The Beatles broke up in 1970. If you were someone “of age” back then – and I most certainly was – the news came as a cultural explosion, the end of an era. There had been rumors of disharmony, boredom, deceit, and delusion for some time, especially around John and Yoko who were clearly marching to the beat of a drummer other than Ringo.
Beatles fans had their look behind the scenes a couple Thanksgivings ago – that 9-hour 3-part documentary produced by Disney and directed by Peter Jackson that painstakingly watched John, Paul, George, and Ringo disintegrate right before our very eyes. At times, Get Back was an ordeal just to watch, so it must have been more brutal to endure it in real life.
Looking at John, Paul, George, and Ringo on this revealing doc, you could see the toll the stress of being the Beatles put on their lives. And after a mere six years in that white hot spotlight, the greatest rock n’ roll band of our lifetimes broke up.
But with no Internet, no social media, and the “mainstream media” not providing the kind of coverage we’re used to now, it all came as something of a shock to the Baby Boomers of that era. The Beatles weren’t just musical Pied Pipers. They were cultural icons who set the standard for their dress, their hair, and their breezy style.
And seemingly from the moment the Fab Four broke up, musical circles started humming with speculation about a reunion, even humorously proposed a couple years later by Saturday Night Live executive producer, Lorne Michaels, who in 1976, satirically offered those mop tops from Liverpool a $3,000 check to reunite on the show.
(There’s an amazing story behind that “offer” as Paul and John were actually watching that SNL show together in the Dakota in New York City, John’s home. I’ll embed a video at the end of this post that Paul narrates.)
It, of course, was not to be. But even this year, a story broke a few months back about Paul using AI technology to clean up a cassette tape John had recorded with the song “Now And Then.” If true, we might get to hear a “new” Beatles song before the ball drops in Times Square this December.
Over the decades, there was conjecture, speculation, and even hope “the next Beatles” would happen along, picking up where the Fab Four left off. Clearly, this new phenomenon would be different from the Beatles, but there was a sense we’d know it when we saw it.
There were a few red herrings over the years – the Knack, out of Detroit seemingly played into the rumors, but their spark burned brightly for a cup of coffee or two before fizzling out. A mystery band known as
Klaatu came around two years earlier, bathed in mystery. Even without the worldwide web, conspiracy theories made the rounds these guys were in reality, the Beatles. That one didn’t last long either.
Then there were a series of bands some thought might come close. The ’80s were pretty much a wash. Aside from the birth of MTV and the era of the music video, the decade was more about Michael Jackson, Madonna, and the birth of Rap.
The ’90s ushered in the Grunge phase, but it too flamed out after a few short years, dampened by the tragic death of Kurt Cobain.
As the years rolled by and the music and radio industry changed, it became clear to many media observers the conditions that helped spawn the Beatles (and Elvis and Sinatra before them) simply didn’t exist. When the Beatles came to America nearly 60 years ago, their debut on CBS-TV’s Ed Sullivan Show attracted 73 million viewers. But back then, there were only three television networks, a bunch of AM radio stations, and the newspaper and magazine industries. Americans, in particular, were collectively listening and watching the same media content.
Unlike today, where fragmentation has become the norm. Our media choices seem exponential. There are hundreds of cable TV channels, but millions and millions of entertainment options on YouTube, Twitch, TikTok, and countless other sites and social media platforms.
Where we once waited in line to buy a copy of Abbey Road the day the album came out (I did that, too), now every song ever recorded can be played on your mobile phone. For the majority of consumers, there’s no reason to buy music, unless you’re a collector. Music has become disposable, a commodity.
Sgt. Pepper’s was a theme album, a cultural breakthrough, a true phenomenon. Today, albums barely exist. The artwork and design, liner notes, and the other accoutrements that accompanied a record are a quaint thing of the past.
We’re all watching and listening to different stuff, often programmed by algorithms created in no small part to continue to give us what we want. That is, more of the same.
That’s why the Taylor Swift phenomenon this year is so damn impressive. While some of you may threaten to take away my Classic Rock bona fides (and my decoder ring), it is hard not to look at what Taylor Swift is accomplishing and not make Beatlesesque comparisons.
It was crystalized for me in a recent New York Times piece by Ben Sisario. His sub-headline sums it up nicely:
“The pop star’s record-breaking, career-spanning show has dominated the summer, commanding attention and whipping up demand at a level thought unachievable in a fragmented age.”
