Billboard Hot 100: 03/02/13

[Au$tin]

Feb 21, 2013 18:07:34 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

I don't doubt Harlam Shake's popularity being much more than Thrift Shop.

Overall? Maybe not. But keep in mind that the Hot 100 measures for just the last week. What have I heard about in the last week? Harlam Shake. Everyone has been posting videos on Facebook. People I know want to make their own video. It's become its own conversation by the water cooler. In one week. I don't think the song will last a second week at #1 but if it does, it will be its last. It's a flash in the pan but one that I think the Hot 100 represents fairly because when we look back on this week years from now, we'll remember the week that Harlam Shake was everywhere.

You make valid points, but I just do not agree.

[Rodze]

Feb 21, 2013 18:09:23 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

You make valid points, but I just do not agree.

You do not agree that Harlem Shake was the most popular song in the United States last week?

I guess what we can all agree with is that counting the 30 second clips is BS. Might as well count the free single of the week on iTunes and Amazon.

That must be addressed.

[Tea-why]

Feb 21, 2013 17:32:58 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

I think people just hate change.

Some seem to even refuse to consider the obviousness and the benefits and would rather focus on the "types" of artists that will be the only ones to ever hit #1 again until the end of time.

I think about it this way, if we go over to topics that talk about artists who we wish could break through or get big, we constantly see lists containing those who have already broken through in nearly every area except radio airplay.
Florence & The Machine, Justin Bieber (before Believe), One Direction and many others. One Direction in particular is a group that few could argue are among the biggest groups in the world right now. Yet how have their songs done on the Hot 100? Two Top 10 hits. Now admittedly, I only know a few of their songs but like Justin Bieber before them, they still had/have some pretty well known songs that don't reflect their popularity on the Hot 100 because radio doesn't play them. Yet, they have millions of views on YouTube.
I admit taking into account multiple plays by one person is hopefully dealt with but other than that, I can't think of a better way to further assess song popularity than including sites like YouTube. Yes, they're *videos* but they're still clips for the *songs* themselves. And I know many people who use Youtube for the music rather than the song. People who have entire playlists to play at house parties on YouTube. It just makes sense. I don't know how people can argue against it other than the fact they don't like change.

Hmm I think you made a lot of very good points here. Based on what your are saying, I do see how this could be a really good thing (once they tinker with it a bit).

[The Upper Hand]

And what about songs played on TV ads? They reach millions of people everyday.

[Deleted]

For me, the ratio of sales should be 45-55%.

[tommymonster44]

Here is another point made by the same user from my last post. Hopefully this will shine some light onto how unfair the calculations were:

"I found these figures on a blog somewhere for the Hot 100, which look right given the 3.5:1 ratio of charting points between Harlem Shake and Thrift Shop reported by Billboard.

Harlem Shake:
Streaming 103 million /325 = 316,923
Radio 2 million /7500 = 267
OD 309k /125 = 2,472
Sales 262k /12 = 21,833
Harlem Shake total = 341,495

Thrift Shop:
Streaming 10.1 million/325 = 31,077
Radio 111 million/7500 = 14,800
OD 2 million/125 = 16,000
Sales 412k/12 = 34,333
Thrift Shop total = 96,210

Interestingly to get Harlem Shake's points for Streaming (316,923) from Radio Airplay instead would require 2.4 billion audience impressions, which would take quite some achieving given the population of the US. To get those points from sales would require 3.8 million downloads in the one charting week

It's so blatantly obvious that Billboard have made a major blunder; they should have divided the streaming by more like 3250, not 325 to get remotely sensible numbers. It looks like they have some urgent repair work to do to their formula.

It ain't gonna last. "

[bat1990]

Maybe this change is what Beyoncé is waiting for. So she can unleash her single & video all at once and debut at #1.

[newpower]

Feb 21, 2013 17:07:27 GMT -5 Lozzy said:

Feb 21, 2013 14:56:55 GMT -5 newpower said:

So, what it is next? What do you think it would be the next Billboard change? How do they top this?

