Billboard Hot 100: 03/05/2016

[rimetm]

The article confirms When We Were Young jumps 20-14. Who else thinks that might be the peak due to the Grammy boost?

[Deleted]

Don't get how the fuck Work got #1 with the video coming out so late in the week lmao.
Really happy for Cake By The Ocean reaching top ten though!

[jtd Thee Stallion]

When Billboard posts an article the day before saying a song has a chance at #1, they seem to be implying that it WILL be #1.

[Ravi]

Feb 22, 2016 14:49:06 GMT -5 @markg94 said:

Don't get how the f**k Work got #1 with the video coming out so late in the week lmao.
Really happy for Cake By The Ocean reaching top ten though!

It had a 9M+ lead on streaming (I was expecting only 6M), which was enough to compensate for the 75M deficit in Airplay.

[popstop]

Cake by the Ocean in the top ten.

This also makes 9 #1 songs in a row by non-Americans - a record.

[jenglisbe]

Feb 22, 2016 14:46:24 GMT -5 Caviar said:

Billboard does not distinguish lead/features when it comes to crediting #1s. There's going to be MANY butt hurt posts after this but Rihanna has 14 #1 hits, period. She's just FIVE hits away from stealing the title and shes not even 30 yet! FYI jenglisbe this post was NOT directed towards you or anyone in particular.

Maybe at this point, but they have started distinguishing it with other chart records so I could see it happening with #1s as well.

[Caviar]

Feb 22, 2016 15:02:58 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Feb 22, 2016 14:46:24 GMT -5 Caviar said:

Billboard does not distinguish lead/features when it comes to crediting #1s. There's going to be MANY butt hurt posts after this but Rihanna has 14 #1 hits, period. She's just FIVE hits away from stealing the title and shes not even 30 yet! FYI jenglisbe this post was NOT directed towards you or anyone in particular.

Maybe at this point, but they have started distinguishing it with other chart records so I could see it happening with #1s as well.

So you think Billboard would eventually discredit her featured #1s? If so they'd have to do that across all artists.

[HolidayGuy]

It's not really a matter of "discrediting" featuring credits, but in terms of Billboard's all-time acts list, those kinds of credits result in split points between/among the acts for such tracks (as it should be). For an article last year, Billboard listed acts' number of Hot 100 entries, with broken-down info on number as lead act, featuring roles, etc.

That's a nice climb for "When We Were Young"- it didn't really get a Grammys boos, though, as she didn't perform it. She did perform it on Ellen on Thursday, though.

[Linnethia Monique]

Feb 22, 2016 15:07:45 GMT -5 Caviar said:

Feb 22, 2016 15:02:58 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Maybe at this point, but they have started distinguishing it with other chart records so I could see it happening with #1s as well.

So you think Billboard would eventually discredit her featured #1s? If so they'd have to do that across all artists.

They wouldn't discredit the other number ones but it would have an asterisk next to it or they would note that one was all the main artist and the other got a boost by being a featured artists. They do it all the time as to avoid people ransacking them, which in the end still happens.

[Caviar]

My post was in reference to most #1 hits not all-acts lists.

[jenglisbe]

Feb 22, 2016 15:16:35 GMT -5 HolidayGuy said:

It's not really a matter of "discrediting" featuring credits, but in terms of Billboard's all-time acts list, those kinds of credits result in split points between/among the acts for such tracks (as it should be). For an article last year, Billboard listed acts' number of Hot 100 entries, with broken-down info on number as lead act, featuring roles, etc.

Exactly. It's not a matter of taking away hits/#1s, it's more about keeping separate records. In the past you didn't see them note things like most top 10s as a lead artist or whatever, but now it's often mentioned in their columns. And as I said earlier and holidayguy reiterated, they've long split chart points when featured acts are involved.

So, in the future I can see them noting that certain artists have the most #1s in general, but then also separately noting the records for lead artists. So, it's more like co-existing.

[Deleted]

Ew, at Work.

However, glad to hear Lukas is top 20!

[Linnethia Monique]

Feb 22, 2016 15:18:35 GMT -5 Caviar said:

My post was in reference to most #1 hits not all-acts lists.

Neither one gets what you were talking about still.

