H100 Change Suggestion #1: All streams/impressions are equal
Nov 26, 2017 19:08:41 GMT -5
Post by Sherane Lamar on Nov 26, 2017 19:08:41 GMT -5
I'm planning on a series of suggestions to change the Hot 100's methodology to make it more accurate representation of the United States music industry. I'm starting with the least controversial ideas, and from there I'm planning on branching out into more controversial, and eventually bizarre ideas.
This first one seems to be pretty obvious. And it's probably one that the majority of us here can get on board with. When we look at the Hot 100, it's usually so that we can answer a pretty simple question: "What's the most listened to song in America right now?" While the untraceability of sales and downloads throws a big wrench in our ability to answer that question, when it comes to streaming and radio, the question should be pretty easy to answer.
The inequality between streams is a brand new change to the Hot 100. But the inequality between a radio impression and a stream has existed for as long as streaming was a factor.
One person listening to one song is equal to one listen. That should be pretty simple and self evident. The method in which that person accessed that song is completely irrelevant to the popularity of that song. What Billboard needs to do is equalize all of it.
Will this matter a decade from now? Two decades from now?
As we know, Billboard doesn't always make the changes they should be making in a timely manner. Some of the suggestions I'm going to be giving are somewhat moot because they won't matter in a decade anyway.
This however is a suggestion that will still be relevant in 10 years. Even if the entire population moves to one or two streaming platforms, there will likely still be paid and unpaid tiers of service.
Treating paid streams as worth more than unpaid streams will make Billboard appear less relevant and reliable, as people will expect the chart life of songs to match their view count. But if the paying demographic and the unpaying demographic does not enjoy the same music, it will all come out lopsided.
What would be the effect of this change if implemented now?
Radio would have increased power. Country music, Pop, Adult contemorary Pop, Alternative, Dance, and WGWG would likely all increase on the charts. Hip-Hop, R&B, Urban Pop, and viral music would all decrease.
That's at least what I believe the impact would be. I'm not as much of an expert as somebody like Simm.
But I think that people who pay for music should have a bigger impact on the charts.
As long as people who don't pay are forced to listen to commercials, they always will. Think about it. A person who listens to the radio for an hour will probably only be able to listen to 7 or 8 songs. A person who listens to unpaid Spotify or Pandora for an hour will probably listen to 11 or so songs. But somebody who listens to paid Spotify will be able to spend all 60 minutes listening to music and will probably end up listening to 15+ songs.
So even without any sort of meddling from Billboard, a person listening to paid Spotify already has double the power and influence over the charts than a person who listens to radio.
This first one seems to be pretty obvious. And it's probably one that the majority of us here can get on board with. When we look at the Hot 100, it's usually so that we can answer a pretty simple question: "What's the most listened to song in America right now?" While the untraceability of sales and downloads throws a big wrench in our ability to answer that question, when it comes to streaming and radio, the question should be pretty easy to answer.
The inequality between streams is a brand new change to the Hot 100. But the inequality between a radio impression and a stream has existed for as long as streaming was a factor.
One person listening to one song is equal to one listen. That should be pretty simple and self evident. The method in which that person accessed that song is completely irrelevant to the popularity of that song. What Billboard needs to do is equalize all of it.
Will this matter a decade from now? Two decades from now?
As we know, Billboard doesn't always make the changes they should be making in a timely manner. Some of the suggestions I'm going to be giving are somewhat moot because they won't matter in a decade anyway.
This however is a suggestion that will still be relevant in 10 years. Even if the entire population moves to one or two streaming platforms, there will likely still be paid and unpaid tiers of service.
Treating paid streams as worth more than unpaid streams will make Billboard appear less relevant and reliable, as people will expect the chart life of songs to match their view count. But if the paying demographic and the unpaying demographic does not enjoy the same music, it will all come out lopsided.
What would be the effect of this change if implemented now?
Radio would have increased power. Country music, Pop, Adult contemorary Pop, Alternative, Dance, and WGWG would likely all increase on the charts. Hip-Hop, R&B, Urban Pop, and viral music would all decrease.
That's at least what I believe the impact would be. I'm not as much of an expert as somebody like Simm.
But I think that people who pay for music should have a bigger impact on the charts.
As long as people who don't pay are forced to listen to commercials, they always will. Think about it. A person who listens to the radio for an hour will probably only be able to listen to 7 or 8 songs. A person who listens to unpaid Spotify or Pandora for an hour will probably listen to 11 or so songs. But somebody who listens to paid Spotify will be able to spend all 60 minutes listening to music and will probably end up listening to 15+ songs.
So even without any sort of meddling from Billboard, a person listening to paid Spotify already has double the power and influence over the charts than a person who listens to radio.
