I was just thinking about this, in 1997, BSB, the Spice Girls and Hanson were HUGE. This set the stage for the music scene, so do you think this hurt the success of U2 and Pop at that time? I think maybe it did hurt some.
Whenever U2 has released an album there's been crap music. I wouldn't say the crap music of 1997 was any crappier than the crap music of 1987. Bottome line is that U2's accessability has varied throughout their career.
Other music in the mainstream was not the reason why Pop didn't sell well. As others have said, there's always crap out there! Back then, it was the Spice Girls, Aqua and the countless boybands like Code Red and Westlife. Now there's nu-metal bands like Linkin Park and System Of A Down. What's the difference?
I was just thinking about this, in 1997, BSB, the Spice Girls and Hanson were HUGE. This set the stage for the music scene, so do you think this hurt the success of U2 and Pop at that time? I think maybe it did hurt some.
if that were the case, then shouldn't that be somewhat true for a lot of other bands around that time? if i remember correctly, radiohead released 'OK Computer' back in 1997 and i think they did very well, at least critically (and probably commercially too). i don't think they were "hurt" by the "overwhelming" presence of pop groups.
as for U2's Pop not being as "successful", it could be a combination of factors...i dunno.