ginger griffin, 2/15

In class on Thursday Dr. Rogers offered up the question at the end of class, "If American Idol is continuing to look for 'new' singers then why are the having them sing 'old' songs?" or something of that sort. Anyway, what I got from this quote was that possibly it is because people (the audience) want to hear songs that they already know. It is not until the very end of the season until you hear new songs, typically from that year. The contestants sing songs from the sixties to the early nineties and it is because the larger part of the audience are from those generations.
Another concept that I enjoyed talking about was the "cult of the new". Everything has to be NEW NEW NEW and if it isn't new then it must be reinvented to look new. What I mean is like somebody prior to my post talked about a cracker label in the css cafe and how its said "NEW LOOK, same great taste." You are constantly having to change your look or change your product. "new = better" right? At least that is what America tends to believe, and because of that, marketing in advertisements has to be on its toes all the time. Although most believe that new = better, it is not always true, take for instance the American Idol example, if new were better then they would never sing old songs, but rather all the new songs that are streaming on the radio. So I ask this question, does new = better? And if so, why is that, why do American believe that because it is new is is automatically assumed better?