pancakes
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2012
Posts: 1,536
|
Post by pancakes on Oct 11, 2012 10:36:26 GMT -5
lol am i the only one finding this change hilarious rather than angry?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2012 10:41:58 GMT -5
If I read it right. They are not taking any charts away, they are simply adding charts
No big deal
|
|
allow that
Diamond Member
Fall into the atlas
Joined: November 2005
Posts: 14,792
|
Post by allow that on Oct 11, 2012 10:46:01 GMT -5
Hopefully Billboard shot themselves in the foot. They've lost sight of the reason for genre charts in the first place. Genre charts are intended as tools so PDs and (while now obsolete) retailers can capture data on what their core demographic are interested in consuming. They exist because of the fact that there are demographics that are musically active but have no attachment to the Pop chart.
This has now all gone to shit. Urban PD's need not know what random 12 year old white girls in Oklabama are downloading with gift cards when they get home from field hockey practice. The Billboard R&B chart is simply no longer an accurate or useful tool for them. Hopefully enough stations and industry insiders cancel their subscriptions so Billboard is forced to revisit this inaccurate policy change.
Now would be a great opportunity for an upstart chart company to come in provide a more authentic chart. Sick of the Billboard monopoly anyway.
|
|
peterca
New Member
Joined: August 2010
Posts: 313
|
Post by peterca on Oct 11, 2012 10:54:37 GMT -5
If I read it right. They are not taking any charts away, they are simply adding charts No big deal That's ok with me as long as these new charts are simply for information only and not for any official recognition as THE charts to determine genre specific rankings.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Oct 11, 2012 10:54:38 GMT -5
Urban PD's need not know what random 12 year old white girls in Oklabama are downloading with gift cards when they get home from field hockey practice. Your whole post was great, but this in particular had me
|
|
Sir Benji
Diamond Member
The One
Joined: April 2008
Posts: 13,351
|
Post by Sir Benji on Oct 11, 2012 10:56:31 GMT -5
If I read it right. They are not taking any charts away, they are simply adding charts No big deal It would be fine if they just added an "R&B songs chart" similar to the Rap songs chart. The problem here is that they are using the Hot 100 method to compile the new overall R&B/Hip-Hop songs chart. Why have a genre specific chart if your gonna compile it the same way as the Hot 100, which is an overall songs chart regardless of genre. It makes no sense to include Pop airplay in non-pop genre specific charts.
|
|
jebsib
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by jebsib on Oct 11, 2012 10:59:43 GMT -5
But R&B PDs still have their r&b airplay chart, no? Or Mainstream r&b chart? Devoid of Oklahoma white hockey girl downloaders preferences.
|
|
Sir Benji
Diamond Member
The One
Joined: April 2008
Posts: 13,351
|
Post by Sir Benji on Oct 11, 2012 11:01:29 GMT -5
True, but I think the old way was a more accurate representation of the most popular songs with Urban radio listeners. This is just a shady business move to push crossover acts.
|
|
jenglisbe
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2005
Posts: 34,550
|
Post by jenglisbe on Oct 11, 2012 11:13:04 GMT -5
But R&B PDs still have their r&b airplay chart, no? Or Mainstream r&b chart? Devoid of Oklahoma white hockey girl downloaders preferences. But who actually looks at those side charts? Billboard acts like they are being so great in keeping those other charts, but the press never covers those charts. You hear about Hot 100 hits, Country hits, etc. You don't hear about the more specific charts. Even if Billboard reports Country Airplay, it will become irrelevant as a chart.
