The culture industry
Adorno and Horkheimer adopted the term 'culture industry' to argue that the way in which cultural items were produced was analogous to how other industries manufactured vast quantities of goods. They argued that the culture industry exhibited as assembly line character, which could be observed in 'the synthetic, planned method of turning its products.'
They linked their ideate a model of 'mass culture' in which cultural production had become a routine. Standardised, repetitive operation that produced undermining cultural commodities which in turn resulted in a type of consumption that was also standardised, distracted and passive. This can be seen through the show, The X-Factor, that produces singers, but gradually all become mainstream - as it's what makes money, uniqueness is not valued much in the music industry, because it doesn't sell to the mass.
However, their view of cultural production has, often been portrayed as the pessimistic lament of cultural elitists who were dismayed at what they perceived to be homogeneity and vulgarity of mass taste, and who were concerned that the potential for artistic creativity in music, literature and painting had been co-opted and corrupted by the production methods administrative regimes of industrial capitalism. The capitalist corporation seems to enjoy an almost omnipotent form of domination and both the consumers and the creative artist are not separate from, but are directly connected to this system of production.
Adorno and Horkheimer argued that the culture industry operated in the same way as the other manufacturing industries. All work had become formalised and products were made according to the rationalised organisational producers that were established for the sole purpose of making money.
Standardisation
Adorno and Horkheimer argued that that al products produced by the culture industry exhibited standardised features. There is nothing 'spontaneous' about culture industry, it has become a routine operation that can be carried out in an office by the application of a specific formulae. Adorno noted that songs that become successful over time are often referred to as 'standards' a category that clearly drew attention to their formulaic character. Songs were based around repetitive sequences and recurring refrains. This was down for commercial reasons, so that the song would be imprinted in the head of the viewer and provoke a purchase. To Adorno the production of bit songs had become a mechanical and manipulative operation motivated by commercial gains.
Pseudo individuality
They were also critical of what they called pseudo individuality. Which meant they way that the culture industry assembled products that made claims to 'originality' but which when examined more carefully exhibited little more than superficial differences. They evoked the image of lock and key, an item that is mass produced in millions, whose little uniqueness only lies in very minor modifications.
Who fits and doesn't fit the theory (as much as possible)
Justin Bieber fits Ardono's and Horkheimer's theory, as he appeals to a standardised and passive audience. He produces catchy sounds that have repetitive sequences (such as 'Sorry.') to provoke a purchase, as it's stuck in the viewer's head. His character lacks individuality and uniqueness, as he fits the 'perfect' male singer image.
However, Freddie Mercury does not fit the theory, though he produced catchy songs - many fans loved him for his unique and original voice and dress sense. He rejects the theory as his character can not be mass produced.
