Billboard Hot 100: 02/15/2020

[lazer]

Feb 10, 2020 15:31:24 GMT -5 Naos said:

Feb 10, 2020 15:29:31 GMT -5 lazer said:

I didn’t say Billboard should remove radio altogether, I said that Billboard should lower the influence of radio and give more power to a more relevant and popular music consumption, streaming.

A lot of people still listen to the radio.

I know that ofc, but have you seen radio updates recently? It seems that radio doesn’t want to let go of some of the older songs in the top and reluctant to give newer songs more power.

[renfield75]

Y'all would have loved chart watching pre-Soundscan in '91. The top ten in early February would be 100% different from the top ten at Christmas, and songs rarely spent more than 15 weeks in the top 40 or 20 weeks on the Hot 100. It may have been less accurate but it sure did move!

[fhas]

Feb 10, 2020 15:35:48 GMT -5 lazer said:

Feb 10, 2020 15:31:24 GMT -5 Naos said:

A lot of people still listen to the radio.

I know that ofc, but have you seen radio updates recently? It seems that radio doesn’t want to let go of some of the older songs in the top and reluctant to give newer songs more power.

Circles' peak:

Streaming: September 21

Radio: February 15

Radio should be counted, but it needs to be downweighted (~10%). They take months to play songs that have already peaked in consumption.

It wasn't weighted this way in 2013-17. There is no need to "protect" radio after the formula change in 2018 and the UGC rule in January/2020.

[jebsib]

…. and those fast pre-91 charts inspired and encouraged the record industry, radio programmers and retail to dump 3 month old songs - no matter how successful they were.
Because the pipeline was always just overflowing with new hot product.

[Naos]

Feb 10, 2020 15:35:48 GMT -5 lazer said:

Feb 10, 2020 15:31:24 GMT -5 Naos said:

A lot of people still listen to the radio.

I know that ofc, but have you seen radio updates recently? It seems that radio doesn’t want to let go of some of the older songs in the top and reluctant to give newer songs more power.

US Spotify:
26. Post Malone - Sunflower (480 days)
28. Lewis Capaldi - Someone You Loved (287 days)
33. Juice WRLD - Lucid Dreams (644 days)
34. Billie Eilish - Bad Guy (318 days)
36. Juice WRLD - Robbery (361 days)
44. DaBaby - Suge (317 days)
47. Lil Tecca - Ransom (262 days)
87. XXXTENTACION - Jocelyn Flores (897 days)
92. XXXTENTACION - SAD! (710 days)
102. Post Malone - Rockstar (877 days)

Japanese Spotify:
6. Official Hige Dandism - No Doubt (665 days)
10. Billie Eilish - Bad Guy (318 days)
14. The Chainsmokers - Closer (1201 days)
31. [Alexandros] - Wataridori (1203 days)
36. ONE OK ROCK - Wherever you are (1209 days)
52. Ed Sheeran - Shape of You (1129 days)

United Kingdom Spotify:
13. Lewis Capaldi - Someone You Loved (408 days)
23. Lewis Capaldi - Bruises (378 days)
30. Billie Eilish - Bad Guy (301 days)
34. Juice WRLD - Lucid Dreams (631 days)
44. Stormzy - Vossi Bop (290 days)
47. Dave - Location (339 days)
64. The Killers - Mr. Brightside (1878 days)

[musicspy]

Feb 10, 2020 15:04:36 GMT -5 Leo ✔ said:

Pulse: Radio has to have less power into the charts!!

Also Pulse: Yay another wind for Circles on radio.

Ridiculous.

Yay? Really pulse?

[jebsib]

Radio still has dominion over millions of people every week and the reach / content penetration is insane (something like 90% of the population.

[atg]

Feb 10, 2020 15:20:51 GMT -5 Leo ✔ said:

Feb 10, 2020 15:15:21 GMT -5 Choco said:

People: omg the charts are so slow

Also people: omg why did they remove "sunflower" from the charts so unfair!

Also Pulse: they finally remove "Perfect" from the charts!!!

