michellef
New Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 104
|
Post by michellef on Oct 11, 2012 11:36:40 GMT -5
I'm betting if this chart had been in place before now she wouldn't have even sent out a second single and Radio would have increased the play of the song. why are you even trying to argue that this song deserves #1 on country? it's not a country song...it doesn't. and it flopped on country radio for taylor.
|
|
rsmatto
6x Platinum Member
Joined: December 2008
Posts: 6,528
|
Post by rsmatto on Oct 11, 2012 11:37:52 GMT -5
It was stalling/dropping. But really, who cares? We all know the song is not a country song. And we know it wasn't a real hit among country listeners. Therefore, for it to be the #1 country song - especially now when it isn't even her current single - is ludicrous. But think about this; if this new formula had been in place all year, "WANEGBT" would be on its 9th week at #1 on Country Songs...with no end in sight. Does that make any sense? Truthfully. I'm betting if this chart had been in place before now she wouldn't have even sent out a second single and Radio would have increased the play of the song. Probably true. AND they'd have picked a different single for the second preview track from the CD.
|
|
layne
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2011
Posts: 1,378
|
Post by layne on Oct 11, 2012 11:40:55 GMT -5
I'm betting if this chart had been in place before now she wouldn't have even sent out a second single and Radio would have increased the play of the song. why are you even trying to argue that this song deserves #1 on country? it's not a country song...it doesn't. and it flopped on country radio for taylor. I'm not arguing that this song DESERVES anything. Plus I've learned on this board that stating a song deserves anything is unacceptable. Based on the criteria the song is right where it should be. It's not like Country Radio shut it's doors to the song totally. Maybe if they had, it would have certainly made a statement.
|
|
michellef
New Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 104
|
Post by michellef on Oct 11, 2012 11:46:24 GMT -5
to be honest, i wonder if they even heard the song before they made the clear channel deal. (not that those radio stations actually had a say in it) it would probably be embarrassing for them to play a song once every hour and then just completely STOP playing the song ever again. they wanted to wait it out and see what the listeners wanted...clearly they decided that they did not approve.
|
|
Lee
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,150
|
Post by Lee on Oct 11, 2012 12:17:26 GMT -5
This new methodology is ridiculous. The Billboard Hot Country Songs is no longer going to be an accurate reflection of Top songs in the country music scene, but instead which song Taylor Swift has released to Digital Retailers that week. There are so many arguments against this I don't know where to begin. Are the Top two songs on the chart this week really a reflection of country music this week. No need to view Billboard's chart every Thurs morning anymore.
|
|
|
Post by KeepDeanWeird on Oct 11, 2012 12:37:10 GMT -5
Frankly, I think Billboard got tired of the boring Country Songs chart - where tracks take months to climb and then boom (by some weird coincidence a song at #1 or Top 10 will lose 1000s or spins in one week and be recurrent in two weeks). I don't like this methodology, but then, again, BB has inconsistent for years. The original H100 (pre-1998) only included pop airplay, but all single sales. So you had Urban songs with minimal pop airplay reaching top 10 or #1 because of sales. I have to say of all the changes, this is the biggest joke.
|
|
Uncle Lumpy
3x Platinum Member
The poster formerly known as Lumpster
Joined: September 2005
Posts: 3,425
|
Post by Uncle Lumpy on Oct 11, 2012 12:51:43 GMT -5
The saddest part of this is Billboard was the only surviving chart that you could use to get a decent comparison to use for older acts from the 50's, 60's, & 70's. Now their country chart will be beyond useless. Maybe its best that Jackson & Straits chart topping days are more or less behind them. Its not like either could compete with the pop acts of today. I simply cant wait for Kelly Clarkson to debut her next single at #1 on the country charts, assuming of course that Taylor doesn't have a song in the pop charts at the time. I'm also assuming acts that don't release digital singles (like Garth Brooks & Kid Rock) won't even have a chance at sniffing the chart. But Hey ,look at the bright side, almost all big pop-leaning acts will now debut at #1 like More Then A Memory. Scoot over Garth. <yay.>
|
|
carrieidol1
Diamond Member
Joined: August 2007
Posts: 12,576
|
Post by carrieidol1 on Oct 11, 2012 13:26:51 GMT -5
My e-mail to them:
Hello,
My name is Kyle and I'm an avid chart follower, particularly in Country music. I see you changed your chart formula for Country music, and I must say I'm not pleased, here's why; Based on what I see, Pop airplay + Digital sales completely override Country radio airplay. Country airplay is the single most important component in Country music, and I believe, along with many others that it should be weighted accordingly in proportion to its importance.
