Honestly, I think he just means 'phenomenon' in the sense that the Beatles were a phenomenon (i.e. a cultural phenomenon) but instead of giving an example of what he meant he just gives his own (questionable) analysis of what it is for something to be a cultural phenomenon.

I'm also confused why he'd say something isn't real just because it's a cultural phenomenon or even just because its a set of things held together by their cultural meaning. It would also make no sense to say it isn't real if what he meant is that it's a social construct but I digress.