• Including Facebook likes and dislikes/Twitter mentions
  
• Adding a voting component
  
• Removing sales
  
• Combining the songs and albums charts

Take your pick! The last one is my personal favorite.

I like that one too! What about having songs played in commercials in TV count? After all, people listen/watch those...

[Quixotic Music Lover]

Feb 21, 2013 19:27:54 GMT -5 tommymonster44 said:

Here is another point made by the same user from my last post. Hopefully this will shine some light onto how unfair the calculations were:

"I found these figures on a blog somewhere for the Hot 100, which look right given the 3.5:1 ratio of charting points between Harlem Shake and Thrift Shop reported by Billboard.

Harlem Shake:
Streaming 103 million /325 = 316,923
Radio 2 million /7500 = 267
OD 309k /125 = 2,472
Sales 262k /12 = 21,833
Harlem Shake total = 341,495

Thrift Shop:
Streaming 10.1 million/325 = 31,077
Radio 111 million/7500 = 14,800
OD 2 million/125 = 16,000
Sales 412k/12 = 34,333
Thrift Shop total = 96,210

Interestingly to get Harlem Shake's points for Streaming (316,923) from Radio Airplay instead would require 2.4 billion audience impressions, which would take quite some achieving given the population of the US. To get those points from sales would require 3.8 million downloads in the one charting week

It's so blatantly obvious that Billboard have made a major blunder; they should have divided the streaming by more like 3250, not 325 to get remotely sensible numbers. It looks like they have some urgent repair work to do to their formula.

It ain't gonna last. "

The comparison to the # of digital download sales is an eye opener. Even "Candle in The Wind 1997" did not sell 3.8 million in one week!

They have probably been working on the formula for months, and did not think a song could be streamed so many times in one week.

[Au$tin]

Feb 21, 2013 18:24:20 GMT -5 Rodze said:

Feb 21, 2013 18:09:23 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

You make valid points, but I just do not agree.

You do not agree that Harlem Shake was the most popular song in the United States last week?

I guess what we can all agree with is that counting the 30 second clips is BS. Might as well count the free single of the week on iTunes and Amazon.

That must be addressed.

No, I don't. I believe "Thrift Shop" was, and I have already stated why I believe that.

[newpower]

Feb 21, 2013 15:50:33 GMT -5 RadioBeatz said:

Feb 21, 2013 14:56:55 GMT -5 newpower said:

So, what it is next? What do you think it would be the next Billboard change? How do they top this?

Including last.fm scrobbles to the formula? I don't know if they're gonna be able to top this mess.

The problem with adding last.fm is that many music services allow to scrobble to last.fm and songs would be double counted

[tommymonster44]

Feb 21, 2013 19:40:13 GMT -5 Quixotic Music Lover said:

The comparison to the # of digital download sales is an eye opener. Even "Candle in The Wind 1997" did not sell 3.8 million in one week!

They have probably been working on the formula for months, and did not think a song could be streamed so many times in one week.

I know that they may have not been working on the formula for this entire time span, but Billboard revealed today that it's been working with Youtube on including video streaming for two years.

For them to put two years of effort into today's failure of a chart is just plain embarrassing.

Edit: Here is some more math that I did.

Taylor, the current queen of Pop/Chr, has an AI of 125 million. The equivalent AI of what HS did this week on Youtube would require a 2.4 billion AI.

After doing the math, that means that IKYWT would have to have 100 times more audience impressions than it currently does to compete with HS.

[weaver]

So..forgive me if someone brought this up already - I only skimmed a lot of this thread. LOTS of posts obv. My question is, will youtube play counts be reset each week? Otherwise, is there a way to know that a song's 443k views or what have you, came from that particular week rather than overall?

I think in theory it makes sense for youtube to be counted, since lots of people listen to music/watch videos that way. It also levels the playing field a bit - just about anyone has access to it, and it's free. It seems, though, it's very manipulatable on a number of levels...by labels, by Billboard (if they should so desire, but why would they?) and by large motivated fanbases. Just my $.02.