Taylor Swift's "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" was generally not well accepted by the Country music community. Due to its initial "buzz" it skyrocketed into the top 20, but shortly thereafter plummeted, stalled, and then plummeted further into the 30s. It has since continued to lose airplay in Country music dramatically. Knowing this, I'm shocked to see it's the #1 Country song, even though it's currently receiving minuscule amounts of Country radio airplay, relative to its Pop airplay. This leads me to believe that in your new formula, Pop radio airplay and digital sales completely undermine COUNTRY radio airplay. In other words, it seems as if Country radio is only a minor component of your formula. In Taylor's case, her digital sales are fueled by her massive Pop radio airplay. How, in this case does her song represent Country music, if the popularity of her song is predominately a result of its Pop exposure, with hardly anything to do with Country music? Your chart suggests that "Never Ever" is a Country hit, when really it's a solely a Pop hit. Country music has little to do with the song's success.
Taylor's "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" is #1 on the Country chart based on its Pop airplay, and its sales generated by its Pop airplay. Country music has little to do with this song's success, yet, on your chart, it's the #1 Country song? Now if this song was successful in Country music in addition to Pop, I wouldn't have a problem. But the chart suggests that "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together" is a Country music hit, regardless of the fact that it is hardly played on Country radio stations throughout the United States of America.
Now, Carrie Underwood's latest COUNTRY hit, "Blown Away" is currently receiving the most Country radio airplay, and thus receiving proportional digital sales to its general popularity. I believe your general "Billboard Hot 100" chart represents all genre's airplay, digital sales, and overall popularity. Why, then, are you making the Country chart represent essentially the same thing with a 'hint' of Country radio airplay? Again, I understand the inclusion of digital sales, but please be aware that Country radio's impact on digital sales does not match that of Pop's airplay. This disproportion in your revised Country chart is not accounted for, and needs to be to truly reflect Country music's general popularity. In other words, digital sales should not be weighted so heavily because they do not depict only Country airplay. Due to different audience numbers, digital sales disproportionally represent Pop airplay. Thus the formula should not only reflect digital sales, but also the disproportion that occurs because of the varying radio airplay across different formats.
Essentially, you're minimizing Country radio's importance. This is evident in the fact that Taylor holds the top two Country songs, with hardly any COUNTRY airplay for either. This is not fair, and does not represent Country music, and its core artists well. Popular acts like; Carrie Underwood, Jason Aldean, Luke Bryan, Kenny Chesney, Brad Paisley, Miranda Lambert, etc... Will struggle to EVER have #1 songs on this chart again because they do not reach the Pop audience as much, which apparently heavily influences the COUNTRY chart based on your new formula. Taylor's "Never Ever" is a Pop hit, not a Country hit, but is depicted as the #1 Country song based on it's Pop airplay and Pop generated digital sales. This makes no sense whatsoever as it is not at all supported by Country radio.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to "revise" the chart so drastically. It alienates most of Country music's core artists who simply do not appeal to the Pop audience to the degree that your formula suggests.