|
|
Lozzy
Diamond Member
Joined: January 2010
Posts: 49,237
|
Post by Lozzy on Oct 11, 2012 11:15:19 GMT -5
But R&B PDs still have their r&b airplay chart, no? Or Mainstream r&b chart? Devoid of Oklahoma white hockey girl downloaders preferences. But who actually looks at those side charts? Billboard acts like they are being so great in keeping those other charts, but the press never covers those charts. You hear about Hot 100 hits, Country hits, etc. You don't hear about the more specific charts. Even if Billboard reports Country Airplay, it will become irrelevant as a chart. Exactly. The old R&B chart has just been tossed into a bin alongside Tropical Albums and MySpace Songs.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2012 11:18:04 GMT -5
This is the scariest part of this change to me. It encourages labels to put even more focus on their crossover acts and even less focus on their genre-specific acts. It also encourages labels to push all of their artists to record material that will be more likely to get pop airplay. The second single was released since country radio was rejecting the obvious pop sound of the first. This change could actually cause more country acts to veer even further into pop sounding music as a way of manipulating the country chart. If an artist can get airplay and sales from outside the format, they will be more likely to climb and remain on the country charts now than when only country airplay was a factor. This is my concern. And it's a self-fulfilling prophecy because I could also see station PDs looking at Country Songs and sort of getting fooled into thinking the more crossover stuff is what country listeners want to hear since that is what will be topping the country chart per Billboard. It's a slippery slope at this point.
|
|
Sir Benji
Diamond Member
The One
Joined: April 2008
Posts: 13,351
|
Post by Sir Benji on Oct 11, 2012 11:25:12 GMT -5
This whole situation reeks of some type of shady underhanded business deal to further manufacture popular music in general, and it has left a really bad taste in my mouth.
|
|
#LisaRinna
Diamond Member
#LiteralLegender
Joined: August 2008
Posts: 42,164
|
Post by #LisaRinna on Oct 11, 2012 11:47:39 GMT -5
I'm going to ask Silvio Pietroluongo so many questions, he'll want to change the charts back :kii:
|
|
jebsib
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,919
|
Post by jebsib on Oct 11, 2012 11:51:00 GMT -5
A big question I have is why now? With 6 weeks to go until the new chart year?
Recall that throughout the '90s, BIG methodology changes only occurred at the tail end of the year. As of the big February 2005 download change, no one over there seems to care about this anymore.
|
|
Eloqueen™
Diamond Member
TSC: Certified Member
Joined: September 2007
Posts: 20,980
|
Post by Eloqueen™ on Oct 11, 2012 12:23:23 GMT -5
lol am i the only one finding this change hilarious rather than angry? Nope. I literally laughed hysterically after viewing the Hot Country Songs chart earlier this morning. I don't agree with the methodology at this point (though I do like the idea of including digital downloads into the equation), but I'm not frantically writing Billboard and making emotionally-tinged declarative statements throughout Pulse. I might've fed into the dramatics here a few years ago, not so much anymore. lol
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2012 12:50:28 GMT -5
I think if the chart checked the % of genre airplay/overall airplay and only included that much of the digital sales, then it would make more sense.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2012 12:57:51 GMT -5
lol am i the only one finding this change hilarious rather than angry? Nope. I literally laughed hysterically after viewing the Hot Country Songs chart earlier this morning. I don't agree with the methodology at this point (though I do like the idea of including digital downloads into the equation), but I'm not frantically writing Billboard and making emotionally-tinged declarative statements throughout Pulse. I might've fed into the dramatics here a few years ago, not so much anymore. lol I'm not bothered so much by the actual chart changes as I am about the effect those changes could have on the industry and genre-specific artists as a whole. Labels have been investing less and less money in artists whose core is R&B because of how much the R&B market has declined in sales. Now they have another reason to further cut their Urban budgets because strictly R&B artists will even be at a disadvantage on Billboard's R&B chart (which is used as a barometer of what's popular by retailers and program directors) due to significantly lower downloads and less streams than crossover black artists.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2012 13:14:15 GMT -5
A big question I have is why now? With 6 weeks to go until the new chart year? Recall that throughout the '90s, BIG methodology changes only occurred at the tail end of the year. As of the big February 2005 download change, no one over there seems to care about this anymore. Not all of them occur mid year The last big album chart change in 2009 occured at the end of the year
|
|
renfield75
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2009
Posts: 1,624
|
Post by renfield75 on Oct 11, 2012 13:20:06 GMT -5
What are the new recurrent rules? With the volatility of digital sales factored in I don't imagine songs will be removed from the Country chart after three weeks of spin losses like they have been in the past. That chart is going to start flying now, compared to what it's been the last 20 years (where songs would move up only one or two spots per week and take 6 months to crack the top ten).
