That's pretty funny. Although, on a point of order, Led Zeppelin are pish, and Rihanna's ace, if entirely bizarre.

(Also, thanks to "Glee", I always say "Ke$ha" as "Key-dollar-sign-ha", so there's two other list items which have brought me pleasure.)

The rest of it is various shades of hilariously terrible. I'm chortling.

Is that the preceding 12 facts are probably true...

Kids these days... no taste.

They are the most ludicrous band in the world. If you don't believe me, head for ver 'tube and watch the video for 'Higher'.

No, it isn't a parody.

apart from number 12. Am I lacking humour by thinking that's a bit mean-spirited?

Most of these are due to the fact that music now sells in much greater quantities than it did thirty or forty years ago. For a start, the world population has doubled since the sixties, so it would be surprising if sales volumes weren't much higher these days. In addition, the real price of music is far cheaper than it has been in the past and it is so much more accessible via downloads, social media etc.

Having said that, at least a couple of points are just plain wrong.

10. Bob Marley's Legend is supposed to have sold 25 million copies worldwide, compared to Billy Ray's Achy Breaky 20m.

11. The Beatles had about 40 Top 30 singles in the US (mostly No.1s). The cast of Glee have had just 8 (none of them No.1s). I can't imagine that the picture would be different in other territories.

Consequently, I remain undepressed!

I'm surprised by many of them but not depressed. For all know Flo Rida may make very good records (I've never heard of him - I was quite surprised that it was a him when I looked it up). Why should I care what sells? What really surprises me is that current artists, whose target audience appears to be the people that "have never and would never" paid for music have sold more records than artists whose heyday occurred when, to listen to the record, you had to buy it. How does that work then?

As we all know, Release Me kept Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields off the top of the charts. I don't care, as I like them both.

"Bye-bye Bert."

It's interesting in a way but it's just about business and there's no real context.

some people think this sort of factoid matters. And milkybarnick is right about no. 12.

Pop. Short for popular. File under popular music.

It's called that because it's popular. These statistics are all about popularity.

"...but, but, but... (Obscure band) are so much better" - maybe, but they are not popular.

Barbra Streisand is ace, and I'd rather listen to her than Pearl Sodding Jam any day of the week.

It tells me that music is as popular as ever - maybe even more so - and that makes me happy. Elitism about one artist being better - more specifically, worthy of more sales - than another really grinds my gears. Unless we're talking about Kasabian, who, as we all know, make cunts' music.

...'more popular than Elvis' blah blah blah stuff which modern artists (of whom no one has ever heard a note... at least not in my house) spout is just one giant irrelance.

Because, as we all know - and as we are all helpfully reminded by the man himself at regular intervals (concerts, interviews, standing at the bus stop next to him...) - Cliff Richard has outsold and outcharted everyone who has ever released a record ever, times ten.

Michael Jackson's 'Thriller' was a poorly circulated demo disc next to the pulverising global might of the Cliff sales bandwagon; 'Mull Of Kintyre' a mere rumour that circulated briefly in the offices of the Guinness Book Of Hit Singles...

Some artists are more popular than most of the ones I like. And these days, people have more opportunity than ever to listen to whatever they want, nobody is forced to listen to Black Eyed Peas but they're the ones who have mass appeal...same as Kajagoogoo, Joe Dolce and Modern Romance in the 80s, except that nowadays you don't have to buy records or wait for john Peel to come on the radio to hear an alternative. The kids have spoken, and they want Flo Patrol and N Dogz. I don't care, I like The Dutch Uncles, Chillwave and Post Dubstep...couldn't care less what anyone else is listening to...less people like my faves the better, tickets are cheaper and more room for me at the gig.
I don't like Lasagne, but it doesn't keep me awake at night knowing this is a hugely popular dish.

I think, if I'm honest, I'm quite pleased that some of my favourite artists have selective appeal. I like it when colleagues ask me what I'm listening to, then say 'I've never heard of them'.

It's snobbery, but there you go.

I have never heard a note of Creed. Rhianna did Umbrella and S&M, who knew there was more? I've never even heard of Flo Rida and Ki$ha. Genuinely this list gave me a bit of a high court judge moment when I went through it.

Although I do think that Barbara Streisand deserves those sales. I love her dodgy disco album, and her version of Life On Mars is just so wrong it's right.

Michael Buble just went to #1 in North America with his x-mas album...and he see's himself as a "serious" artist...Oh my..

that keeps me from reaching for the pearl handed revolver on reading this list is that we definitely won't be comparing acts to Flo Rida, Black Eyed Peas, Ke$ha etc in 40/50 years time as we are now with the Beatles, Elvis, Led Zep etc.

... (at least not by this list)

Pop music moves on. I don't move quite as fast, except possibly in pursuit of a pint on Friday evening.

BTW, *does* Justin Bieber actually exist? I'd assumed he was generated by some sort of computer programme. Please don't shatter my dreams.

Records used to be relatively expensive. Songs are now affordable to children via downloads.

Broadly speaking, singles cost about a pound thirty years ago and albums were about four quid. Thirty years ago my weekly take home pay was about 15 quid from my part-time job. It was a big decision to buy an album - which is why a bad one was so disappointing.

after all, you can prove anything with facts.

Most of my favourite artists don't sell particularly large amounts of records.Doesn't overly concern me but I am not the one making a living out of music. Depends on the artist and their aspirations I guess. Take for example Jackie Leven - his fanbase was not large by any stretch yet his output was pretty impressive - his own official releases, his website releases and his stuff under aliases such as Sir Vincent Lone. Sometimes a couple of releases per year.His muse didn't wane whereas commercially successful artists have to deal with intolerable pressures to produce which must stifle their artistic talents.

Barbara Streisand, Rhianna and Katy Perry records. I am not depressed. It's this superiority of proper music thing again isn't it? - now that's quite a drag.