Why does slate continue attempting to pretend they know shit about music? about once a week I'm subjected to some piece of shit article about the next flavor of the week "artist" (lady gaga, miley, etc). And, WOW! So mainstream music steals from underground music (and sometimes vice versa!) GROUNDBREAKING NEWS! Up next on Slate......Cheney is a Liar!

OH, and two side notes I should have mentioned: I've listened to Maps many times, and the "similarities" between that and Kelly Clarkson are almost completely unnoticeable. At most, two songs using the exact same chord change? IMPOSSI`BLE`! and the fact that you actually clicked on and sent links to SEVEN different videos of creepy 12 year olds singing about brushing they teeth with Jack (which I'm sure that half if not all had no idea what that even meant, maybe..). Whatever happened to the days when 12 year olds and shitty music stayed where they belonged, at home. And how could we miss underground french club hits with 27k views on youtube? You sure are up to speed on music. Because when I think of great music, I go to clubs.

IMaps is on regular repeat on my mp3 player and I also have no idea where this comparison comes from. However, I didn't click on the links because I am at work.

I understand what Jonah is getting at but this is nothing new. Pop music is, by my definition, a repackaging of other forms of music to make it more pleasing to the general public. It all just depends on the extent to which your ears can handle music in it's purest form. One could borrow melodies from animal collective's my girls and turn it into a pop sensation. But clearly the general public can't handle peacebone. The just don't have the capacity or the patience to suffer through all that noise (which I love).

I know this is besides the point, but there is very little distinction between the music/culture of hipsters and that of pop. Or, better stated, pop musicis just a subset of hipster music which is more broad than people give it credit. Go to pitchfork now and see that they review Jay-Z and tons of other pop artists.

I agree, why does this guy keep writing about music?

I have written for a couple American and British music publications, as more or less a hobby but one I take very seriously, and my fellow writers and editors at these publications are talking about real ground-breaking music but also very aware that, duhhhhh, pop music producers read the likes of Pitchfork . . . why wouldn't they? Do you think that doctors don't read JAMA? We write about music we feel for whatever reason merits review and consideration, as I suspect Slate's writers do also, but we do not try to force greater cultural commentary on the music or find some astounding link or new spin on it as Slate seems determined to contrive.

Let me tell you a little story: my ex-boyfriend's cousin was a producer and keyboardist for the Backstreet Boys and related acts. Through said boyfriend, I met him in Orlando and wound up hanging out a couple years later with a 19-year-old Aaron Carter. What did we talk about? The new Roland V-Synth GT keyboard and other synths and . . . get this: Laurie Anderson. We talked about her use of vocoders and Synclavier on her early performance work. So when Aaron's new album, just as pop as it can be, drops around Christmas, please don't say "aha! his people listen to The Postal Service" because whether they do or don't, his roots run waaaaay deeper. How insulting that a music journalist assumes all pop acts to only look through a back-catalog going back to 2004.