Do you enjoy any art of measurable complexity? Do you regularly spend time with any music that asks something of it's listener?
Let's surmise there are objective qualities that can result in good music: sincerity of message and emotion, developed grasp of melody and harmonic interplay, skilled musicianship, instrumental contrapunctuality, technical grasp of language with regard to lyricism, strong imagery, et cetera.
These are universally agreed upon determiners of quality music. These are concepts highly rooted in classical beauty, and artists working within that tradition seek to forge their metals into their craft.
Subsequently, Newsom's work is rife with them. Regardless of your enjoyment of it, the claim that her music is in any way lazy is absolute nonsense. You either appreciate what she does and are able to admit that it does have merit, or you flatly disagree with the entirety of Westerm artistic and musical criticism for, say, the entirety of recorded history. Which it seems you do! Bravo! Come one, come all! This Anon here thinks that his failure to accurately apprehend something invalidates it's objective merits! A true spectacle, one for the ages! Read all afuckin bout it.
Frankly, if you ever decided to participate in anything apart from disingenuous sophistry, and had any interest in being a functioning human being with a working critical faculty (as opposed to, say, a deadened sloth, as you are currently), you could probably get something out of the experience. Newsom is far more well read than either you or I and infinitely more talented (no virtuoso, but still exhibiting rigorous and skillful musicianship). Newsom's aesthetics are so centered around classical beauty that any attempt to dismiss her outright is equal, at least in terms of sheer idiocy, to an argument for Bach being a hack, or da Vinci being of no serious contribution.
Your postings have the true marketplace stink.