That’s right. In a “long tail” media world where we can access just about any content on any device wherever and whenever we like, Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour, its amazing merch, and the swirl she has created around her persona is mind-boggling.
Unlike the Beatles who exploded on the scene as the leaders of “The British Invasion,” Taylor Swift’s rise to these heights has been a steady hum of
fandom, brilliant calculation, and smarts the likes we just haven’t seen – perhaps ever.
At 33, she has accomplished much, with much more runway to grow. Consider that when the Beatles walked away from their fame and fortune, none of the four had turned “the big 3-0.”
Consider the following factoids about Swift:
- She has an army of fans – Swifties – that is every bit as loyal and committed as the kids who reveled in Beatlemania.
- Swift dodged bullets during the Ticketmaster meltdown at the beginning of the tour. And as is the case in recent years, many fans have now seen the Eras Tour in multiple cities around the country (and the globe).
- She waged a successful battle to win back control of her music, an effort that included rerecording her first three albums, creating “Taylor’s Versions.”
- Taylor Swift has stamina. The Times reports that after polishing off 53 shows in the U.S., Eras will go international for 78 dates, and then return to North America in the fall of 2024. She’s also a great live performer, and of course, that generates an amazing power as acts like Bruce Springsteen have shown.
- Speaking of the Beatles (and Prince), Swift recently matched an amazing record – three top 10 hits on the chart this past June. Even more impressive, all three songs are from different albums.
- Like Lennon and McCartney, she’s a gifted songwriter, earlier in her career, crossing over from Country to the Pop charts. She may be at the highest level of superstardom, but her songs resonate with her fans.
- Taylor Swift has mastered social media and community building, tools unavailable to the Beatles, the Stones, and others of that era. But even many of today’s superstars pass those duties off on staffers, barely engaging with fans. She speaks to her fans directly via social.
- For superfans, she leaves messages – “Easter eggs” – in her albums and videos. That code communication creates a deeper level of intimacy between the artist and her community. Not surprisingly, the Beatles did this, too. (“Here’s another clue for you all. The walrus was Paul.”) Brilliant.
- She has values, and has made risky political statements over the past several years. Interestingly, the Beatles flourished by displaying similar behavior in their opposition to the Vietnam War. In our polarized world today, Taylor Swift has stuck to her beliefs.
- Observers remark on Swift’s great team – the way she treats fans and industry people, the attention to detail. If you’ve met her through a connection to radio, you know those backstage moments are personal and warm. She remembers you, who’s visiting and how to connect with them. And all that interaction gets amplified all over social pages, the story of a fan’s life.
This list could go on. And on.
That’s a huge point. While Taylor Swift is a gifted artist, singer, songwriter, and marketer, her unprecedented success is proof positive of the importance of attention to detail…and doing the right thing.
Last week, she was lauded for handing out six-figure bonuses to her road crew and truck drivers – an act of appreciation that also elicited a great deal of press coverage.
Eighteen years into a grueling business, she’s at the top of her game – not on the “back 9” where so many artists end up after the touring, the burnout, and the wear and tear.
I’ll give the last word to someone who knows this stuff well, William Martin Joel – but you know him as Billy, who showed up, family in tow at the Eras Tour stop in Tampa:
“The only thing I can compare it to is the phenomenon of Beatlemania.”
I get it.
As promised, here’s that video, featuring Lorne Michaels’ reunion offer to the Beatles, with a reaction narrated by Paul. – FJ
Jacobs Media has consistently walked the walk in the digital space, providing insights and guidance through its well-read national Techsurveys.
In 2008, jacapps was launched - a mobile apps company that has designed and built more than 1,300 apps for both the Apple and Android platforms. In 2013, the DASH Conference was created - a mashup of radio and automotive, designed to foster better understanding of the "connected car" and its impact.
Along with providing the creative and intellectual direction for the company, Fred consults many of Jacobs Media's commercial and public radio clients, in addition to media brands looking to thrive in the rapidly changing tech environment.
Fred was inducted into the Radio Hall of Fame in 2018.
- Old Man, Take A Look At My Ratings - December 20, 2024
- In The World Of On-Demand Audio, How Do We Define Success? - December 19, 2024
- Scenes From The Classic Rock Highway – 2024 Edition - December 18, 2024
Very enjoyable piece. I also have been awestruck by Swift’s unique level of success.
Thanks, Brad. I enjoyed writing it.
