CLOSE
Getty Images
Getty Images

The 'Millennial Whoop': The Musical Trope That’s Suddenly Everywhere

Getty Images
Getty Images

If you’re one of those people who thinks that everything on Top 40 radio sounds the same, we have some validating news: you’re kind of right. Product manager and musician Patrick Metzger recently identified a tiny melodic sequence that’s been permeating popular music for years, and once you hear it, you’ll be surprised you didn’t notice its ubiquity before.

Hop to 1:05 in Katy Perry’s "California Gurls" below to hear a prime example.

Did you catch it? Roughly transcribed it’s "Oooooh oh oooooh," which doesn’t seem like much, because it isn’t. As Metzger writes:

"It’s a sequence of notes that alternates between the fifth and third notes of a major scale, typically starting on the fifth. The rhythm is usually straight 8th-notes, but it may start on the downbeat or on the upbeat in different songs. A singer usually belts these notes with an 'Oh' phoneme, often in a 'Wa-oh-wa-oh' pattern."

He’s dubbed the trope the "Millennial Whoop," and it’s so ever-present that it was even parodied by The Lonely Island. Everyone from Fall Out Boy to Carly Rae Jepsen has employed the motif, and it probably isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. As Metzger notes, it’s such a short sequence that no one can claim copyright. As far as tracing its origins, there are definitely some early adopters, but the "wa-oh-wa-oh" trope seems to be somewhat universal.

Our cultural obsession with the Millennial Whoop makes sense in many ways: it’s catchy as heck, and the more we hear it, the more ingrained it becomes, which means that the next time we hear it in a song, we already feel like it’s familiar. Whether using the human brain’s affinity for patterns is smart or sinister or comforting (maybe all three), the melodic alteration now known as the Millennial Whoop is likely to be stuck in your head for years to come.

To hear more, check out the video from Quartz below.

[h/t Quartz]

Know of something you think we should cover? Email us at tips@mentalfloss.com.

nextArticle.image_alt|e
iStock
arrow
Animals
Switzerland Just Made It Illegal to Boil Live Lobsters
iStock
iStock

No, lobsters don’t scream when you toss them into a pot of boiling water, but as far as the Swiss government is concerned, they can still feel pain. The path most lobsters take to the dinner plate is supposedly so inhumane that Switzerland has banned boiling lobsters alive unless they are stunned first, The Guardian reports.

The new law is based on assertions from animal rights advocates and some scientists that crustaceans like lobsters have complex nervous systems, making death by boiling incredibly painful. If chefs want to include lobster on their menus, they’re now required to knock them out before preparing them. Acceptable stunning methods under Swiss law include electric shock and the “mechanical destruction” of the lobster’s brain (i.e. stabbing it in the head).

The government has also outlawed the transportation of live lobsters on ice or in icy water. The animals should instead be kept in containers that are as close to their natural environment as possible until they’re ready for the pot.

Proponents of animal rights are happy with the decision, but others, including some scientists, are skeptical. The data still isn’t clear as to whether or not lobsters feel pain, at least in the way people think of it. Bob Bayer, head of the University of Maine’s Lobster Institute, told Mental Floss in 2014 that lobsters “sense their environment, but don’t have the intellectual hardware to process pain.”

If you live in a place where boiling lobsters is legal, but still have ethical concerns over eating them, try tossing your lobster in the freezer before giving it a hot water bath. Chilling it puts it to sleep and is less messy than butchering it while it’s still alive.

[h/t The Guardian]

nextArticle.image_alt|e
iStock
arrow
Pop Culture
Why Mickey Mouse Could Soon Be in the Public Domain
iStock
iStock

Mickey Mouse debuted to the world in the 1928 animated short Steamboat Willie, and has since transformed into an icon recognized around the world. But the mouse’s status as Disney's exclusive property is under threat. As Ars Technica reports, Steamboat Willie is set to enter the public domain in 2024, and unlike in previous years, there have been no moves from Congress to stop that from happening. Once it does, in theory, anyone could use Mickey's image for free.

This is the third time the cartoon has been on the verge of losing its copyright protection. The first came in the 1970s, back when copyright terms only lasted 56 years. That meant every book, song, and movie made in 1923 was scheduled to lose its protected status in 1979, and Steamboat Willie would follow on its 56th anniversary in 1984. But in 1976, under pressure from companies like Disney, Congress extended the statute to 75 years, keeping all works made after 1923 from becoming public domain until 1998 or later. Mickey remained safely out of the public domain for another two decades. Then, when copyright terms were again scheduled to expire in 1998, Congress extended them a second time, this time to 95 years.

Now, the clock is ticking down for these older works once again as the 2018 expiration date of that copyright extension nears. Only this time, it looks like Congress may let them become public property without a fight.

Today’s constituents tend to care more about copyright law now than they did in 1976 or even in 1998. The rise of online streaming and easily accessible pirated content has made the issue more relevant to the life of the average person than ever before. The defeat of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in 2012 made this clear to legislators. That bill, which would have empowered law enforcement to punish or block sites sharing pirated content, was so controversial that it sparked protests across the web. Because of the sheer scale of that public response, lawmakers are now hesitant to change any existing copyright protections, including those set to expire on January 1, 2019.

But even if those protections expire, Disney could still find a way to prevent rival studios from using Mickey’s image when 2024 rolls around. While copyrights are designed to be temporary, trademarks have the potential for serious lasting power. That’s because copyrights only protect a single work of artistic expression (in this case, the film Steamboat Willie), while trademarks are attached to images and logos that represent a brand (so Mickey Mouse, the character). As long as Disney can prove that Mickey has evolved beyond his first screen appearance into a symbol that’s synonymous with its corporation, he’ll remain a protected property. And if you take a look at their theme parks, cruise ships, media, and the dozens of Hidden Mickeys they've hidden in their movies, you’ll see that they can easily make that case.

But few works of art made in the 1920s have taken the same path to corporate dominance as Mickey Mouse, even other works made famous by Disney (like Winnie the Pooh, first introduced in A.A. Milne's stories in 1926). Even if Disney manages to protect Mickey, the public should have a big new batch of copyright-free content to access in the next few years.

[h/t Ars Technica]

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER
More from mental floss studios