I wrote up this big comment and I'm posting it because hey, I went through all that effort, but it needs this caveat, which is that I don't disagree with anything in your comment at all. I thought maybe I did, at first, but really, we're not saying very different things now that I have written it all out.

So since you mentioned it, I'm going to draw some parallels between music and poetry and use them to guide my thoughts!

First, I absolutely agree: Anyone can get a poem published somewhere, just as anyone can put a song up on YouTube, even if it's pure and utter crap. The barrier to entry is basically the same too: you can put anything up on YouTube, you can put anything up on your blog. And that "publication" means absolutely nothing because yeah, no one vetted your work, no one had to like it, and so on. It does create a lot of noise - IF you are using YouTube to find new bands to listen to, if you are reading anything in the blogosphere tagged "poetry" in the hopes of finding good verse.

However, thank god, we have music blogs and websites and poetry journals and suchlike to sift through the sweaty, non-deodorized filth for us. (As a former reader for a poetry journal, oh what filth there sometimes was! And there is something you didn't specifically say but I think is there underneath your text, which is: how disheartening sifting through shit is. It is exhausting, thankless, and will make one cynical if not utterly fed up.)

There are "little" music blogs, like the Swollen Fox and there are big sites like Pitchfork. Or, for poetry, a small press like one of my favorites, FLAPPERHOUSE, and large snooty presses like the Poetry Foundation. I personally think the smaller sites have a lot more to offer, such as personality and freshness, that the large ones don't. The large ones are not dissimilar from r/music: they will publish and gush about big names simply because they are big names, not because they are doing anything new or interesting. They also can get elitist, pompous, and snooty. Everyone secretly wants to get featured by them even if they hate and rage against them. Because a feature in Pitchfork or Poetry means you're really real, and you've Arrived. You are an undeniable success.

Pop music is like Pitchfork or Poetry. I think there is a lot of very good pop music out there. I too am a huge Ke$ha fan. I think that being Pop, or mainstream, gives an artist considerable short-term advantage in market but that doesn't necessarily carry over to long-term at all. I suspect you might agree.

I absolutely read the Poetry Foundation even though it's "Pop" - but I find I build relationships with the small presses. To me I value them more because I know that real honest genuine sweat has gone into every page of every issue, that every sale/donation really makes an impact to their bottom line, etc. I was recently chastised for having "too many publications in small presses" and I was like, girl do you even know. Like, don't you dare look down on some magazine because it hasn't been established for 50 years. At one point neither was the Poetry Foundation.

We've both totally wandered in this discussion but I've enjoyed it. If I found a song or a poem I enjoyed, you're right, it wouldn't matter what press or label got it to my attention. But I definitely care about supporting the smaller ones more. I guess because of that I'm more likely to seek out "indie" music than pop - but since pop is ubiquitous, there's no real need to seek it out. It will come my way nonetheless.

I f'in love Ke$ha, and some pop. "Hotline Bling" is my jam, man.

Saying you are "into music" is like saying you "like to laugh and have fun" in a dating profile. Do you know a single person who doesn't like to laugh?

Hey, at least that means people in r/poetry are reading Shakespeare. or come on, let's be honest: at least they are all reading the title and upvoting without clicking the link because they see "Shakespeare" and it reinforces their mental idea of "good poetry" without requiring them to digest any content or think about anything.