I send this with the utmost respect, but also with great concern for the genre of Country music. I believe your revision will greatly and detrimentally impact Country music negatively. This chart gives superior advantage to cross over artists, which in Country music are generally rare. Nowadays, the only true Country crossover artist is Taylor Swift, thus she'll be the only one to truly benefit from this change, as shown by her chart positions this week. The rest of Country's core artists will struggle to ever have #1s on this chart again, which isn't fair because they work hard to find and write worthy #1s, but they'll never reach that position as long as Country crossover acts are unfairly and disproportionally represented on this chart due to Pop airplay and sales that have little relation to Country music.
I think by this point I've made my point(s) and I hope I'm able to open your eyes to the seemingly blatant and purposeful injustice your revised chart has created. Again, I send this with the utmost respect for you, but with also great concern. I ask that you please consider changing, or re-revising your formula to account for the disproportion your current new formula fails to include. I thank you for reading this, and would greatly appreciate a response.
Best Regards, Kyle Kleef
|
|
imafan
New Member
Joined: November 2007
Posts: 289
|
Post by imafan on Oct 11, 2012 13:35:24 GMT -5
I have never been much of a chart watcher, more of a chart peeper :) I guess. What I am is an album lover. I want to own an album, not down load a song. Even if I don't love every song, I want that whole product. Usually love album tracks more than singles. Feels like complete albums are on the endangered list, and this move is another blow. As someone who just loves music to someone more in the know..is my anxiety about the demise of "the album" justified? or no?
|
|
McCreerian
9x Platinum Member
Joined: June 2010
Posts: 9,070
|
Post by McCreerian on Oct 11, 2012 13:42:15 GMT -5
I really don't see what the big deal is. They just changed the name of the single chart to "Country airplay." "Hot Country singles" is just a new chart. There has always been a Hot 100 and a Hot 100 airplay chart. So I take it as just another chart to watch, bfd!
|
|
layne
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2011
Posts: 1,378
|
Post by layne on Oct 11, 2012 13:47:22 GMT -5
I really don't see what the big deal is. They just changed the name of the single chart to "Country airplay." "Hot Country singles" is just a new chart. There has always been a Hot 100 and a Hot 100 airplay chart. So I take it as just another chart to watch, bfd! Actually the new chart is now the "main" chart for determining and awarding #1 songs. For example: the previous chart which is now "just" an airplay chart would have more than likely had Carrie Underwood's Blown Away as the number one Country song next week. Now Taylor's song is the Official #1 Country song and Carrie really only has the #1 airplay song. Does that make sense?
|
|
michellef
New Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 104
|
Post by michellef on Oct 11, 2012 13:49:17 GMT -5
I really don't see what the big deal is. They just changed the name of the single chart to "Country airplay." "Hot Country singles" is just a new chart. There has always been a Hot 100 and a Hot 100 airplay chart. So I take it as just another chart to watch, bfd! yeah, but that's the thing. i think they're pretty much putting the "country airplay" chart off to the side as just a chart to watch, and putting more importance on the new hot country songs chart...which should not be the case!
|
|
joey2002
6x Platinum Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 6,372
|
Post by joey2002 on Oct 11, 2012 13:51:52 GMT -5
To me it's even a bigger joke that "Red" (an unreleased album track) is at #2 on the chart.
Suddenly Mediabase[/i] is looking better and better...
|
|
Lee
Platinum Member
Joined: September 2004
Posts: 1,150
|
Post by Lee on Oct 11, 2012 13:53:48 GMT -5
The saddest part of this is Billboard was the only surviving chart that you could use to get a decent comparison to use for older acts from the 50's, 60's, & 70's. Now their country chart will be beyond useless. Maybe its best that Jackson & Straits chart topping days are more or less behind them. Its not like either could compete with the pop acts of today. I simply cant wait for Kelly Clarkson to debut her next single at #1 on the country charts, assuming of course that Taylor doesn't have a song in the pop charts at the time. I'm also assuming acts that don't release digital singles (like Garth Brooks & Kid Rock) won't even have a chance at sniffing the chart. But Hey ,look at the bright side, almost all big acts will now debut at #1 like More Then A Memory <yay.> I actually think I it will be next to impossible for many of Nashville's biggest star that do not lean toward pop to ever have a number one record again. Since they dont benefit from pop airplay spurring sales.
