What is good and bad (and everything in between) are entirely subjective matters, only existing in thought. For something to be good, only requires the person to perceive it as being good, and is completely independent of the object in question, which is simply just an object. Without people (or any other living thing capable of thought) to judge what is good or bad, the terms would be meaningless. By definition of subjection, yes, popular = good. Or, in other interchangeable words, people liking something = people like it.
The Tide Pod challenge. Jump for Trump. The "Mail Yourself" challenge. The choking game. The cinnamon challenge. The ice and salt challenge.
Just because something is popular does not mean it is good. All of these things listed above were actually trends that have existed. I do realize that some trends exist for a good cause (like the ice bucket challenge, Which raised awareness for ALS. Even then, It had negative effects. . . It was deemed a waste of water; California was suffering a drought).
Not everyone likes things because they're "good." That's not how it works. There are many factors that go into whether you like something or not, and how "good" that thing is could be 10% of whether you like it, or it could be 90% of whether you like it. However, when everyone starts liking something, you might decide you like it just because everyone else likes it, and it snowballs from there. But does everyone really "like" this thing because it's good? Not at all. There are many other reasons why the goodness of something should not be based on popularity, but that's just an example. Goodness and popularity are very different things.
You can see their loyal fans fight with their dying breath that they are not bad influence. Any sane person will know otherwise.
Yet, I will just mention one name. How many knew Nelson Mandela before his death? He was no where as near to being popular as the above two. Yet has so much good qualities that people should follow.
So as much popularity should have been used to preach good. It no longer is and hence it shouldn't be used to define good.
Because being good is solely based on your personal opinion, one person could hate them another person could love them. Popularity is just a statistic, do statistics prove anything yes but they don't mean that somethings good or not. They could be not popular because nobody knows about them. Also the monopoly of the music industry (which is almost dead) was making it hard for independent artists to be noticed. Now because of the internet anybody can do anything which is good. But my argument stands that popularity does not mean your good or bad it simply means people have noticed you. A lot of bad things are popular too.
People wouldn't watch if they weren't good. People like one direction cause they are good at boybanding. There is very few examples of something that is good and not popular. Not only that but "good" is in the eye of the beholder. I like onedirection and streeetlight manifesto. I find both good, but one is more popular. If you disagree feel free to debate me on whether or not 1D is a good band
Popularity may last for a while, but it doesn't last long and many of the songs of pop music are simply a whole loads of electronics and absolutely no talent at all. Popularity is an arbitrary criteria to say if someone is good or bad by his or her popularity. Talent and skill is what judges a person to be "good".