Dude, you are overthinking this. Like, you spent longer thinking about the alleged pacification of masses by agenda driven producers than said producers spent thinking about the songs in question.

There is no agenda and/or purpose behind this. You just made the mistake to assume your views on one of the most subjective topics possible (music) are fitting for music in general. That's not the case.

You might like a little rebellion, commentary, what have you in your music. You might like to express the issues that move you via music. Many others don't.

The charts are, what people are actually listening to, so don't mistake the charts for something that's only pushed by labels or something. It takes listeners and labels to push something into the charts.

That doesn't say that there are never songs of the critical variety in the charts or anything. It's just rarer.

While there may very well be a conspiracist element to this, I suspect that it's simpler than that. For a lot of people music is meant to be their escape from reality, so having reality interject ruins the experience - as such any songs that try to capture that simply don't get as popular, so end up in alternative genres

I always thought it was pretty stupid that rage against the machine was criticized for simultaneously being anticapitalist and commercially successful. What do we want, commercially successful bands to all be bootlickers or completely apolitical? Much better to reach more people.

Record companies are complete shithouses but they’re not part of some global conspiracy

Rage Against the Machine and Public Enemy come immediately to mind.

Edit: I guess those would fall into, what you call, “angry genres”. Not sure if that matters when it comes to spreading information. Popular is popular regardless of tone, and what is popular changes pretty regularly.

Someone clearly hasn't been listening to the lyrics in pop songs.

Some modern pop songs are actually about some pretty dark subjects and aren't happy at all. Pumped Up Kicks immediately comes to mind.

But that nobody outside “angry” genres seems to be doing it is what saddens me.

There's a lot of "non-angry" (ie no thick distorted guitars and screamed vocals) music that has strong political themes and social commentary going on. A lot of folk, blues, EBM, EDM, reagge, dub is about the struggles of the working class, people of color etc, has anti-capitalist, anti-war and anti-globalisation message.

Leslie fish
Asian Dub Foundation
Later VNV Nation (early works are stylistically more "angry", but thematically similar)
Covenant
Chip Taylor
Shamen
And many more

Music of rebellion makes you wanna rage; but it's made by millionaires who are nearly twice your age.

-Porcupine Tree

I think it's because the top 100 or whatever chart you're looking at is meaningless these days. It used to be a fair representation of what people were listening to, I remember people taping the top 40 off the radio on a Sunday to listen to through the week, everyone was on the same page regarding new single releases.

Now we're atomized, I don't even know what the #1 single is on any given week and I don't care. I've got 30,000 tracks on my home server. There's no new artist who can speak for a generation like Dylan or Woody Guthrie could in their day.

I feel like pop songs are incompatible with the kind of message you're proposing. Pop songs need to be generic, lighthearted and catchy to receive as wide an audience as possible.

True. At same time, permitting angry music subcultures keeps the angry masses docile enough to not completely lose their shit. Engaging in angry music is a bit the same like writing angry political comments online - it feels engaged but changes little.

About pop music, I do respect that some people enjoy catchy tunes, easy melodies, dance-able rhythm as a kind of escapism. Listening to political comment can be exhausting, and music is, among other roles it can play, meant to be enjoyed.

That said, give me punk rock before pop anytime. Most shallow music these days makes my brain melt with the use of autotune alone before I even try to make out the lyrics.

System of a Down, Flobots, Rise Against & Rage Against the Machine aren't popular music?

i don't treat music, or any entertainment medium, associated with reality. whenever i watch or listen to something, i want to be transported to the world the artists created.

like listeners who listens to whatever top charts now, they want escapism and we should not give a damn about it. the real world is depressing enough, you want to extend it?

Rage Against the Machine has had a Billboard Top 100 song with Guerilla Radio. As have a lot of other angry songs over the years, especially in the 90's, 2000's and 2010's when grunge and numetal were big.

Are you only actually looking at "pop music" which is itself a genre and doesn't necessarily mean that it's actually popular? Or do you just mean here and now in 2023?