|
|
layne
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2011
Posts: 1,378
|
Post by layne on Oct 11, 2012 13:59:32 GMT -5
Take a look at the chart without the Taylor Factor involved. Isn't the Florida Georgia Line song next in line behind Carrie and it's not even in the top 5 airplay. So to me it's clear that even if you aren't getting POP airplay, if you are a big digital seller and your song is getting at least some country airplay, you are going to be able to get a #1 song. If Taylor doesn't have any songs out, then it really makes it more about the song and if it's selling great rather than airplay or the Artist. This spells trouble for anyone A-list or not that doesn't dominate digital sales.
|
|
McCreerian
9x Platinum Member
Joined: June 2010
Posts: 9,070
|
Post by McCreerian on Oct 11, 2012 14:01:09 GMT -5
I really don't see what the big deal is. They just changed the name of the single chart to "Country airplay." "Hot Country singles" is just a new chart. There has always been a Hot 100 and a Hot 100 airplay chart. So I take it as just another chart to watch, bfd! Actually the new chart is now the "main" chart for determining and awarding #1 songs. For example: the previous chart which is now "just" an airplay chart would have more than likely had Carrie Underwood's Blown Away as the number one Country song next week. Now Taylor's song is the Official #1 Country song and Carrie really only has the #1 airplay song. Does that make sense? It makes sense but I really don't see PDs all over reprogramming their stations to sound even more Pop, to just satisfy this one chart when there is still the Mediabase and Airplay charts. I think this chart just reflects more on what the consumers are buying and listening too, which isn't a bad thing. I've always thought Country should have its own Hot 100 type chart. It'll all work together and its not going to make the industry do a polar shift. I just don't see it being a big deal.
|
|
joey2002
6x Platinum Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 6,372
|
Post by joey2002 on Oct 11, 2012 14:03:25 GMT -5
Isn't the Florida Georgia Line song next in line behind Carrie and it's not even in the top 5 airplay. Florida Georgia Line is "cruising" up the airplay chart at a very fast rate partly because of its digital popularity. That's just one factor. I've always thought Country should have its own Hot 100 type chart. Billboard Country Songs is simply a country hot 100 type chart.
|
|
layne
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2011
Posts: 1,378
|
Post by layne on Oct 11, 2012 14:05:46 GMT -5
Actually the new chart is now the "main" chart for determining and awarding #1 songs. For example: the previous chart which is now "just" an airplay chart would have more than likely had Carrie Underwood's Blown Away as the number one Country song next week. Now Taylor's song is the Official #1 Country song and Carrie really only has the #1 airplay song. Does that make sense? It makes sense but I really don't see PDs all over reprogramming their stations to sound even more Pop, to just satisfy this one chart when there is still the Mediabase and Airplay charts. I think this chart just reflects more on what the consumers are buying and listening too, which isn't a bad thing. I've always thought Country should have its own Hot 100 type chart. It'll all work together and its not going to make the industry do a polar shift. I just don't see it being a big deal. I think the main point you are missing is the way #1 songs are going to be recognized. Blown Away is not going to be awarded the BB #1 song as it would have been had the chart not changed. It will be on mediabase but it won't be Country's #1 song on BB. That's a big blow to fans and the Artists themselves. The main reason it's not going to be #1 is because Taylor's song receives more Pop play. So that's what the big deal is.
|
|
mikem
New Member
Gillian Welch 'The Harrow and the Harvest'
Joined: March 2012
Posts: 242
|
Post by mikem on Oct 11, 2012 14:07:34 GMT -5
^ It does appear that sales is a huge factor in the new chart. I mean, Red isn't getting played since it hasn't even been released as a single to any genre, yet it made it to #2 on the chart.
