DaFiz wrote:
Crap! (i.m.h.o.) ?
To a teenager the looks might be important, but I'm the other side of 50, and I'm more impressed by the "feeling" you put into the music.
This paper pointedly did not look at teenagers. Bear in mind, this is not saying that people will prefer a good looking crap band to a bad looking good one. They're saying people have a preference for the more exciting looking performers, all else being equal. And that bias may be quite strong.
Just think about it: for every Mike and the Mechanics, there are 20 famous bands that don't look like they just wandered in off the street ?
Wormwood wrote:
I remember being disappointed when i first saw frank black
But then i saw kim and it was all ok
Super jealous.
But bear in mind, they're not saying the best looking people are preferred. They're saying the most visually appealing wins. So Frank Black with his screaming and intensity is much more interesting that a really boring but good-looking fellow.