|
|
Eloqueen™
Diamond Member
TSC: Certified Member
Joined: September 2007
Posts: 20,980
|
Post by Eloqueen™ on Oct 11, 2012 13:28:11 GMT -5
I'm not bothered so much by the actual chart changes as I am about the effect those changes could have on the industry and genre-specific artists as a whole. Labels have been investing less and less money in artists whose core is R&B because of how much the R&B market has declined in sales. Now they have another reason to further cut their Urban budgets because strictly R&B artists will even be at a disadvantage on Billboard's R&B chart (which is used as a barometer of what's popular by retailers and program directors) due to significantly lower downloads and less streams than crossover black artists. Which are legitimate concerns. I wasn't commentating on those who've protested the changes (with justifiable reasoning, such as what you've given) in a rational and reasonable manner. When I speak of the "dramatics" I'm more referring to those whose words look as if they were beaten into the keyboard and whose total sanity appears to be hinged on these charts. To me, it is troubling to a degree, but I'm not heading a lynch mob (obviously an exaggeration, but you get the point).
|
|
Jay D83
4x Platinum Member
Joined: June 2006
Posts: 4,505
|
Post by Jay D83 on Oct 11, 2012 13:31:52 GMT -5
I'm not bothered so much by the actual chart changes as I am about the effect those changes could have on the industry and genre-specific artists as a whole. Labels have been investing less and less money in artists whose core is R&B because of how much the R&B market has declined in sales. Now they have another reason to further cut their Urban budgets because strictly R&B artists will even be at a disadvantage on Billboard's R&B chart (which is used as a barometer of what's popular by retailers and program directors) due to significantly lower downloads and less streams than crossover black artists. Which are legitimate concerns. I wasn't commentating on those who've protested the changes (with justifiable reasoning, such as what you've given) in a rational and reasonable manner. When I speak of the "dramatics" I'm more referring to those whose words look as if they were beaten into the keyboard and whose total sanity appears to be hinged on these charts. To me, it is troubling to a degree, but I'm not heading a lynch mob (obviously an exaggeration, but you get the point). Funny you should post that because this morning I was going to post did anyone think it was unhealthy to get so angry about something that has NO bearing on our everyday lives... Then I thought fuck that, our faves are OUR LIVES!!! Let the handwringing commence! lol.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2012 13:34:41 GMT -5
Maybe the charts that compile what songs are popular in other countries should incorporate crossover airplay from U.S. artists on the CHR/Pop format and also U.S. digital sales and streaming.
It's simply a conflict of interest to compile genre-specific charts with crossover airplay from my view.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2012 13:36:12 GMT -5
Can someone point me to where they said they're including pop airplay in the formulas for these revamped charts?
|
|
Jay D83
4x Platinum Member
Joined: June 2006
Posts: 4,505
|
Post by Jay D83 on Oct 11, 2012 13:37:41 GMT -5
Can someone point me to where they said they're including pop airplay in the formulas for these revamped charts? " Until now, only country stations contributed to the Hot Country Songs chart, or R&B/hip-hop stations to Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs; the same held true for Latin and rock. The new methodology, which will utilize the Hot 100's formula of incorporating airplay from more than 1,200 stations of all genres monitored by BDS, will reward crossover titles receiving airplay on a multitude of formats. With digital download sales and streaming data measuring popularity on the most inclusive scale possible, it is only just the radio portion of Billboard chart calculations that includes airplay from the entire spectrum of monitored formats."
|
|
carrieidol1
Diamond Member
Joined: August 2007
Posts: 12,577
|
Post by carrieidol1 on Oct 11, 2012 13:46:44 GMT -5
Can someone point me to where they said they're including pop airplay in the formulas for these revamped charts? " Until now, only country stations contributed to the Hot Country Songs chart, or R&B/hip-hop stations to Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs; the same held true for Latin and rock. The new methodology, which will utilize the Hot 100's formula of incorporating airplay from more than 1,200 stations of all genres monitored by BDS, will reward crossover titles receiving airplay on a multitude of formats. With digital download sales and streaming data measuring popularity on the most inclusive scale possible, it is only just the radio portion of Billboard chart calculations that includes airplay from the entire spectrum of monitored formats." In other words, in order to score #1s, an artist literally has to crossover into multiple formats. Which defeats the purpose of genre charts in the first place. S**t wouldn't be so crazy if they formulated by proportions. As stated before, the digital sales should count only as much as the proportion to each genres airplay. For example (using random #s): If Taylor's WANEGT receives 30% of its airplay from Country radio, then 30% of its digital sales should be counted towards Country, not 100% of its digital sales. Something to this extent would be much more fair. WANEGBT is not a Country hit relative to its Pop success, yet because of its high digital sales (fueled predominately by its Pop airplay), it's listed as the #1 Country song... ??? What?... Makes no f**king sense...