ETA: I hate to say it, but the Billboard chart just became irrelevant in my eyes (not that they care). As much as I distrust Mediabase's gimmicky, top-secret formula for computing points, it will surely be a much more accurate country music chart.
|
|
joey2002
6x Platinum Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 6,372
|
Post by joey2002 on Oct 11, 2012 14:09:43 GMT -5
It does appear that sales is a huge factor in the new chart. I mean, Red isn't getting played since it hasn't even been released as a single to any genre, yet it made it to #2 on the chart. That tells you how much of a factor airplay is on the new Country Songs chart. It will be on mediabase but it won't be Country's #1 song on BB. Almost all of the countdown shows use Mediabase – so it won't change those at all.
|
|
McCreerian
9x Platinum Member
Joined: June 2010
Posts: 9,070
|
Post by McCreerian on Oct 11, 2012 14:16:02 GMT -5
Well the industry has changed. More people listen to their Ipods in the car and around the house than radio. As the years go by, radio is going to mean less and less to peoples lives, especially when the baby boomers start to die out. By the time people in their 20s now are in their 50s, radio will be what Black and White Tube TVs are considered to be today. Things change and this is all a part of it. Radio doesn't play the artists I listen to the most anymore and even the ones they do, I'm not going to wait thru car commercials and songs I don't want to hear just to hear the one I do when all I can do is put on my Ipod. So the new chart reflects more of the current generation than the one who isn't the main consumers anymore.
|
|
michellef
New Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 104
|
Post by michellef on Oct 11, 2012 14:18:12 GMT -5
Well the industry has changed. More people listen to their Ipods in the car and around the house than radio. As the years go by, radio is going to mean less and less to peoples lives, especially when the baby boomers start to die out. By the time people in their 20s now are in their 50s, radio will be what Black and White Tube TVs are considered to be today. Things change and this is all a part of it. Radio doesn't play the artists I listen to the most anymore and even the ones they do, I'm not going to wait thru car commercials and songs I don't want to hear just to hear the one I do when all I can do is put on my Ipod. So the new chart reflects more of the current generation than the one who isn't the main consumers anymore.no it doesn't. i don't know why you're defending the new chart so hard. all the new chart does is add pop success into the genre specific charts, which makes GENRE specific charts pointless.
|
|
layne
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2011
Posts: 1,378
|
Post by layne on Oct 11, 2012 14:21:13 GMT -5
Well the industry has changed. More people listen to their Ipods in the car and around the house than radio. As the years go by, radio is going to mean less and less to peoples lives, especially when the baby boomers start to die out. By the time people in their 20s now are in their 50s, radio will be what Black and White Tube TVs are considered to be today. Things change and this is all a part of it. Radio doesn't play the artists I listen to the most anymore and even the ones they do, I'm not going to wait thru car commercials and songs I don't want to hear just to hear the one I do when all I can do is put on my Ipod. So the new chart reflects more of the current generation than the one who isn't the main consumers anymore. I have long thought that Country Radio had too much power over determining which Artist makes it and which one Doesn't. With this new chart, it's clear that even a simple album cut with no airplay can be recognized if it sells enough. I actually think the Dixie Chicks could put out a new single and it would be very high on this new chart and radio wouldn't have any say in it.
|
|
joey2002
6x Platinum Member
Joined: January 2009
Posts: 6,372
|
Post by joey2002 on Oct 11, 2012 14:23:04 GMT -5
There's nothing wrong with adding a new chart – the problem is Billboard acting like it's replacing the airplay chart.