[tommymonster44]

Feb 21, 2013 19:53:43 GMT -5 weaver said:

So..forgive me if someone brought this up already - I only skimmed a lot of this thread. LOTS of posts obv. My question is, will youtube play counts be reset each week? Otherwise, is there a way to know that a song's 443k views or what have you, came from that particular week rather than overall?

I think in theory it makes sense for youtube to be counted, since lots of people listen to music/watch videos that way. It also levels the playing field a bit - just about anyone has access to it, and it's free. It seems, though, it's very manipulatable on a number of levels...by labels, by Billboard (if they should so desire, but why would they?) and by large motivated fanbases. Just my $.02.

They haven't (and it seems they don't plan on) publishing the specifics on how they put together a song's view count. However, based on what information they have released, my personal interpretation is that views reset each week. What we don't know is which day of the week the collection process resets.

[DJ General]

Feb 20, 2013 22:42:09 GMT -5 nighttime said:

I think the next addition should be Last.fm scrobbles

lol I wish!

[DJ General]

Feb 20, 2013 19:49:06 GMT -5 Adonis the DemiGod! said:

So if I put a video on YouTube and a ton of people watch it, I could make the HOT100. LOL!

I'm all for democratization of the charts but this is rediculous.

Some people are taking this way too seriously. There is no difference than someone like Rebecca Black getting a hit. She was/is a nobody and recorded a track that blew up and released on iTunes.

The Hot 100 is about the 100 biggest songs of the week. Harlem Shake is certainly the #1 song of the week. I agree about the 30 second clips shouldn't really count, but essentially that is the length of the song (consider it a radio edit)... there are no rules against the lengths of songs to chart on the charts right?

To me it seems like people complain about the rules because their favorite artists don't get to benefit from it. Give me a break lol.

If Mariah Carey/Kelly Clarkson/Ke$ha/other pulse favorite released a 30 second song and it got to #1 I bet things would be switched. Anyone is entitled to release any length of a song for it to chart so that's all there is to it

[leonagwen]

Taylor swifts I knew you were trouble has been the number one airplay song for over a month,in fact it actually reache 16000 spins but never makes it to number one on billboard hot 100,but the harlem shake makes number one with virtually no airplay.It just makes no sense.Taylor deserves number one more than the harlem shake.Airplay should have more weight in the formula than it does.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

People need to get over using airplay as the definition of a "hit song".

[Deleted]

I don't think there is a rule on song lengths, but knowing Billboard, they'll probably make a rule change on it by April.

[SPRΞΞ]

Feb 21, 2013 22:51:01 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

People need to get over using airplay as the definition of a "hit song".

especially when a) you probably don't even listen to the radio, and b) you have no control over what's being played either.

[Au$tin]

Feb 21, 2013 21:42:48 GMT -5 DJ General said:

Some people are taking this way too seriously. There is no difference than someone like Rebecca Black getting a hit. She was/is a nobody and recorded a track that blew up and released on iTunes.

I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here.

Feb 21, 2013 21:42:48 GMT -5 DJ General said:

To me it seems like people complain about the rules because their favorite artists don't get to benefit from it. Give me a break lol.

I can't speak for others, but that is not the reason I'm taking a stand against this new formula. I'm taking a stand against this formula because I genuinely think it's flawed.

If Mariah Carey/Kelly Clarkson/Ke$ha/other pulse favorite released a 30 second song and it got to #1 I bet things would be switched. Anyone is entitled to release any length of a song for it to chart so that's all there is to it

Except that's not the problem here. The people making these 30 second clips are the random people uploading the videos, not the artist or label. I understand that the label still gets paid, but it just doesn't sit right with me.

Feb 21, 2013 22:51:01 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

People need to get over using airplay as the definition of a "hit song".

It's certainly not the only factor, but it is a key element.

Feb 21, 2013 22:56:29 GMT -5 SPRΞΞ said:

you have no control over what's being played either.