I now see why they put that 25/52 rule. While it is frustrating that before the rule, there were a few songs that made it way past 60 weeks, but it’s completely understandable as to why this rule exists


So when the rule first made its way on the charts, Uptown funk was already the 4th biggest song of all time and if it were to get more weeks in the 20-50 range it would’ve been THE biggest song of all time without hesitation. Sunflower would’ve reached the top 5 eventually. Perfect would’ve been in the top top 10 and shape of you would’ve been like #2 or 3 like that’s a nightmare to even think about. They put the rule in to make it kinda more fair and it makes sense

[hughster1]

Feb 10, 2020 15:39:05 GMT -5 renfield75 said:

Y'all would have loved chart watching pre-Soundscan in '91. The top ten in early February would be 100% different from the top ten at Christmas, and songs rarely spent more than 15 weeks in the top 40 or 20 weeks on the Hot 100. It may have been less accurate but it sure did move!

Back when Billboard was publishing the Soundscan and radio monitor charts for sales and airplay, but before the Hot 100 itself had converted, I used to make up my own charts, doing a rough 50/50 split based on chart position on each. The discrepancies between the Hot 100 with the old data and the "computerized" version were glaring. Top ten hits - even by big artists of the time like Paula Abdul - weren't even top 20 on either computerized chart. Songs that clearly should have had long runs (which back then was 4 weeks or more) at number one eked out a week. All this explained why songs I never, ever heard on the radio or saw on MTV - like "Whole Wide World" by A'Me Lorain or "Piece of My Heart" by Tara Kemp - managed to be Top Ten hits. Back then the obvious chart rigging bothered me. Still I do wish nowadays for a little more turnover; streaming seems to have only made that worse.

[campbellssoup]

Feb 10, 2020 16:39:46 GMT -5 hughster1 said:

Feb 10, 2020 15:39:05 GMT -5 renfield75 said:

Y'all would have loved chart watching pre-Soundscan in '91. The top ten in early February would be 100% different from the top ten at Christmas, and songs rarely spent more than 15 weeks in the top 40 or 20 weeks on the Hot 100. It may have been less accurate but it sure did move!

Back when Billboard was publishing the Soundscan and radio monitor charts for sales and airplay, but before the Hot 100 itself had converted, I used to make up my own charts, doing a rough 50/50 split based on chart position on each. The discrepancies between the Hot 100 with the old data and the "computerized" version were glaring. Top ten hits - even by big artists of the time like Paula Abdul - weren't even top 20 on either computerized chart. Songs that clearly should have had long runs (which back then was 4 weeks or more) at number one eked out a week. All this explained why songs I never, ever heard on the radio or saw on MTV - like "Whole Wide World" by A'Me Lorain or "Piece of My Heart" by Tara Kemp - managed to be Top Ten hits. Back then the obvious chart rigging bothered me. Still I do wish nowadays for a little more turnover; streaming seems to have only made that worse.

Do you have these charts saved anywhere? I would be interested to see what the computerized chart showed as the top 10 each week.

[renfield75]

Feb 10, 2020 16:39:46 GMT -5 hughster1 said:

Feb 10, 2020 15:39:05 GMT -5 renfield75 said:

Y'all would have loved chart watching pre-Soundscan in '91. The top ten in early February would be 100% different from the top ten at Christmas, and songs rarely spent more than 15 weeks in the top 40 or 20 weeks on the Hot 100. It may have been less accurate but it sure did move!

Back when Billboard was publishing the Soundscan and radio monitor charts for sales and airplay, but before the Hot 100 itself had converted, I used to make up my own charts, doing a rough 50/50 split based on chart position on each. The discrepancies between the Hot 100 with the old data and the "computerized" version were glaring. Top ten hits - even by big artists of the time like Paula Abdul - weren't even top 20 on either computerized chart. Songs that clearly should have had long runs (which back then was 4 weeks or more) at number one eked out a week. All this explained why songs I never, ever heard on the radio or saw on MTV - like "Whole Wide World" by A'Me Lorain or "Piece of My Heart" by Tara Kemp - managed to be Top Ten hits. Back then the obvious chart rigging bothered me. Still I do wish nowadays for a little more turnover; streaming seems to have only made that worse.

