Although it’s been a few years since since Rihanna dropped a new single, don’t forget that she’s one of the biggest artists ever in terms of chart performance. Billboard has actually confirmed that: On their new Greatest Of All-Time Hot 100 Artists chart, Rihanna finds herself in the top 10.
The list is as follows:
The Beatles
Madonna
Elton John
Elvis Presley
Mariah Carey
Stevie Wonder
Janet Jackson
Michael Jackson
Whitney Houston
Rihanna
Of those, Rihanna is the only artist whose first single — 2005’s “Pon De Replay” — was released in the 2000s. Billboard notes that Drake was really close to also making the top 10, as he ranks No. 11 (compared to No. 22 on the 2018 chart). Also making the top 100 list are Taylor Swift (No. 21), Maroon 5 (24), Bruno Mars (29), and Justin Bieber (38). Additionally, a handful of artists who made their Hot 100 debut in the 2010s are also appearing on the chart for the first time: The Weeknd (No. 43), Post Malone (77), Ariana Grande (78), and Ed Sheeran (87).
As for how this chart was put together, Billboard notes, “Billboard‘s Greatest Of All-Time Hot 100 Songs and Artists rankings are based on weekly performance on the Hot 100 (from its inception on Aug. 4, 1958, through Nov. 6, 2021). Songs are ranked based on an inverse point system, with weeks at No. 1 earning the greatest value and weeks at lower spots earning the least. Due to changes in chart methodology over the years, eras are weighted differently to account for chart turnover rates during various periods. Artists are ranked based on a formula blending performance, as outlined above, of all their Hot 100 chart entries.”
Some artists covered here are Warner Music artists. Uproxx is an independent subsidiary of Warner Music Group.
More than 50 years ago, The Beatles, came to an end after Paul McCartney announced that he would be walking away from the group. The band attempted to reunite on several occasions but it never happened, and in 1980 John Lennon was tragically assassinated. While it’s been noted that Lennon privately expressed a desire to walk away from the band before McCartney’s announcement, McCartney has long been blamed for the band’s breakup. During an upcoming interview on BBC Radio 4, McCartney pointed the finger elsewhere.
“I didn’t instigate the split. That was our Johnny,” McCartney said, according to The Guardian. “I am not the person who instigated the split. Oh no, no, no. John walked into a room one day and said I am leaving the Beatles. Is that instigating the split, or not?” He added that Lennon described his departure from The Beatles as “quite thrilling” and “rather like a divorce,” despite the fact that the other group members were “left to pick up the pieces.”
McCartney notes that confusion about who instigated the band’s dissolution was caused by the group’s new manager at the time, Allen Klein, who sought to wrap up some business deals before announcing the split. “So for a few months we had to pretend,” McCartney said. “It was weird because we all knew it was the end of the Beatles but we couldn’t just walk away.” McCartney admits he became “fed up of hiding it” and it led to his decision to publicly announce the split and “let the cat out of the bag.”
“I had to fight and the only way I could fight was in suing the other Beatles, because they were going with Klein. And they thanked me for it years later,” he said about the legal drama that ensued after the group’s split. “But I didn’t instigate the split. That was our Johnny coming in one day and saying ‘I’m leaving the group.’”
McCartney’s full interview on BBC Radio 4 will air on October 23
When comedian Ron Funches tweeted that Outkast is better than The Beatles, he likely knew his opinion would be controversial and generate plenty of discussion as a result. But he probably wasn’t expecting Andre 3000 to reach out to him and offer to send him a gift for, as he puts it, “telling the truth.” Funches explained the reasoning behind his viral tweet, analyzed the reaction to it, and revealed his correspondence with the Outkast member during last night’s episode of The Late Late Show with James Corden.
“What prompted me to write it was just my love of OutKast,” he recalled. “It’s not hatred to the Beatles — I think the Beatles are amazing.” However, he said, “Some of the things that I grew up with and that I value aren’t necessarily given the same amount of worth… They moved the entire rap industry to Atlanta, how they changed it from rapping about drugs to rapping about art, rapping about life. Erykah Badu over Yoko Ono, all day!”
