Why is it that different countries have different standards for becoming a gold, platinum or diamond selling artist? For example, in the US to be considered platinum you're album has to sell over 1 million copies (or close enough). But in Canada its only 80,000. That makes no sense. That would mean that someone like Paris Hilton (who has no musical talent) who only sold a little over 80,000 copies of her album is considered a platinum artist in Canada, but her album didn't even break Gold here in the US. Why is that? Why are some artists considered platinum or gold in one country when their album totally flops in another?

*Note: I used this site to get the RIAA certifications of the countries:

List of music recording sales certifications - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_music_recording_sales_certifications)

I think that the differences in sales figures required for gold, platinum and diamond is based on the population of the country. The U.S. has a much larger population than Canada, so an album has to sell many more copies there to be considered a success. Gold is 50,000 in Canada and 500,000 in the U.S. Platinum is 100,000 in Canada and one million in the U.S. Diamond is 1 million in Canada and 10 million in the U.S.

That makes sense. It's just not fair in my opinion. Paris Hilton shouldn't be on the same level as REAL platinum artists.

I agree that Paris Hilton has no musical talent. 70s classic rock and 80s glam metal were great, but there hasn't been any good music since the late 1980s, it's a shame.

This is true. While I may only be 19, I am a big music critic and its true, the 80's were pretty much the golden age for music. Now a-days artists don't care about their music. The days of artists taking time to perfect every song on an album are over. Today, artists rush to get their music on iTunes and in the stores so they can make their millions (if that). Shame really... oh well.