"Red" is at #2. This has nothing to do with airplay...
|
|
layne
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2011
Posts: 1,378
|
Post by layne on Oct 11, 2012 14:23:17 GMT -5
Well the industry has changed. More people listen to their Ipods in the car and around the house than radio. As the years go by, radio is going to mean less and less to peoples lives, especially when the baby boomers start to die out. By the time people in their 20s now are in their 50s, radio will be what Black and White Tube TVs are considered to be today. Things change and this is all a part of it. Radio doesn't play the artists I listen to the most anymore and even the ones they do, I'm not going to wait thru car commercials and songs I don't want to hear just to hear the one I do when all I can do is put on my Ipod. So the new chart reflects more of the current generation than the one who isn't the main consumers anymore.no it doesn't. i don't know why you're defending the new chart so hard. all the new chart does is add pop success into the genre specific charts, which makes GENRE specific charts pointless. I actually think it makes SALES the main point. Red isn't being played on POP radio but it still is ahead of Carrie's song. This tells me that it's clearly about sales.
|
|
McCreerian
9x Platinum Member
Joined: June 2010
Posts: 9,070
|
Post by McCreerian on Oct 11, 2012 14:35:16 GMT -5
Well the industry has changed. More people listen to their Ipods in the car and around the house than radio. As the years go by, radio is going to mean less and less to peoples lives, especially when the baby boomers start to die out. By the time people in their 20s now are in their 50s, radio will be what Black and White Tube TVs are considered to be today. Things change and this is all a part of it. Radio doesn't play the artists I listen to the most anymore and even the ones they do, I'm not going to wait thru car commercials and songs I don't want to hear just to hear the one I do when all I can do is put on my Ipod. So the new chart reflects more of the current generation than the one who isn't the main consumers anymore.no it doesn't. i don't know why you're defending the new chart so hard. all the new chart does is add pop success into the genre specific charts, which makes GENRE specific charts pointless. Like I said radio is on its way out, and other ways of listening to music are in. This new chart lets consumers decide who has the top 10 hits, not radio PDs. The PDs can still have their say on the Airplay chart and the fans can influence the Singles chart. When radio took fans opinions away and started these "Clear channel" and other backroom deals with corporate radio, that killed the airplay format the most with fans having a say on what is played. I have called radio stations about new releases or older 90s songs and been told "I am not allowed to play that record." Well on this new chart, fans determine where the song lands, not what corporations allow. I say more power to the fans, its a great thing, and to hell with Corporations and PDs contriving a playlist to chart the what they want it to. Fans will now have the last word with their wallets. And if Taylor Swift is the one fans are buying the most, so be it! If fans want a Josh Turner song to chart to the top 5 on Country singles, then they better pay up! The music industry began single driven with fans buying old 45 record singles, then it went album driven. Now its digital single driven. Times change, music changes, and the way fans listen to music is changing. Honestly if local commercial radio just went away, a good amount of people wouldn't even care. Hey maybe we will get more singles now from albums instead of taking 6 months to a year per song in many cases. That'd be a GREAT thing!
|
|
carriekins
5x Platinum Member
With my mouth wide open in a whiskey rain, I could stand here 24 hours a day...
Joined: November 2011
Posts: 5,328
|
Post by carriekins on Oct 11, 2012 14:38:28 GMT -5
There is a significant emphasis on sales on the new chart. That is undeniable.
That being said, some of the format's bigger stars aren't big digital sellers: Brad, Keith, Dierks, Miranda, Blake ... they might have a handful of gold singles, but they aren't platinum sellers like Carrie, Taylor, Jason, and Luke (and Eric, for Springsteen). So the new methodology puts more of an emphasis on those that sell, which can hurt some of the more consistent players in the genre.
My concern is that it will dilute the genre - some of the biggest songs this year not by Carrie, Luke, Taylor, and Jason were the more gimmiky and, er, crummy releases. Look I'm a huge Dierks fan but 5-1-5-0 is not a direction that I would like to see him continue to go in. But that's a gold single, so on this new chart, that would probably be a decent hit. How are artists going to be motivated to put out GOOD songs (and I realize this is subjective) if they won't sell? Red Solo Cup is another good example - a novelty song that peaked at #11 on airplay, and would have easily been #1 on this new chart. (There are obviously exceptions to this - Even if it Breaks Your Heart, Springsteen, Pontoon - all would have done deservedly well based on both airply and sales.)