Funches also said that Andre did reach out, joking that the always unconventional rapper sent him an owl — as in Harry Potter — letting him know the gift was on the way. “I hope it’s a handmade flute doesn’t work,” he giggled.
You can watch Ron’s interview with James Corden above.
Despite hailing from Liverpool in the United Kingdom, an ocean away from the birthplace of rock and roll, The Beatles’ importance in the influence of American popular music can not be understated. But why do they keep getting compared to American rap groups from Atlanta, namely Migos and Outkast? In a recurring social media gag, every so often some prominent figure on Twitter declares a modern rap group “bigger” or “better” than The Beatles, setting off another round of vigorous and — it must be stated — mostly irreverent, tongue-in-cheek debate.
On one side are The Beatles’ defenders — those who believe that even feigning to compare them to newer acts, across genres, generations, and geography, amounts to nothing less than musical sacrilege. On the other, a mass of folks who seem delighted to do nothing more than joyfully impugn the legacy of the most successful rock band of all time by arguing for one group whose biggest breakout involved the repetitious invoking of a luxury design house and another whose most mainstream hit was accompanied by a video that parodied the height of Beatlemania.
Caught in between them are bewildered music fans who can’t help but wonder how the artists being compared even relate to each other and why either side seems so intent on making such a fuss over the others’ opinions. Some may wonder how Migos, barely a decade into their career, or Outkast, more than a decade past their golden years as a respected rap duo, even merit discussion alongside the act that held more Billboard records than any other until very recently. However, the answer is not so simple as comparing plaques, and the motivations of both sides are more complex than they appear.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think anyone takes these declarations all that seriously — and if they do, that’s their prerogative. Art is subjective; one person’s most successful rock band of all time is Quincy Jones’ pick for “worst musicians in the world.” For someone whose tastes run more toward blasting bass-heavy, 808-ridden triplet raps through the streets of downtown Atlanta than dropping the needle on the psychedelic meditations of a groovy quartet of shaggy-haired British misfits, making the claims that “Stir Fry” is greater than “Penny Lane” might seem pretty reasonable.
But for an elder generation who grew up with The Beatles, it’s a slap in the face — which is part of the fun for their disruptive detractors. For many of hip-hop’s formative years, rock-chauvinist music critics and fans denied the nascent movement’s musicality, value, and validity as an art form. Fans of rap endured sneering comments that dubbed rap “crap” (haha, so clever) and demeaned the poetry in its often blunt, plainspoken lyrics. Used to lofty, esoteric references to walruses and thinly veiled references to the wonders of LSD — you know damn well that’s what that song is about — rap’s tendency to drive home its points with the force of a nail gun rubbed them the wrong way.
By the same token, their criticisms got under rap fans’ skin, but all rap fans could do was rankle privately and defend the value of the form publicly, through multiple waves of indecency witchhunts led by the likes of Barbara Bush all the way up to Bill O’Reilly. Even today, Cardi B has to defend herself from the Tucker Carlsons of the world almost weekly. But now that rappers like Cardi and Migos are the best-selling acts in the country (an easily quantified claim to make thanks to the advent of streaming), their legitimacy is already assured and all that’s left is to return four decades’ worth of grief one trollish tweet at a time.
Furthermore, The Beatles are no longer a group that defines youth culture. Where once they shocked the world, sent teen girls into hysterical paroxysms, and made concerned mothers clutch their pearls even as they tapped their feet, they’re beyond tame by today’s standards — they’re lame. Furthermore, The Beatles’ prime was a long time ago. We’re in an era where most news items, hit singles, and viral discoveries have a shelf life of about 18 months. For younger millennials and Generation Z, a group that had their own “mania” 50 years ago and no new hits in the last 30 would barely register against the non-stop deluge of new content we’re asked to consume just to keep up these days.