|
|
HolidayGuy
Diamond Member
Joined: December 2003
Posts: 33,883
|
Post by HolidayGuy on Oct 11, 2012 13:54:38 GMT -5
Someone pointed out on another board that this isn't all that dissimilar to when Billboard added all genres to the Hot 100 airplay panel; prior to that, the Hot 100 primarily had been a pop-oriented chart (with some rhythmic, AC and modern rock thrown into the mix during the 90s); tracks that were pop smashes couldn't top the Hot 100 because they lacked crossover play at non-pop formats like urban radio.
Billboard didn't enter into this decision lightly, I suspect.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2012 13:56:26 GMT -5
If Taylor's WANEGT receives 30% of its airplay from Country radio, then 30% of its digital sales should be counted towards Country, not 100% of its digital sales. Something to this extent would be much more fair. That makes no sense either. You can't just assume 30% of its sales are from country listeners. The only way including sales data in the genre charts makes sense is to include only sales data from stores that primarily sell music from one particular genre, which is impossible in the digital age. Billboard was obviously trying to figure out a way to re-incorporate a sales component into the R&B charts, but it's impossible. I also have no doubt they were under immense pressure from Clear Channel and the like to give the top pop artists a further dominance on Billboard's charts.
|
|
michellef
New Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 104
|
Post by michellef on Oct 11, 2012 14:00:05 GMT -5
maybe they should just release multiple versions of a song with different labels (ex. taylor's WANEGBT can be released with a genre of pop and a genre of country) even if they're the exact same song and take the sales for each song to coincide with the respective chart. lol
(fyi, i know this would never work)
|
|
carrieidol1
Diamond Member
Joined: August 2007
Posts: 12,577
|
Post by carrieidol1 on Oct 11, 2012 14:00:32 GMT -5
If Taylor's WANEGT receives 30% of its airplay from Country radio, then 30% of its digital sales should be counted towards Country, not 100% of its digital sales. Something to this extent would be much more fair. That makes no sense either. You can't just assume 30% of its sales are from country listeners. The only way including sales data in the genre charts makes sense is to include only sales data from stores that primarily sell music from one particular genre, which is impossible in the digital age. Billboard was obviously trying to figure out a way to re-incorporate a sales component into the R&B charts, but it's impossible. I also have no doubt they were under immense pressure from Clear Channel and the like to give the top pop artists a further dominance on Billboard's charts. I agree, but if they want to count sales, they NEED to account for the different proportions of sales yielded by each genre. If they can't measure that, then the change is pointless. Each genre chart with this modification reflects overall popularity across all genres. Genre specific charts should reflect popularity within a genre, not all genres. Otherwise, each genre chart is essentially a measurement of how well songs crossover and not their relative specific genre popularity.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2012 14:01:38 GMT -5
Someone pointed out on another board that this isn't all that dissimilar to when Billboard added all genres to the Hot 100 airplay panel; prior to that, the Hot 100 primarily had been a pop-oriented chart (with some rhythmic, AC and modern rock thrown into the mix during the 90s); tracks that were pop smashes couldn't top the Hot 100 because they lacked crossover play at non-pop formats like urban radio. That made the Hot 100 a more inclusive representative of the most popular songs in the country rather than acting like pop radio was the only measure of popularity and people listening to Urban radio, Country radio, or Rock radio didn't count. This move takes charts that were meant to be representative of what's popular among a certain listening demographic and turned it into a ranking of the most popular songs in the country within a certain category, in which case, Billboard subjectively decides which songs and artists belong on those charts. No one who listens exclusively to Urban radio would tell you Rihanna's "Diamonds" is the most popular song out right now. The chart no longer measures the same thing, yet the purpose of the chart is still the same.
|
|