That's interesting, I heard "Piece Of My Heart" often back then. Not as much as Tara Kemp's previous hit "Hold You Tight" but POMH seemed like a legit hit to me. "Whole Wide World" I liked but honestly I agree I only ever heard it on American Top 40. The charts were definitely off (BBD's "Poison" would likely have hit #1 and "The Humpty Dance" was an easy top 5) but it was fun to watch, especially since we were unaware at the time how really inaccurate everything was.

[Lukas]

Feb 10, 2020 16:08:02 GMT -5 atg said:

Feb 10, 2020 15:20:51 GMT -5 Leo ✔ said:

Also Pulse: they finally remove "Perfect" from the charts!!!

I now see why they put that 25/52 rule. While it is frustrating that before the rule, there were a few songs that made it way past 60 weeks, but it’s completely understandable as to why this rule exists


So when the rule first made its way on the charts, Uptown funk was already the 4th biggest song of all time and if it were to get more weeks in the 20-50 range it would’ve been THE biggest song of all time without hesitation. Sunflower would’ve reached the top 5 eventually. Perfect would’ve been in the top top 10 and shape of you would’ve been like #2 or 3 like that’s a nightmare to even think about. They put the rule in to make it kinda more fair and it makes sense

No. On their August 2015 update they used a lower multiplier for 2015 than they did in the August 2018 update. The 52/25 rule wasn’t a thing on their 2015 update, hence the lower multiplier. When the 52/25 rule was put in place they weighed that era higher in their 2018 update to compensate for shorter chart times. Hence why All About That Bass jumped from #69 to #67 despite not charting since early 2015.

If they chose to not make this rule, they would’ve used lower multipliers for their all time list for recent eras to compensate. It wouldn’t be what you make it out to be.

[iggyamo]

The problem I see with radio is that it doesn’t really represent what’s popular right now. I mean the amount of weight it gets should be based on how much it matters, and radio hasn’t felt like it mattered that much in years, especially not enough to keep LYTLM and all the other almost radio only hits in the top 10. I mean these songs probably should’ve dropped out of the top 30 by now and are way passed the general public caring

[Verisimilitude]

C'mon Dance Monkey...

[Baby Yoda Hot100Fan]

Feb 10, 2020 16:57:29 GMT -5 iggyamo said:

The problem I see with radio is that it doesn’t really represent what’s popular right now. I mean the amount of weight it gets should be based on how much it matters, and radio hasn’t felt like it mattered that much in years, especially not enough to keep LYTLM and all the other almost radio only hits in the top 10. I mean these songs probably should’ve dropped out of the top 30 by now and are way passed the general public caring

I do agree on this point, but same can be said about streaming. Most people, I believe, just stream on playlist they don't do themselves nor do they chose to stream song by song. They just skip whatever they don't care for. In my case, I have Autoplay disabled in YouTube.

[fhas]

This week's top 10:

Most points coming from radio: Circles, Memories, Someone You Loved, 10,000 Hours, Don't Start Now.

Most points coming from streaming: The Box, Life Is Good, Dance Monkey, everything i wanted.

Neutral (~48% streaming + ~48% radio): Roxanne.

[dremolus - solarpunk]

I think the problem is more on radio stations and less on Billboard. Yeah Billboard could lessen the points it gives radio for streaming but I feel that just gives more room for albums to wreck havoc on the charts again. It's stations that are keeping these songs afloat, well past their prime.

Since radio is still mostly a corporate run platform and not one that the people have much say in, I think the best compromise would be to rotate out songs the same way country radio rotates out songs. I'd say around 15-20 weeks before they're forced to drop out of the Top 10 of radio stations. That way, old songs to have a stranglehold on radio charts and newer songs get much needed airplay boosts.