And while The Beatles ruled radio in their day, the average 13-year-old today has probably never even willingly turned one on for their own benefit — if they even know what radios are (again, thanks to the advent of streaming). Many can likely only name a handful of songs — songs that, to them, probably sound how the tunes Captain America was listening to sound to elder millennials and Generation X. It’s their grandparents’ music, and while grandparents can be cool, their taste usually isn’t. So while older hip-hop heads — and it’s usually members of the aforementioned “X-ennial” generation who actually post the tweets in the first place (see: Ron Funches and Donald Glover) — plot to torment their own elders as a means of resistance and revenge for all the pestering of their formative years, for the zoomers, it’s a way to assert their own tastes and identities, as well as indulging in their generations’ unique taste for digital chaos (see: Lil Nas X).
However, that alliance is mostly one of convenience and circumstance and there are already signs of it fracturing. Consider this: Outkast’s last major hit came out almost 20 years ago. That’s just long enough to be retro — which is only a few more years away from being terminally uncool. Time marches on, and Father Time remains undefeated. So while Migos and Outkast may be better than The Beatles today, tomorrow, they might just be inferior to the Polo Gs and Lil Nas Xs of the world. And The Beatles? Well, you know what they say: Everything old is new again. Maybe in another 10 years, they’ll be back in fashion after some 17-year-old samples “Hey Jude.”
For the past several decades, The Beatles have been considered one of the greatest rock bands in existence and the measuring stick by which many other popular music acts are measured. In recent years, however, music fans on Twitter have taken to trolling The Beatles’ legacy (and fans) by suggesting that newer groups — particularly ones in hip-hop, such as Migos — are more impactful and popular. The latest group to receive this lofty assessment is Outkast, who for some reason have been injected into the debate on Twitter today, prompting a trending topic and a fiery debate between fans.
When society admits OutKast is better than The Beatles then we can truly start healing.
While one might expect the division to be intergenerational or split between fans of each genre, many of the most prominent tweets center on longstanding appropriation accusations against The Beatles, with commentators pointing out the influence the band gleaned from existing Black rock and blues artists who came before them. A common argument, the sentiment was even echoed a few years back by no less an authority than Quincy Jones, who called The Beatles “the worst musicians in the world” in an interview with Vulture. Even Eve 6 got involved, using the opportunity to take a wild shot at Radiohead.
Yes, Outkast is better than the Beatles. And they didn’t need to steal anyone’s style to make their own.
Comparing Outkast to the Beatles isn’t fair. Outkast didn’t have 30 years worth of Blues artists music to steal from uncredited. https://t.co/2IwOh51DGn
Meanwhile, Outkast is being lauded for their innovations to hip-hop music (conveniently overlooking the stylistic quirks they inherited from funk fixtures like P-Funk) and their impact on younger artists (despite receiving a mostly confused reception when they played Coachella in 2014 and many younger music fans being completely unaware of their existence). These quibbles and facts aren’t getting in the way of the spirited, hilarious debate, which you can see more of below.
OutKast could easily write “Hey Jude” but The Beatles could never write “Hey Ya!” and we won’t be entertaining any rebuttals. Thank you for your time. https://t.co/C7LW9jCSkh
— Castle Island Brewing Co. (@cibrewing) April 7, 2021
I don’t understand slandering The Beatles but I REALLY don’t understand directly tying OutKast to The Beatles. WHY? HOW? The Beatles wouldn’t exist without the Black Rock & R&B artists they grew up listening to/emulating but comparing OutKast & The Beatles like Funk ain’t exist?
Hey Jude is considered one of the “best songs ever” by old white people but the last four minutes are this and they have the nerve to call Playboi Carti out for being repititve
OutKast could write and perform “Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds” but the Beatles could never write or perform “SpottieOttieDopalicious” https://t.co/fkAiKoZn7D
— #FreeMumia #FreeMaroon #FreeThemAll (@jaybeware) April 8, 2021
stop asking if OutKast is better than the Beatles and worry about what will happen when you are Kast Out from the kingdom of Heaven and have to languish being Beat in hell for all eternity