The End of Monoculture Marks the Permanent Demise of Celebrity

Earlier this year, a widely followed X account faced backlash after posting a tweet comparing Taylor Swift to Michael Jackson, claiming she had surpassed him in fame and was approaching the level of The Beatles. The tweet was quickly deleted, but it sparked widespread discussion about the nature of fame in the modern era.

Despite Taylor Swift's immense success, many argued she hasnt reached the global cultural saturation that icons like Michael Jackson or The Beatles achieved. This isnt a critique of her talent or impact. Instead, it reflects a fundamental shift in how celebrity operates today.

Before the explosion of social media between 2004 and 2010, culture was largely a monoculture. Most people consumed the same movies, TV shows, and music, which created shared experiences across generations and geographies. The limited number of channels and absence of streaming meant that popular culture was highly centralized.

During this era, artists like the Beatles, Michael Jackson, and Madonna dominated the cultural landscape. Their work reached nearly everyone because there were fewer entertainment options, and major releases were events that captured global attention. For instance, the Beatles 1964 appearance on The Ed Sullivan Show was watched by over 73 million viewers, while Michael Jacksons Thriller became a worldwide phenomenon. Madonnas image and music videos defined an entire decade of pop culture, largely without competition.

There were always alternative scenesindependent films, local concerts, and niche record storesbut engaging with them required effort. There was no algorithm delivering personalized recommendations, and even those on the cultural fringes couldnt escape the dominance of major artists. This scarcity amplified the reach and impact of those who broke through.

In contrast, todays celebrity landscape is fragmented and algorithm-driven. Each persons online feed presents a curated version of culture tailored to their tastes. This has democratized fame, allowing countless artists and creators to achieve recognition without ever becoming universally known. Major events or conflicts that once defined cultural moments can now exist for some while being invisible to others.

The shift extends beyond music. In the Golden Age of Hollywood, stars like Elizabeth Taylor, Marilyn Monroe, Tom Cruise, and Julia Roberts were household names. Now, recognition depends heavily on the content one engages with online. A prominent actor or musician may be entirely unknown to someone whose interests lie elsewhere.

Algorithms create echo chambers where fans perceive their favorite artists as more mainstream than they truly are, reinforcing the sense of personalized cultural universes. Taylor Swift, for example, dominates her own sphere, but outside of her fan base, millions may not follow her every movenot because she lacks relevance, but because they inhabit different online worlds.

This fragmentation has broader implications. Social media fosters individualized realities, influencing politics, news, and social perspectives. Collective cultural experiences have been replaced by highly personalized ones. Fame is no longer a shared event; it is distributed across countless micro-communities, each with its own stars.

The result is a redefinition of celebrity. While todays fame lacks the unified hysteria of past decades, it offers new intimacy and diversity, allowing people to engage with culture on their own terms. The global icons of the pastMichael Jackson, Madonna, the Beatlescannot be replicated because the spotlight now shines in multiple directions simultaneously.

Modern celebrity is no longer about mass adoration but about personalized relevance. The shared cultural moments that once defined generations are gone, replaced by infinite streams of curated experiences shaped by algorithms and individual tastes.

Author: Gavin Porter