[Deleted]

There is something to be said about a feature credit on a song having varied influence on the song's success. A 15 second guest rap vs. singing the entire massive chorus/hook, for example. Rihanna's "feature" in all 3 #1s have all been a huge part of the songs, whereas some features are very minor in comparison. I realize this is subjective, but it's just another way to look at it. This notion of not counting any of the 3 songs would be just as contentious as counting them. I don't see that ever happening anyway. Put asterisks on them, fine, but that doesn't mean anything to me with these particular songs. She deserves credit for their success.

[areyoureadytojump]

Feb 22, 2016 14:14:43 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Feb 22, 2016 12:24:46 GMT -5 areyoureadytojump said:

CHART: Digital Songs
Week Ending: 02/18/2016

1 FLO RIDA + MY HOUSE 134k
2 RIHANNA FEAT. DRAKE + WORK 119k
3 BIEBER*JUSTIN + LOVE YOURSELF 118k
4 TWENTY ONE PILOTS + STRESSED OUT 111k
5 ZAYN + PILLOWTALK 103k
6 G-EAZY + ME, MYSELF & I 78k
7 TRINIX + HELLO 68k
8 CHARLIE PUTH + ONE CALL AWAY 65k
9 GRAHAM*LUKAS + 7 YEARS 64k
10 BAY*JAMES + LET IT GO 61k

Trinix?

Editing error, sorry.

It's

7 Adele + HELLO 68k

[HolidayGuy]

Oh, I get it- I was simply adding additional info for anyone interested. :)

[popstop]

For now, RIhanna has a 14th #1 without Billboard qualifications, but Billboard has been known to change their mind on records like this. I feel like they used to count Elvis' 1955-1958 #1s for chart stats and then decided to drop those around the 50th anniversary of the Hot 100 in 1958. Or maybe sooner than that?

When My Boo went to #1, Billboard made an announcement of Confessions being the first album to yield 4 #1s in awhile. But My Boo was on the re-release. I remember questioning that by writing to Fred Bronson, like it wasn't as legit to me as when Mariah Carey had done it. The when Katy Perry got her sixth #1 with her re-release, they recapitulated and said it wasn't a record-breaker because it was from a re-release.

One record I wonder if I will ever see being broken is Mariah's cumulative weeks at #1. Rihanna is the only one with a chance at breaking that anytime soon.

[Deleted]

Feb 22, 2016 15:49:00 GMT -5 popstop said:

For now, RIhanna has a 14th #1 without Billboard qualifications, but Billboard has been known to change their mind on records like this. I feel like they used to count Elvis' 1955-1958 #1s for chart stats and then decided to drop those around the 50th anniversary of the Hot 100 in 1958. Or maybe sooner than that?

When My Boo went to #1, Billboard made an announcement of Confessions being the first album to yield 4 #1s in awhile. But My Boo was on the re-release. I remember questioning that by writing to Fred Bronson, like it wasn't as legit to me as when Mariah Carey had done it. The when Katy Perry got her sixth #1 with her re-release, they recapitulated and said it wasn't a record-breaker because it was from a re-release.

One record I wonder if I will ever see being broken is Mariah's cumulative weeks at #1. Rihanna is the only one with a chance at breaking that anytime soon.

I understand and agree with the examples you've given, but they aren't really relevant or specific to an artist's credit on a song counting in an overall #1 (or whatever) tally.  That's not the same thing as a song on a re-release album or counting elvis's songs pre H100 or not.  I can't see them changing this particular criteria.  She has credit on 14 #1 songs, and that's not going to change.  Asterisk, maybe, or separate list to satisfy the naysayers, perhaps, but that's it.

[Deleted]

Well, I don't think Work is gonna let go of that top 10 spot anytime soon, considering the video just dropped a couple hours ago. Surprised it jumped so much, considering the lead the other songs had.

Also surprised Pillowtalk actually rebounded. Looks like it has potential to stay in the top 10 for a while after all.

[Gary]

Statistics give a different story depending on how you tell it.

- Features vs leads
- Solo vs not
- Male vs Female


My favorite:
Billboard referring to "all time" as the start of the Hot 100 in August 1958. As opposed to the start of the "rock era" in 1955 or the start of Billboard charts in 1940.


Each gives a different story, all are fun and all are true.

[NeRD]

Feb 22, 2016 14:40:28 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

It's a sad commentary on our culture today that something as redundant and mundane as "Work" is the #1 single. It's easily among her worst singles. Meanwhile the terrific "Stay" couldn't get to #1.