[hughster1]

Feb 10, 2020 16:44:02 GMT -5 campbellssoup said:

Feb 10, 2020 16:39:46 GMT -5 hughster1 said:

Back when Billboard was publishing the Soundscan and radio monitor charts for sales and airplay, but before the Hot 100 itself had converted, I used to make up my own charts, doing a rough 50/50 split based on chart position on each. The discrepancies between the Hot 100 with the old data and the "computerized" version were glaring. Top ten hits - even by big artists of the time like Paula Abdul - weren't even top 20 on either computerized chart. Songs that clearly should have had long runs (which back then was 4 weeks or more) at number one eked out a week. All this explained why songs I never, ever heard on the radio or saw on MTV - like "Whole Wide World" by A'Me Lorain or "Piece of My Heart" by Tara Kemp - managed to be Top Ten hits. Back then the obvious chart rigging bothered me. Still I do wish nowadays for a little more turnover; streaming seems to have only made that worse.

Do you have these charts saved anywhere? I would be interested to see what the computerized chart showed as the top 10 each week.

I might somewhere. It wasn't very scientific - I think I did an inverse points system based on chart position on each.

[lazer]

Feb 10, 2020 17:26:37 GMT -5 dremolus - solarpunk said:

I think the problem is more on radio stations and less on Billboard. Yeah Billboard could lessen the points it gives radio for streaming but I feel that just gives more room for albums to wreck havoc on the charts again. It's stations that are keeping these songs afloat, well past their prime.

Since radio is still mostly a corporate run platform and not one that the people have much say in, I think the best compromise would be to rotate out songs the same way country radio rotates out songs. I'd say around 15-20 weeks before they're forced to drop out of the Top 10 of radio stations. That way, old songs to have a stranglehold on radio charts and newer songs get much needed airplay boosts.

That’s the problem that radio needs to overcome. If they want to gain more audiences, they need to have more fresh songs in the top 40. A few years ago, it was normal for songs to rotate heavily with +5 updates but nowadays it seems that older songs are still holding up and the newer songs are struggling to climb to the top. Radio needs to look at the streaming charts to see what people are listening and actually compete with streaming in order to engage with audiences.

[hughster1]

Feb 10, 2020 16:46:11 GMT -5 renfield75 said:

Feb 10, 2020 16:39:46 GMT -5 hughster1 said:

Back when Billboard was publishing the Soundscan and radio monitor charts for sales and airplay, but before the Hot 100 itself had converted, I used to make up my own charts, doing a rough 50/50 split based on chart position on each. The discrepancies between the Hot 100 with the old data and the "computerized" version were glaring. Top ten hits - even by big artists of the time like Paula Abdul - weren't even top 20 on either computerized chart. Songs that clearly should have had long runs (which back then was 4 weeks or more) at number one eked out a week. All this explained why songs I never, ever heard on the radio or saw on MTV - like "Whole Wide World" by A'Me Lorain or "Piece of My Heart" by Tara Kemp - managed to be Top Ten hits. Back then the obvious chart rigging bothered me. Still I do wish nowadays for a little more turnover; streaming seems to have only made that worse.

That's interesting, I heard "Piece Of My Heart" often back then. Not as much as Tara Kemp's previous hit "Hold You Tight" but POMH seemed like a legit hit to me. "Whole Wide World" I liked but honestly I agree I only ever heard it on American Top 40. The charts were definitely off (BBD's "Poison" would likely have hit #1 and "The Humpty Dance" was an easy top 5) but it was fun to watch, especially since we were unaware at the time how really inaccurate everything was.

I assume there were some regional differences and of course radio playlists weren't as consolidated back in those pre-Clear Channel days, so just because I didn't hear it doesn't mean it wouldn't have been a hit, of course, but it did seem unusual that it got no play. Songs also would do things like climb four spaces into the Top Ten and then drop out the next week, which was not the usual chart pattern (songs would hold at a position and then fall, or at most climb a notch before falling, but not take big jumps). Other songs I remember having real gaps between the two chart performances were two similarly named songs: Neneh Cherry's "Kisses In the Wind" and Paula Abdul's "Blowing Kisses In the Wind". Marky Mark's "Wildside" also seemed to hit the Top Ten without justification, as did Madonna's "Hanky Panky"; both fell FAST and had short runs, which was a sign that chart position was inflated. On the other hand, both of their predecessor hits - "Good Vibrations" and "Vogue" - seemed to have their runs cut a bit short. And "(Everything I Do) I Do It For You" probably would have had an even longer run than its 7 weeks - closer to its 16 week UK run maybe - with more honest charts. Of course, in just a few more years we'd see a LOT of runs like that.