What I find most odd about the entire situation is the near glaring non-support of Swift by pop radio. Perhaps it’s only the stations in my area(?), but I’m pummeled by Dua Lipa, Harry Styles, Lizzo and seemingly everyone BUT Taylor Swift. Hearing about her phenomenal tour and record-breaking success, I was surprised that none have done what WJ BEATLE K did in the 1960s. Where’s the fan support? Are they TRYING to slip even more into irrelevance?
Have to disagree. Driving between Boston and Providence this morning heard both KISS 108 and 92 PRO FM playing Swift’s “Cruel Summer” at the same time. They both play a lot of Taylor Swift.
Taylor Swift’s “Cruel Summer” was the most played at Top 40 radio this past week according to Monday Morning Intel’s weekly research report.
I’m not sure that Swiftymania will ever be the cultural onslaught that Beatlemania was, but given the stratification of music and media, what Taylor Swift has done may be more remarkable. And she’s done more with love performance than the Beatles came ose to doing. And I don’t know if radio has stopped playing her, but if so, it’s pure lunacy.
She will never come close to beatlemania todays arist just don’t have the same talent like back then
Stopped reading when Taylor Swift got brought into the article. Amy Winehouse was a way better singer/ songwriter, than bland music Swift.
Winehouse had that thing called ” edgy”. What’s missing from today’s bland music, were everything sounds the same.
An neither into the near deification of the Beatles either. The Rolling Stones, Cream, Jimi Hendrix, Velvet Underground, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, all made Rock albums as good as the Beatles, who had a more commercial radio- friendly, poppy-rock sound.
In other genre’s of music. Jazz: Miles Davis, John Coltrane, were geniuses. Soul: Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder, etc. Pop: Abba, Bee Gees, Michael Jackson, Prince. Reggae: Bob Marley…
Excellent comparison, Fred. I had the privilege of bringing my daughter to one of her M&G’s once and Taylor was just you described. My words to her were “If more people in this business were like you, it would be a much better business.” She thanked me for saying that and I said “it’s true.”
Taylor has actually been running Jimmy Buffett’s social media playbook only she started much younger! I think her loyalty to her fans is only matched by Buffett’s.
Yeah, no. Taylor Swift is very talented and perhaps every bit is worthy as your level of adulation for her songs in showmanship proclaims, she has nowhere near the cultural impact of the Beatles during the 1960s. Like you I’m from that era and I’m very surprised that you would make that comparison. She’s lovely, I guess, but she is not, by a country mile, the innovator that the Beatles offered.
Agree.
And not to mention the cultural, musical and industry impact The Beatles had around the world, which will never be matched by Taylor Swift, who may be a great personality in the United States, but who in the rest of the world is not so appreciated and that don’t even come close to the 4 of Liverpool.
Taylor Swift is not even thisclose to The Beatles.. There has been a long history of groups and solo artists who have been compared because of album sales and media hype,only to fall into the abyss. I do wish Taylor continued success though.
The Beatles once had five songs in the top 10 at once, not just three. And the Beatles did not leave Easter eggs for their fans. The whole point of Glass Onion is that their fans were LOOKING for clues, (The slang use of the term Easter egg didn’t exist yet) but the Beatles didn’t give them any. The song was just nonsense.
The Beatles once had five songs in the top 10 at once, not just three. And the Beatles did not leave Easter eggs for their fans. The whole point of Glass Onion is that their fans were LOOKING for clues, (The slang use of the term Easter egg didn’t exist yet) but the Beatles didn’t give them any. The song was just nonsense.
I’m a huge Beatles fan. I turned 14 just a few weeks before Feb 9, 1964, so I was primed to grow up with their ‘60s dominance. They not only had 5 songs in the top 10 for the first week of April 1964, they had the top 5 of the top 10. However…
It was “wind-aided.” I won’t get into the where’s and why fore’s here, but we were inundated with previously recorded singles that were never released in the US or were ignored. Once The Beatles exploded, the radio stations started to play those earlier recordings and they were all bunched together over those next early weeks in March. That’s how they ended up dominating the charts in April. Still, very impressive.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe I read that Taylor held all 10 spots on the top of one of the rating services earlier this year. I’m not sure if she will reach or has reached the sobriquet of “the next Beatles,” but she deserves all of the accolades she is receiving. She is a gifted singer/songwriter/performer. In a class by herself.
Many people need to go to a Fest For Beatles Fans to be Educated . There is one in Chicago this weekend
There will never be another phenomenon like The Beatles through the End of time . Please stop these silly comparisons . Modern music would not be what it is today if not for The Beatles , Period .
