Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[blmeanie]

When John's quote of the Beatles being more popular than Jesus was quoted in August of 1966 in America and all the negativity commenced, the world population that year was ~ 3.4 billion people.

What do you all think to this question - what percent of the world population heard/knew of the controversy?  With technology all that it wasn't back then, radio and tv reports and written newspapers and magazines were the only way it would spread.  The Beatles were the most "non Jesus" entity (most likely) then, right?

So how many people in the world knew of his quote, knew who he was?

Imagine in today's world with social media, how would it spread?  Imagine the United Airlines goof x 1000 ?

[tkitna]

Probably most of the population.  The media pushed the story and it travelled.

[Moogmodule]

It's an interesting question. I wonder if the main difference today is that it would be highlighted in a lot of different markets where it might have passed with less comment in the 60s. For instance twitter would reach the Latin American markets which have strong religious communities. That could have helped stoke up the outrage.  I'm not aware whether this was a big controversy for non English speaking markets in the 60s.

On the upside those coming to Lennon's defence would have been more easily mobilised as well.

[blmeanie]

What surprises me the most still to this day is that in England, where it was originally published 5 months prior to in the U.S. , there didn't seem to be any outrage. 

[Bobber]

On the other hand, John might have had a better possibility to get the quote correct. In 1966 it soon became 'bigger than Jesus', where John actually stated 'more popular than Jesus'. A slight difference with a great impact.

[Hombre_de_ningun_lugar]

On the other hand, John might have had a better possibility to get the quote correct. In 1966 it soon became 'bigger than Jesus', where John actually stated 'more popular than Jesus'. A slight difference with a great impact.

That's a great difference, actually. Being "more popular than Jesus" could have been a fact. Being "bigger than Jesus" would have been an insane pretension.

[Moogmodule]

He could have used it as his twitter bio.

[Hello Goodbye]

I was 16 at the time and read about it in the newspaper.  I knew what he meant by that remark.  "Bigger" was slang for "more popular."  Most of us in the United States paid little attention to it initially.  Several radio stations promulgated the mess.  Primitive social media proved to be a strong influence.

[KelMar]

It seems to me that there's always been a very vocal minority in the US that gets upset about such things. I feel like most of the footage I've seen of outraged adults lamenting the younger generation has come from here. It wasn't that way in my family. My parents were like others from their generation in many ways but they were very cool in many other ways. They seemed to actually enjoy what the older kids, and later what I listened to; Mom especially. She was always asking me who that was singing on the radio. For some reason that embarrassed me when my friends were in the car. LOL I should have realized that was a good thing.

[Bobber]

It seems to me that there's always been a very vocal minority in the US that gets upset about such things. I feel like most of the footage I've seen of outraged adults lamenting the younger generation has come from here. It wasn't that way in my family. My parents were like others from their generation in many ways but they were very cool in many other ways. They seemed to actually enjoy what the older kids, and later what I listened to; Mom especially. She was always asking me who that was singing on the radio. For some reason that embarrassed me when my friends were in the car. LOL I should have realized that was a good thing.

I'm doing the same thing with my kids now. Thing is that they hardly know the artists for themselves. Music has become a throw away thing. Very exchangable. It's not like the old days, when you had to save up to buy a LP record you were eager to get and listened to day and night (because you hardly had any other record). I still know the playing order of a lot of records I had. Today kids listen to a song for a week and it's deleted from their phones with the greatest ease.

[KelMar]

I'm doing the same thing with my kids now. Thing is that they hardly know the artists for themselves. Music has become a throw away thing. Very exchangable. It's not like the old days, when you had to save up to buy a LP record you were eager to get and listened to day and night (because you hardly had any other record). I still know the playing order of a lot of records I had. Today kids listen to a song for a week and it's deleted from their phones with the greatest ease.

That's sad but I could see things heading this way when my kids were teenagers, 10 years ago. I had to replace a lot of my albums because they got damaged but I know what you mean about the playing order. When I listen to the CDs or the digital versions I still remember when I had to turn the record over. 

[blmeanie]

the hard part is when a song ends, your mind tells you what should be coming next including the unique length of time between those particular songs depending on your memory source album/cassette/8track

When the next song isn't what you expected, there is a letdown

[Mr Mustard]

What surprises me the most still to this day is that in England, where it was originally published 5 months prior to in the U.S. , there didn't seem to be any outrage. 

I don't think we had then, nor in today's more secular age do we have now, anything comparable to America's fervent "Bible Belt" which is where the controversy seemed to take root Stateside. Nowadays I know it bewilders many here in the UK that the USA - still regarded as the cutting edge of forward thinking, bold technological advance and positive futurism - retains such deep and widespread religious fortitude.

[tkitna]

Nowadays I know it bewilders many here in the UK that the USA - still regarded as the cutting edge of forward thinking, bold technological advance and positive futurism - retains such deep and widespread religious fortitude.

I'm one of them that retains it.  In that regard, I wonder how I would have reacted back then if I was a teenager or younger person.

[Moogmodule]

I was too young to remember it. I was brought up in a pretty serious catholic family. I seem to recall even my mum, who was pretty devout, said (a few years after when I was older) that it was blown out of proportion and taken out of context. And she wasn't a Beatles fan being early middle age when they arrived.

[KelMar]

It's interesting to get the point of view from across the pond.

[Mr Mustard]

I'm one of them that retains it.  In that regard, I wonder how I would have reacted back then if I was a teenager or younger person.

Good for you, Todd - I too believe and take my faith and spirituality very seriously. The UK has become increasingly secular in recent generations and there is a frustratingly ignorant link in some people's minds between Godlessness and enlightenment, which I wholeheartedly disagree with, personally.

I think what underscored the different reactions to John's remark - which I do think was twisted out of context and magnified - was that the Americans often took The Beatles literally and seriously whereas John's fellow Brits rolled our eyes and thought "There goes bigmouth again!" (in an affectionate, tutting at a naughty nephew kind of way).

[tkitna]

I think what underscored the different reactions to John's remark - which I do think was twisted out of context and magnified - was that the Americans often took The Beatles literally and seriously whereas John's fellow Brits rolled our eyes and thought "There goes bigmouth again!" (in an affectionate, tutting at a naughty nephew kind of way).

That's a good point Mr.M.  While the world recognizes the Beatles for their greatness and popularity, different regions probably see them differently.  It reminds me of a conversation I was having with a gentleman from England and we were talking about McCartney and something silly he had done.  The English person told me that they see Paul as pretty much a joke anymore and that made me sad, but I could see why he said it.  Of course that doesn't sit with everybody, but I wonder if he spoke for the majority?

Sorry, off topic.