Stay could've easily have been her 14th but Def Jam was still butt hurt about streaming being the future. Technically, different label yeah, but same management since 2010 so I'm glad they came to their senses to turn one of Rihanna's strongest points into a positive that would have greatly benefited her all along, chart wise.

[jenglisbe]

Feb 22, 2016 15:29:29 GMT -5 @broccoli said:

There is something to be said about a feature credit on a song having varied influence on the song's success. A 15 second guest rap vs. singing the entire massive chorus/hook, for example. Rihanna's "feature" in all 3 #1s have all been a huge part of the songs, whereas some features are very minor in comparison. I realize this is subjective, but it's just another way to look at it. This notion of not counting any of the 3 songs would be just as contentious as counting them. I don't see that ever happening anyway. Put asterisks on them, fine, but that doesn't mean anything to me with these particular songs. She deserves credit for their success.

Did I miss where someone said to get rid of them? I think most of us were just talking about there essentially being two separate records (or an asterisk if you will, but even that reads more like discounting them).

[jenglisbe]

Feb 22, 2016 15:53:44 GMT -5 @broccoli said:

Feb 22, 2016 15:49:00 GMT -5 popstop said:

For now, RIhanna has a 14th #1 without Billboard qualifications, but Billboard has been known to change their mind on records like this. I feel like they used to count Elvis' 1955-1958 #1s for chart stats and then decided to drop those around the 50th anniversary of the Hot 100 in 1958. Or maybe sooner than that?

When My Boo went to #1, Billboard made an announcement of Confessions being the first album to yield 4 #1s in awhile. But My Boo was on the re-release. I remember questioning that by writing to Fred Bronson, like it wasn't as legit to me as when Mariah Carey had done it. The when Katy Perry got her sixth #1 with her re-release, they recapitulated and said it wasn't a record-breaker because it was from a re-release.

One record I wonder if I will ever see being broken is Mariah's cumulative weeks at #1. Rihanna is the only one with a chance at breaking that anytime soon.

I understand and agree with the examples you've given, but they aren't really relevant or specific to an artist's credit on a song counting in an overall #1 (or whatever) tally.  That's not the same thing as a song on a re-release album or counting elvis's songs pre H100 or not.  I can't see them changing this particular criteria.  She has credit on 14 #1 songs, and that's not going to change.  Asterisk, maybe, or separate list to satisfy the naysayers, perhaps, but that's it.

Again, where are people advocting for changing the credit? That isn't what I see being discussed. The examples @popstop mentioned are relevant because they show Billboard changing the way they count/report chart records. To that end having a distinction in chart records between lead artists and counting all credits is certainly plausible; as has been said, they have already started doing this with some records.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

What is a "lead" artist anyway? All it is is a technicality or a label. I'm sure there are #1 singles by artists whose contribution on their own songs are less than those who are labeled as "featured artists" on #1 songs. A #1 is a #1. Congrats Rihanna. The song is terrible but I'm all for fun chart stats and this one makes for a good one. Plus, the album is good so maybe her 15th is coming soon.

[kingofpain]

Who cares about Work. The biggest top 10 news is DNCE getting a top 10 hit!!!!!

[Caviar]

They should release "Kiss It Better" in about a month so she can replace herself.

[Caviar]

Rihanna & Drake Rise to No. 1 on Hot 100 With 'Work'

The song becomes Rihanna's 14th leader, lifting her past Michael Jackson for the third-most No. 1s all-time. Plus, DNCE dances into the top 10 with "Cake by the Ocean."


Rihanna's "Work," featuring Drake, reaches No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 (dated March 5), becoming her 14th topper, as well as Drake's second.

Rihanna & Drake Put in 'Work' for New Video

Meanwhile, Joe Jonas-led DNCE hits the top 10 with "Cake by the Ocean," granting him entrance to an elite club historically (keep reading…)

As we do every Monday, let's work our way through the Hot 100's top 10 and more. Highlights of the airplay, sales and streaming-based Hot 100 post on Billboard.com each Monday, with all charts updated each Tuesday.

After a race for the top that was too close to call based on sales projections from industry sources and preliminary airplay and streaming data according to Nielsen Music on Friday, "Work," released on Westbury Road/Roc Nation, surges 4-1 on the Hot 100 (and becomes the 1,052nd No. 1 in the chart's 57-year history).