Amen, there is artistic value to most of the Beatles music. I rock and roll wasn’t taken seriously until the Beatles , we will have them for centuries.
Not sure you can really compare Taylor with The Beatles. Each is a phenomenon in a different way. Taylor has amassed a legion of fans that’s monstrous, no doubt. Her talent is noteworthy, no doubt. I knew of her appeal when I first played “Our Song” as a fill-in on a country station in 2007. (I was the fill-in, not Taylor.) May her star shine bright but realize please that the demographic appeal of this young lady can never approach what John, Paul, George and Ringo created in their all-too short pop music career. It’s clear. Taylor is a genius at reflecting musical taste. The Beatles created musical taste. There are dozens more examples on how it’s unfair to either entity to compare them and their success. Glad you brought it up, Fred-it’s always fun to see where you’re coming from.
No one is the next Beatles. They are a one off.
But, as an old Beatles fan i have come across a band that reminds me of them.
A hard rock band from Japan called Band Maid.
Look past their costumes and they are one of the best musically with similar personalities and work ethic of the fab four.
Exactly. The Beatles are untouchable in terms of cultural impact, but Band-Maid are the one band I’ve found who I can truly say equals or even exceeds them musically.
Taylor Swift? Shes good at what she does, but there’s nothing new there.
While I can see the broad comparison, it is hard to escape, on any level, the incredible output of the Beatles, not just musically but culturally. It is like they pulled the world into its own future, the cycle of reinvention of themselves that they made from ’63 to ’70 seems equivalent to what you might expect over decades and propelled us all forward in time.. they were/are simply a phenomena of unparrallaleled significance.
Just one mans thoughts anyways.
Let’s look at it this way .Beatlemania was a different reaction to a different time .just like Taylor swift is now.another 30 years or so that generation to will have there own Beatles and tylor swifts to build their secured from .Each having its own impact in its own time.
Just an opinion but…Taylor Swifts music doesn’t compare in quality to the music of The Beatles. Never did, never will…
This comparison is about as far off as it gets. Everyone knows that you can’t compare any band or person to the Beatles. Taylor swift is very talented and successful but is one person, the Beatles were 4, the beatles were a culture and changed music as we know it and are still relevant as ever 60 years later, we have a long way to go to see if taylor swift or her music will even be remembered in 60 years. The Beatles were a movement and had everyone singing and learning to play their songs as well as trying to look like them. They made movies, cartoon shows and then broke up and all had amazingly successful careers with most of their independent works sounding just like the beatles. In addition 3 out of 4 of the beatles were all multi-instrumentalists. Love and respect Taylor Swift but this comparison is ridiculous.
Allow me to be VERY clear on this there will never be a next Beatles…end of story…why? Because there will never be a band that were as innovative with style of music and how their sound was produced….many modern bands acknowledge the foundations laid for influence on music that the Beatles brought forth…..and we can thank the fifth Beatle for that namely Mr.George Martin.
The next Beatles? So, THE FAB FOUR spent several years gigging in clubs, taverns and such working their asses off in their home country of England and Germany honing their craft performing multiple shows daily and nightly inspired by and covering those who came just a few years before them, then writing originals and becoming pop culture
monsters in no time with help from Ed Sullivan (and considering the “music radio” boredom for youth that occurred in the pre-1964 era that was still largely our mom’s and pop’s of the day. Just look at chart/sales history from the day the music died in February of 1959 on to 1963, much of it very MOR and not of the youth, outside of “The Twist”, R&B, and some Jazz [Dave Brubeck]). The Beatles nearly single-handedly ushered in the British (worldwide) Invasion and then released Rubber Soul and Revolver on their way to further glorious Benchmarks and Milestones on their way to becoming true ICONS of influence. They were the B.M.I.s and did more in 6 years than any other act and followed with stellar solo careers for years to boot.
Taylor Swift is a modern day social media-propelled solo act born out of a clever plan to establish her in country (or “Nashville Pop”) music and the tops in terms of number of radio stations in the Country format and then moved on to pop (who has done that!) She gets it and knows her craft, I’ll give her that. Unfortunately since today’s so-called CHR, et al, radio plays what I term “designed music” to be hyped, to the chart and then die-off to be forgotten after recurrent status is certainly not the TOP 40 of old. But there is NO comparison with THE Beatles.
