart positions or YouTube views do not represent how good an artist is
Debate Rounds (3)
The idea that one artist is better than another because he or she is more popular is absurd. Music is a form of art and is purely subjective. Therefore the quality of an artist cannot be determined based on whether or not an artist is successful. Chart positions only reflect mainstream exposure, not the actual quality of music.
Definition for "represent"- allege; claim. This is the definition on Google that worked best in the context.
Does it represent it? Following this definition, yes- it's a claim that they earned all the fan support, which means it usually represents accurately who is likely to suit your tastes. Note, a claim- not necessarily true, but as it often is, the logical answer is that yes, Youtube views often show how good a video is. Of course, there are some exceptions. However, these are, as I said, exceptions, and these are rare enough that you can safely assume that most videos with lots of views will be good. There are of course some rising stars who will present high level videos for a small audience. But a good video is likely to have lots of views, even if the channel that made it is still small. As such, for the vast majority of videos with high numbers of views, you can expect a high quality video. And you can expect that the vast majority of videos with low numbers of views will not be nearly so good. So as a perfect sample, no, but as a representation, yes, Youtube views tend to show how good the video is.
In conclusion, as a representation, high numbers of view suggest that the video will probably be one you'll enjoy more than videos with low numbers of views, with only a few exceptions.
TheYoungManAndTheSea forfeited this round.
If you do not respond for round three, I'm calling that a win my way. I would have continued the debate, so forfeit = my win, as I did not give up.
1. First I would like to argue that the idea that one artist is superior to another is simply a matter of taste. Listeners will forever argue whether an artist, a genre, a song, or an album is better then another. They will always disagree because no matter what the argument is, you cannot change an individuals musical preference which will always be unique to them. Music is an artistic form of expression and I argue that because of this the quality of music cannot be judged based on the idea of 'units sold."
2. I would like to argue that popularity is not a measure of artistic quality. An independent artist without much recognition could potentially be a much better artist then an extremely popular artist with a major record deal. I would like to argue that in terms of music most artists, with a few exceptions, have climbed the charts have done so not based on their own merit, but because of the support and promotion of a major record label. I would like to ask the question, is a popular song on YouTube with 0.5m views inferior to a song with 1.5m views? The answer is no. Exposure is what causes higher view counts, not individual artist or song quality.
Now in response to your points.
1. Fair enough, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. But an artist has usually done "good" if they are high on the charts and/or have lots of Youtube views. Whereas an artist who has less views may have done good to those who watched it, but they have not made as many people think they are good.
One of the many definitions for the word good- giving pleasure; enjoyable or satisfying.
Surely if a Youtube video is watched more, it has given more pleasure, joy and satisfaction than one which fewer people have watched. So it is therefore more good than other videos. So while to certain individuals one is better than another, the one that has been watched more has done good things for more people.
2. The thing is that the other artist has earned the major record deal, if the better artist has the talent, they also get offered a major record deal. And again-
A definition of the word represent- allege; claim.
More views is a claim that the video is better. Whether it is or not depends, but usually it does accurately portray that the video is superior. And if a song with half a million view is popular, than a song with one and a half million is even more so. More exposure usually comes to better Youtubers, and better Youtubers can afford to pay for better songs, for better special effects, etc. So on average, yes, higher views = better video.
So by the definitions of the question, I should win this one.
Literal definition of arguments point- Chart positions or YouTube views do not make a claim about how much pleasure an artist gives.
It does make a claim that it will give more pleasure than a less popular video. Whether you in particular will receive that pleasure is unsure, but it does give the world more pleasure, most of the time.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.