With the ascent of "Work," Rihanna collects her 14th Hot 100 leader, upping her into a solo share of the third-most No. 1s all-time, breaking a tie with Michael Jackson. Here's an updated look at the acts with the most Hot 100 No. 1s:

20, The Beatles
18, Mariah Carey
14, Rihanna
13, Michael Jackson
12, Madonna
12, The Supremes
11, Whitney Houston
10, Janet Jackson
10, Stevie Wonder

Meanwhile, Drake tallies his second Hot 100 No. 1, both in featured roles on Rihanna smashes: the tandem's "What's My Name?" topped the Nov. 20, 2010-dated Hot 100. As a lead artist, Drake has risen as high as No. 2 with "Best I Ever Had" in 2009 and "Hotline Bling" last year.

"Work" crowns Streaming Songs, roaring 4-1 with a 73 percent increase to 25.8 million streams, according to Nielsen Music, after its recent wide release on streaming services, including official and user-generated content on YouTube; with the song's official video released today, any gains from the clip's arrival will be reflected on next week's Hot 100, to be released next Monday (Feb. 29). Rihanna earns her second Streaming Songs No. 1 (following her featured turn on Eminem's "The Monster," which led the Jan. 4, 2014 list), while Drake celebrates his first Streaming Songs leader.

"Work" concurrently holds at No. 2 on Digital Songs (119,000, up 5 percent), after debuting at No. 1 on the ranking three weeks ago, and lifts 13-10 on Radio Songs (76 million, up 21 percent). Rihanna posts her 24th top 10 on Radio Songs, passing Mariah Carey's 23 for the most top 10s dating to the chart's December 1990 inception. Drake tallies his 14th Radio Songs top 10. (The track wins dual top Streaming and Airplay Gainer honors on the Hot 100 for a second straight week.)

"Work" additionally tops the subscription services-based On-Demand Songs chart (15.1 million streams, up 16 percent) for a second week and paces Billboard's Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart for a third (nonconsecutive) week.

Also, with Rihanna and Drake assuming the Hot 100's throne, the Barbados-born Rihanna (who celebrated her 28th birthday Saturday!) and Canadian Drake extend the record of non-U.S.-born acts leading the chart to 33 weeks. "Work" is additionally the ninth No. 1 Hot 100 in a row by non-Americans, breaking the record for the longest such streak; eight first reigned in succession in 1985).

Rihanna's new Hot 100 ruler narrowly places atop Justin Bieber's "Love Yourself," down 1-2 after two nonconsecutive weeks atop the Hot 100. Still, "Love" spends a second week at No. 1 on the Radio Songs chart, with a 5 percent increase to 151 million in weekly audience. It rises 4-3 on Digital Songs (118,000 downloads sold, up 17 percent) and dips 2-4 on Streaming Songs (16.4 million U.S. streams, down 4 percent).

www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/6882910/rihanna-drake-no-1-work-hot-100

[jenglisbe]

Feb 22, 2016 16:39:29 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

What is a "lead" artist anyway? All it is is a technicality or a label. I'm sure there are #1 singles by artists whose contribution on their own songs are less than those who are labeled as "featured artists" on #1 songs. A #1 is a #1. Congrats Rihanna. The song is terrible but I'm all for fun chart stats and this one makes for a good one. Plus, the album is good so maybe her 15th is coming soon.

Sure, but all we have are credits. I mean, do you think Ludacris and Nick Minaj having all those chart hits for guest verses is the same as Elvis or Madonna charting with their own full-fledged hits? I don't think most people do, which is why Billboard had started distinguishing the records. Rihanna in and of herself may not be the best example, but it comes down to how songs are credits. That's the most objective way to distinguish.

Also, in terms of someone being on a song and getting it to #1, in that sense Diana Ross and Michael Jackson should both have the #1s they had with their respective groups count for their #1s since they basically sang all of those songs.

[Zeebz]

Thrilled to see "Work" at number one, and I hope it stays there for a few weeks. It's one of her best in a while. It's also really nice to see some turnover at the top this year.

[allow that]

The best part about "Work" going to #1 is that it sets up "Love On The Brain," "Kiss It Better," and "Needed Me" to be the huge hits they ought to be.