Now, pardon my rant, but I’m retired from the industry I loved, but…
Enough about music being old or where to go to DISCOVER MUSIC! Are the classic painters or classical composers thought of as such? No! Their paintings sell for millions. And their music is TIMELESS! It is ALWAYS BEING DISCOVERED! Music in general is being found each and every day by newbies seeking new ideas, thoughts and sounds. It is used in syncs in commercial ads (much to my chagrin) The music we hear today has only been around since the 1950s/60s, a mere 50 to 60 years! It is truly timeless. Stop treating it like it is so old and disposable! We are our musical brothers/sisters keepers! We should respect the music we played that allowed so many radio station/group owners to sell their highly rated market format-dominant stations to new owner/operators for 10 or 20+ times cash flow during the halcyon years. I know several who became very wealthy via station sales of the 1980s and 90s.
I am a 35-year radio vet of small, secondary, large and major markets now some 15 years out of the biz, who started as a mere lad of 16 in high school (the manager who gave me my break in the industry via a phone book call-out survey job asking random persons what radio meant to them in ’73, also told me we only play music to have something to air between the commercials) but if I were programming today I’d be all about the Spotify/YouTube rankings of real plays and not the manipulated, unrealistic, so-called charts to determine what is “popular”. Yes, I’d insist on playing what is HOT, be it new or older (gold) gleaned from ISP plays. As we well know CATALOG product plays a huge part (can you say, “Classic Rock”) and the now (formerly) major labels know this to be fact, yet they continue to be pretenders to the throne of radio’s current-release domain. It’s all TikTok and no A&R. Consider the recent revelation that some 112,000 songs are added to Spotify daily and some 38 MILLION songs have not even been heard/played at all since they were uploaded to the platform.
Talk about granular, it may be past time to bring back local MUSIC DIRECTORS to change local station playlists daily instead of weekly to reflect what’s actually hot and hip TODAY in their respective markets. Time to stop dwelling on over-priced, low samples of household diary/PPM ratings and get to airing meaningful programming between stop-sets to appeal to an American working class audience to sell to and air QUALITY spots (created by clever and capable COPYWRITERS) based upon your station’s true local reach to deliver results to our clients and as Lee Abrams would say, “AFDI” folks! This is not rocket science. And AI won’t solve this malaise. It’s radio. And once upon a time it was magical, coming from the “ether”. It is being taken for granted by those who would rather pad their pockets than provide the service their license once required. Shame on the FCC. Maybe it needs to go the way of the original FRC. The NAB?
Today I am strictly a non-com radio listener when I do listen to OTA because so much of commercial radio is SHABBY!. I have not listened to commercial radio outside of a baseball game (a forgotten endeavor by local radio, by the way) in more than 7 years. Just this week a local MLB-carrying AM/FM-translator affiliate I occasionally tune-in was totally silent during the course of the entire scheduled game in my market. Oh, the carrier was on, yet there was zero audio, a pristine silence for more than 3 hours (I kept the FM on while viewing a TV stream). No one was home between 6:45 and 10PM (no board-op) and the automation was not working properly going into the pre-game and it was never addressed. I knew the game was on since I can pick up the unlistenable static-filled AM flagship more than 100 miles away!
I live in a 55+ community and NO ONE SPEAKS OF WHAT THEY’VE HEARD ON THE RADIO these days. It’s ALIEN for years now!
We were once B R O A D-casters. It is way past time to be just that. Or, maybe it’s just past time for radio here on the non-big show. Radio has much work to do to remain relevant in this well-established new world of 2023 and 1/2. Or it’s “Radio Ga Ga” g-g-goodbye.
We now return to your regularly scheduled program…
I like her. I saw her live once (last tour) and totally respect the hard work she’s done to reach this level. And I (heart) Billy Joel but I think his oft-repeated quote is a bit hyperbolic.
Here’s the sense I have, and if you’ve seen her current tour and can correct me, have at it:
Her audience isn’t even close to 50/50 male/female.
Call me sexist, but I’m not ready to call a specific performer a generational game-changer unless the demographics cut across age/sex/race for all parameters.
The Beatles did that. Several Motown acts did that. Whitney came pretty close. Not sure about Taylor Swift. Yet.
She’s a commercial, manufactured entity who will never have the cultural impact of the Beatles. Sixty years from now it’ll be, Taylor who?
Taylor Swift is an amazing talent and perhaps even more impressive a business person. But popularity and marketing prowess is not the same as musical/cultural impact. The Beatles – and in my opinion, it is not really a close call.