instead we have this line of thinking
I think the sub-text of your argument is that if it's popular, it must be bad. Popularity (or lack of) and quality (or lack of) aren't the same thing, but nor are they mutually exclusive.
which is not my sub-text. What's popular right now is bad, whereas in the past good country music was popular (i.e. there are no current equivalents to Hank Williams, Johnny Cash, Geroge Jones, etc)
which leads us to this line of thinking
"As far as comparing what's happening now with the past, "now" is always at a disadvantage, because with the passage of time, only the best from the past survives...some people will be looking back nostalgically to the days when Rascal Flatts, Kenny Chesney and Carrie Uderwood ruled the country airwaves and saying how much better things were back then and let's bring back real country music."
which is a "don't believe those lying eyes of yours" sort of argument that, instead of answering my question, tries to convince me that things actually weren't as good before and they are not as bad now, after all someone will be nostalgic for this season's run of bad country music. The problem is that I actually trust my judgment. I'm not waxing nostalgically for the country music of my youth. I worked my way backwards from Garth Brooks. I use to think Phil Vassar was really awesome. but as I worked my way back and began listening to these artists that everyone was paying lip service to, I began to realize just how good country music could be, which made me enraged at how bad the industry has allowed it to become.
Was there bad music before? Of course, but it lived next to good music. Where is the good stuff now? I'd have to be pretty dishonest with myself to try to say that country music's quality has remained constant and that Tim McGraw and Alan Jackson = Merle Haggard and Buck Owens.
I just don't get the refusal to admit that country music is worse today that it has been in the past. Look at the top artists, and their top songs, and compare them to the top artists and the top songs of the past. I'm losing my mind with all of this "well, we can't compare this to Johnny Cash and Hank Williams and Merle Haggard and Willie Nelson and Waylon Jennings and Kris Kristofferson and Roger Miller and Buck Owens and Lefty Frizell and etc etc, because those guys are the best of all time" In the words of Toke from Metalocalypse "Is I's crazies?" These are precisely the guys we should be comparing people to. They don't exist in some mythical realm, the before time, the long long ago. They were the most popular guys of their day. When someone said "I'm a country music fan" that's what they meant. Now, I can't tell people, especially people who are serious about music, that I'm into country music without a caveat that I don't mean that schlock on the radio.
So, assuming that I can trust my lying eyes and that we can all bring ourselves to admit that the pop-country of today is actually bad, is the consensus here that the songwriters know better? Do these guys write these and say "yeah, this one is stupid as all get-up, but it sounds like a hit to me" or are they all vapid or self-delusional enough to think that these are significant works?