1. They had feet in avant-garde and early adopter camps.

2. They had a popular impact that has arguably never been matched (I include eg. Sinatra, Elvis, MJ and Madonna etc) which lifted the normal "populariser" contribution to your cultural shift.

So there are other huge bands or artists in the progressive, influential respect, people like eg. James Brown, Nirvana, Kraftwerk, NWA etc etc and lots of influential but not commercially successful or mainstream acts.

The Beatles though were arguably more progressive than even those, and on a completely different level in terms of cultural reach. That's what makes them special.

Btw they're not really a band I listen to much, in case there are any "you're just a fanboy" suspicions motivating counters to this. :)

You're assuming The Beatles had significant control over their own success.

The Beatles are highly comparable to other phenomena such as The Simpsons and the iPhone, and discussing their merits and contributions is just as irrelevant. All of what has been said about them applies to The Beatles.

EDIT: I almost forgot about Michael Jackson.

EDIT2: To answer your question more directly, mass media picks and chooses what it popularizes. The artist can choose what they make, but they cannot choose to be chosen. The audience doesn't choose what is mostly heavily advertised either. You can insist that modern ads don't have this effect anymore, but we're talking about a different era.

https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/justice-jackson-accu...