NYT Says Taylor Swift Is Bigger Than The Beatles!? WTF

The fact that every new artist is still compared to the Beatles tells us that nobody is bigger than the Beatles.

Taylor Swift is "changing her content for the algorithm of pop music". Rick you've summed it up perfectly.

So in the 80s I saw Paul McCartney in Tampa stadium. 60,000 people were mesmerized by a small band with no smoke/fireworks, backup dancers, and flashy costumes. You haven’t lived until you sing Hey Jude with McCartney and 60,000 people on a warm summer evening. Taylor Swift is a smart woman who has captured her audience. I admire her showmanship skills, her relationship with her fans and her style. I just watched her Eras tour video. I see why she is so popular. She’s a personal event storyteller. But she’s not the Beatles no matter how many records she sells. I don’t even think she wants to be anybody but Taylor. Good for her. Different times produce different artists. Opinion writers seem to feel the need for comparisons that are pointless. Like comparing Van Gogh and Jackson Pollack. I feel the Beatles legacy is safe.

The mere comparison is ABSURD.

"[Blank] artist/band is now bigger than the Beatles." We've heard that over, and over, and over through the decades.

The fact that the Beatles did what they did without social media, streaming and all the instant platforms out there tells you how big they were.

The Beatles had number 1s when you had to sell at least a million to get to number 1 . These days sell a handful of records / downloads and X amount of streams ... its pathetic anyone would even try to make the comparison

I’m 58 years old & proudly wear my Beatle album tees throughout the summer. The Beatles were often imitated but never duplicated. Nobody can touch what they accomplished in six years.

Can someone please explain why I have spent the last ten years hearing about Taylor Swift but I couldn't name one of her songs?

The Beatles' later albums = Michelin-rated restaurants. Taylor Swift's later albums = McDonald's or Taco Bell. Sales does not equal quality.

The Beatles broke up when I was 9 years old, well before my musical hey day, BUT, I can still name every song pretty much. I can't name one Taylor Swift song as an adult.

Rick you are more than 100% on point. The nerve of the un-informed NYT!

It's like comparing a Diet Coke to a Chardonnay based on their selling results.

the Beatles had a ton of #1 when the competition was: the Stones, Hendrix, the Beach Boys, etc, etc.

As a kid in the 70s, I can still recall the media hailing one band or the other as "bigger than the Beatles" -- I think the Bay City Rollers was one! But the number of sales or streams is how the tone deaf define musical success; musicians don't. The Beatles, to this day, inspire new bands, like The Lemon Twigs. If TS does or will in the future, it would be challenge to hear it specifically, since it would be just as easy to claim it was influenced by Max Martin, et al. As you say, the Beatles really never wrote the same song twice. The opposite is true for TS.

No TS on my song list. Never.

I’m from the Netherlands, The Beatles are inside our high school history curriculum. They are a mandatory thing we need to know about for our history exams, that is the extent of the cultural impact they’ve had. Who cares if Taylor Swift has more streams, her name will turn to dust in 100 years or so. The Beatles, like many of composers of old, such as Beethoven or Mahler, are here to stay. Immortalized in the history books.

As somebody who grew up in the UK with the Beatles music, yes I am that old, they were more than just their songs. They were at the forefront of a generational change, both musically and culturally. Their legacy goes far beyond than just their music.

One significant difference - TS songs are for 14 year old girls. Beatles songs were for everyone.

The fact that there's towns, neighborhoods and streets that's named after The Beatles and their songs are enough to prove that Taylor ain't the sh*t