I just read an article on wired.com about iPods and how they are bringing the idea of shiffling music to the fore. By shuffling I mean setting up a group of an indeterminate number of songs, and having them played in a random order. One college professor interviewed in the article talks about how this sort of thing appeals to the MTV generation because they have short attention spans and are likely "brain damaged." This condescending statement makes him into a horse's ass. Let me give you one explanation, a theory that also explains some of the decline in retail music sales and the rise of single-song downloading. Back in the day, say the early 60's, most pop albums were released with one or two good songs and 10 or so tracks that were basically filler. The Beatles were the first band to popularize the obvious idea of trying to make an entire album for people to enjoy. That idea stuck around for a while, but I dare you to go to Media Play and listen to some recent pop singles, find one you like, and then buy the album that single came from. Listen to the whole thing and I can just about guarantee you'll like no more than three other tracks. The rest will be ok at best, but not something you'd want popping up after listening to a great track like "Hey Ya" on your iPod. If bands would create 12 tracks of good music then people might listen to the entire thing. And they might buy it. Most people realize that buying a CD is a waste of money when you can download (for only $0.99/track, legally) just the couple of songs that aren't crap. The music industry is always looking outside to explain their problems. Most well-run companies, when they discover problems, look to solve it internally before blaming outside forces. The music industry refuses to take any responsibility for themselves. Next time you hear someone whining about illegal downloading, tell them to try my test, and then they'll understand.