Isn’t the stuff that’s popular only popular because that’s what people want to hear? That’s what the people who only like popular music tell me.

On my way home yesterday I heard an updated remake of "We Didn't Start the Fire"...

Fit For An Autopsy exists. Listen to them. They just had a tour like last year.

If you care for music that touches on climate change and class disparity, you could check out King Gizzard and The Lizard Wizard's albums Infest The Rats Nest and PetroDragonic Apocalypse; or, Dawn of Eternal Night: An Annihilation of Planet Earth and the Beginning of Merciless Damnation.
I really enjoy those albums even though I don't typically get into Metal music. For something that's not Metal, the song Plastic Boogie from their album Fishing For Fishies is also great.

I'm pretty sure that there still are a lot of songs about social issues.

I don't think it's quite that simple, though I suspect there is a grain of truth to it, that apolitical or less emotional music is manipulated out of popular and financial success. Mostly, though, I think it's just the nature of reaching wide audiences. The "blander" (here meaning simply not particularly heavy on any subject matter) something is, the fewer people will be put off by what it has to say. If all there is to a song is just enjoying the piece of music for entertainment, there are simply more people who would appreciate that over, say, black metal, that is designed to evoke certain specific strong emotions

I also suspect that your premise is not so much flawed, but a disingenuous oversimplification, and that popular music probably involves heavier and "angrier" themes then you are giving it credit for. Or maybe you're right entirely. I couldn't name a single Taylor Swift song. I'm a metalhead, and whenever I go outside that comfort zone, it's never to pop music. I look for artistry in music, and the top 100 don't guarantee artistry, only sales, which if you wanna get into, is a whole lot of conspiring, just not political

Sales as a measure of success is entirely flawed in a capitalist society well after the invention of the field of psychology. When you know how to manipulate people, you can manipulate populations into buying shitty music. If you have the money, you can pay for advertising, which will make your artist seem more popular than they are, and then give you even more money to pump into yet more advertisement. It is certainly political, but not in a "we can't have people having revolutionary thoughts" way, just in a "capitalism must perpetuate itself" way

Most political songs belong to more extreme political views, I'd say. Thus they're divisive and are more prone to angry music styles. Most people seem to prefer music that makes them feel good, so non political songs are more succesful. There are political feel good songs, 'we are the world' comes to mind. So I don't think its a conspiracy of record labels to keep the masses docile. Plus with streaming services the big labels loss influence, but things have not changed much.

My friend. Rich Men North Of Richmond was number 1 for quit some time

"Less Talk, More Rock" and "How To Clean Everything" by Propagandhi were released damn near 30 years ago and sadly that shit is still relevant

Pop music is happy, dance, fun music - usually. Nothing weird about that. It's weird when it isn't.

I think it's called "escapism"

Well, John Lennon tried but someone shot him. Imagine was an intensely political song though.

King Gizzard? Like, okay, they aren't Superbowl popular (yet), and they aren't exactly pop-music from a genre standpoint (though they've had albums that dip into that), but they're growing rapidly. They're also indie, so they don't have the issues that come with being on a label, but damn, they're growing pretty rapidly despite not having that kinda backing.

Yeah, but you’re forgetting how much it hurts Ed Sheeran’s feelings when you never call.

IDLES are getting pretty popular and they are very vocal about social justice and politics. Still not a top 100 charts band though.

Things were a bit different in the 80s and 90s I would say, with songs like "Land of Confusion" by Genesis and "Civil War" by Guns n' Roses charting in the top 10.

I think the reason we dont hear much music that is critical about current events in the charts is a consumer problem though. Mary and John just don't want to listen to stuff that is uncomfortable. Record Labels would definitely produce music like that again, if it would be profitable.

I hate Punk Rock but its left so I need to like it I guess 🤷‍♂️

which is very easy to find in punk rock and some variations, as well as rap.

When it comes to rap, it was far easier to find.

I'm not alone in noticing that a lot of mainstream(!!!) rap has become a minstrel show, glorifying capitalism, and racist stereotypes about black people.