I do wish the "crossover" aspect was not a part of the equation at all, personally. Country artists just don't crossover to other formats often enough for this to not be seen as the "Taylor Advantage."
|
|
Ten Pound Hammer
9x Platinum Member
Banned
I watched it all on my radio
Joined: August 2006
Posts: 9,595
|
Post by Ten Pound Hammer on Oct 11, 2012 15:09:47 GMT -5
So anyone got the entirety of this "new" chart? Billboard.com only lets you see up to #25.
|
|
layne
Platinum Member
Joined: February 2011
Posts: 1,378
|
Post by layne on Oct 11, 2012 15:13:12 GMT -5
^The songs you listed though were the Best songs out in 2012 and they connected with people and sold well. I didn't particulary like Red Solo Cup but I do feel based on it's popularity and sales that it was just as worthy of #1 as Pontoon. Some of the formats bigger stars are quite simply bigger because radio made them that way. If Miranda and Blake aren't selling with their current singles very well, what does that say about those songs and the way they connect with people? It makes me think those songs are being forced on us just because radio wants them to be stars and they are on a major label. I don't really like this chart being this heavy on sales but I also don't like the airplay chart because radio Programmers have all the power to make or break someone regardless of whether the song is good and people like it or not.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2012 15:13:43 GMT -5
I'm betting if this chart had been in place before now she wouldn't have even sent out a second single and Radio would have increased the play of the song. Don't you see that this is a HUGE problem though? I'm sorry, layne, but I have to disagree with pretty much all your thoughts on this new chart. If this chart had been in place and WANEGBT had been #1 for weeks and weeks, why should radio bump its airplay because of that? Why should a song get an airplay increase because of its position on a national chart with a methodology dictated by Billboard? The airplay charts have never been perfect but they should always be based on listener feedback, and that's why WANEGBT fared so poorly. It tested terribly. The majority of country radio listeners strongly disliked it. This hurts so many country singers and will really help the crossover acts and it's just terrible. George Strait, Alan Jackson, Reba...even guys like Tim, Keith, Toby, Brad...artists who got to the top before 2005 (ish), don't sell singles the way that the newer stars do. Why? Because a lot of the big stars from the 90's and before established fanbases back then, and many of those fans have stuck with them...and the older fanbases simply do not buy singles nearly as much as the rabid young fans do for 'who's hot right now'. Look, I'm very interested in sales too, because sometimes, a song can connect earlier than it does on the airplay chart, which in turn will spur its airplay along. We saw that with Thompson Square's "Are You Gonna Kiss Me Or Not", Eli Young Band's "Crazy Girl", and now Florida Georgia Line's "Cruise". But radio people already can get or have access to the SoundScan charts that show single sales...it makes NO sense to mix them with airplay. Why not mix album sales then? Or count each album sale as a single sale too. After all, the 70,000 people that bought Alan Jackson's latest album in its 1st week certainly all bought "So You Don't Have To Love Me Anymore", right? Alan and George can sell albums decently well yet, even with their decline at radio, yet this new chart will not help them. Instead, it will help people like Love & Theft, who barely sold anything at all with their new album, yet sold many copies of "Angel Eyes". There will be a lot of issues with this chart. I will try to support the airplay chart, in hopes that it remains relevant within the industry. But maybe I'll just have to follow Mediabase more. Or maybe...maybe I won't care. Following the charts and my favorite artists has always been a big passion of mine, a hobby if you will. But I don't like where it's all heading. Maybe I'll just keep listening to the music now, and forget about airplay and sales. Finally, one last thought...why does the country genre have to have a mixed chart? Pop doesn't, right? Rock doesn't. Rap doesn't. The Hot 100 is NOT a pop chart...just a combined sales/airplay/streaming chart for all genres, and I've always thought it was useless. There are still songs that go #1 on the Pop airplay chart but don't go #1 on the Hot 100. So my question is, why are they trying to make this mixed hybrid chart the main country chart, when other genres still have airplay-only charts as their main chart?
|
|