This is another thing that irks me. Some people on here act like radio chooses what songs to play based off of nothing. That's not correct. They use call out scores and requests to form their playlists. Yes, some companies are paid off to play a song a certain amount of times, but that can only get a song so far. (See "You Da One," "Give Me All Your Luvin'," etc.) We do know of cases where radio deliberately does not play a song, but all the cases I can think of were fueled by the label. (See "Sober" by Kelly Clarkson or "Gimme Dat" by Ciara).

While they do have control over what they play, they don't have total control.

[Adonis the DemiGod!]

Under normal circumstances the formula wouldnt be flawed. This is an extreme case....of a song going viral and having the sales to back it up. I need to see more data before I say Billboard messed up their formula.

I would put radio airplay in the passive streaming category because its not user demanded like youtube is or on demand is.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

People have control over what radio plays but only to a point.
If I had my way, radio would be playing much different music than it plays now. As it is, radio plays NOT what people want to hear. Instead, they don't play what people don't want to hear. And there's a difference here. Most of what I hear on the radio stations I listen to I'm indifferent to. There are a few songs I hear that I don't like and change the station when I hear them but other than that, it's simply indifference. But I can tell you that what I want to hear isn't usually what comes on on the radio and I think that's where the issue comes in. Most people now have pretty broad musical preferences that isn't reflected by individual radio stations. A lot of us like songs by artists that don't have wide name recognition and because of that, they won't get played on the radio. If I like a song by Artist A that nobody else has ever heard of, you like a song by Artist B that nobody has heard of and someone likes a song by Artist C that nobody else has heard of, neither of us will hear these songs on the radio. Any song that is polarizing in any way, whether by name recognition, sound or otherwise, won't get much airplay.

[Rurry]

I think we are getting pretty close to a point where streaming/online viewing is a more important factor into what makes a hit song than radio. How many people really listen to the radio anymore? I mean, still a lot, probably, but the numbers have dwindled considerably, as streaming's numbers have gone up. I do think, with teens/young adults at least, more people are getting their music from the internet than the radio at this point.

[Fat Ass Kelly Price]

Okay, but saying that using airplay as a definition of a hit song is obsolete is a bit over the top. It is a definition. It just isn't the only one. There are other definitions and components. I don't see why anyone should "get over" using airplay as a definition.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

What I meant with my "get over" comment was in response to leonawagon who said:

Taylor swifts I knew you were trouble has been the number one airplay song for over a month,in fact it actually reache 16000 spins but never makes it to number one on billboard hot 100,but the harlem shake makes number one with virtually no airplay.It just makes no sense.Taylor deserves number one more than the harlem shake.Airplay should have more weight in the formula than it does.

Which suggested that because radio isn't playing a song, it isn't a hit. I wasn't saying radio isn't a definition of what counts as a hit, I'm saying radio shouldn't be the sole indicator of whether a song is a hit. Some people are stuck on the idea that if it's not on radio, it's not a hit. That's what I meant when I said people need to get over it.

[The Upper Hand]

Feb 21, 2013 19:49:20 GMT -5 newpower said:

Feb 21, 2013 15:50:33 GMT -5 RadioBeatz said:

Including last.fm scrobbles to the formula? I don't know if they're gonna be able to top this mess.

The problem with adding last.fm is that many music services allow to scrobble to last.fm and songs would be double counted

Most people don't even know what last.fm is.

[rfucom]

Being no.1 on BB is an honor and it's a huge honor before but now it's anybodys no.1. I will miss the close competitions on hitting the no.1 spot. RIP billboard

[newpower]

Feb 22, 2013 2:24:25 GMT -5 The Upper Hand said:

Feb 21, 2013 19:49:20 GMT -5 newpower said:

The problem with adding last.fm is that many music services allow to scrobble to last.fm and songs would be double counted

Most people don't even know what last.fm is.

Most people don't even know what Harlem Shake is.

[Deleted]

Feb 22, 2013 7:24:49 GMT -5 newpower said:

Feb 22, 2013 2:24:25 GMT -5 The Upper Hand said:

Most people don't even know what last.fm is.

Most people don't even know what Harlem Shake is.

The youtube numbers suggest otherwise