Justin who?
Timberlake? No, don't know him either.
If each new singer gets popular one week and then shafted the next, then even artists who do genuinely add something new to the industry might get dumped for some other wonderboy/girl. I'm more ticked off at the music industry for being too restrictive over what constitutes "fair use" and their tendency to exaggerate money lost over pirated music (personally I don't see why the cost should be how much it took to produce versus how much it costs for the consumer to buy it legitimately, because no consumer would buy it at the production price. And this is usually stuff that is readily available, so there's no reason to charge the production price. So let's stop talk of VHS tapes costing $100 or every individual music track costing like $10,000).
Granted, if I think about it, the complaints I have regarding fair use of music are just because "it's up on YouTube, it's either an obscure song by itself or it's a song set to an AMV to give it an extra punch, this is clearly illegal use of music because it's an alternative to buying the song but I don't want it to be illegal". But similarly, if it is indeed difficult to get something legitimately, I don't see why it shouldn't be dumped into the public domain immediately. If they stopped selling something, it tells me they don't expect to make any more revenue off it. So open it up.
As for individual singers I think should die, that'd include anyone who decides to be mean to the press and act like they're gods. I generally don't care what goes on in the lives of music artists (unless I really really like them - Weird Al for one), so don't go parading it around. I let the music talk for them on whether I think they're good or not.
But then there was Fergie of the Black Eyed Peas who had an awesome though ridiculous excuse:
"I may not have the type of voice you like, but I can sing. You can't take that away from me, 'cause singing is a gift from God, and when people say I can't sing, it's kind of like insulting God."