[hughster1]

Feb 10, 2020 17:35:12 GMT -5 lazer said:

Feb 10, 2020 17:26:37 GMT -5 dremolus - solarpunk said:

I think the problem is more on radio stations and less on Billboard. Yeah Billboard could lessen the points it gives radio for streaming but I feel that just gives more room for albums to wreck havoc on the charts again. It's stations that are keeping these songs afloat, well past their prime.

Since radio is still mostly a corporate run platform and not one that the people have much say in, I think the best compromise would be to rotate out songs the same way country radio rotates out songs. I'd say around 15-20 weeks before they're forced to drop out of the Top 10 of radio stations. That way, old songs to have a stranglehold on radio charts and newer songs get much needed airplay boosts.

That’s the problem that radio needs to overcome. If they want to gain more audiences, they need to have more fresh songs in the top 40. A few years ago, it was normal for songs to rotate heavily with +5 updates but nowadays it seems that older songs are still holding up and the newer songs are struggling to climb to the top. Radio needs to look at the streaming charts to see what people are listening and actually compete with streaming in order to engage with audiences.

I think one important difference is that streaming tends to get more involved committed listeners while radio tend to get more casual, "background music" listeners, which is probably due to age. (Which is going to become a much bigger problem in future years as old users die off without new users to replace them.) So the latter probably is more likely to want familiar and non-adventurous choices, accounting for the slow turnover. (Although as pointed out some streaming is even slower to turn over!) But I agree that the country music model is preferable; I think a lot of radio listeners would be "led" into listening to the newer music. But that would probably require a less corporate and more instinctive programming model, like in the 60's, where individual DJ's often programmed their own shows (something unheard of now!).

[gregtwinner]

Feb 10, 2020 15:43:42 GMT -5 fhas said:

Feb 10, 2020 15:35:48 GMT -5 lazer said:

I know that ofc, but have you seen radio updates recently? It seems that radio doesn’t want to let go of some of the older songs in the top and reluctant to give newer songs more power.

Circles' peak:

Streaming: September 21

Radio: February 15

Radio should be counted, but it needs to be downweighted (~10%). They take months to play songs that have already peaked in consumption.

It wasn't weighted this way in 2013-17. There is no need to "protect" radio after the formula change in 2018 and the UGC rule in January/2020.

I feel like they're weighting streaming less to try to appease the popheads who hate rap who were complaining at billboard when there were loads of rap songs on the chart back in 2017-18 and the popheads who reply to billboard/chartdata's tweets. I remember so many people saying streaming was weighted too high when artists like 6ix9ine came around and people complaining back when billboard's articles had comment sections so maybe billboard is trying to have the charts reflect their audience's taste while satisfying accuracy. Probably some industry component too with how high they weigh radio.

[mikeymonster]

#19 - Hot Girl Bummer (+4)
#31 - My Oh My (+4)
#49 - South Of The Border (+1)

[fhas]

Holy... except for Life Is Good/Circles, I predicted correctly the entire top 15 this week. That's the only good thing about radio having more influence, it's easier to predict.

[𝓲𝓽'𝓼.𝓰𝓿]

Feb 10, 2020 17:54:51 GMT -5 mikeymonster said:

#19 - Hot Girl Bummer (+4)
#31 - My Oh My (+4)
#49 - South Of The Border (+1)

Hooray Top 20!

[Naos]

Top 10 artists in the US (Artist 100):
1. Billie Eilish (=) *9th week at #1*
2. Lil Wayne (re-entry)
3. Post Malone (+1)
4. Roddy Ricch (-2)
5. Russ (re-entry)
6. Taylor Swift (+19)
7. Eminem (-4)
8. Louis Tomlinson (re-entry)
9. Halsey (-4)
10. DaBaby (-3)

[Naos]

New arrivals this week (so far):
#93 - "Get Me" by Justin Bieber featuring Kehlani
#89 - "Nice to Meet Ya" by Meghan Trainor featuring Nicki Minaj
#88 - "Funeral" by Lil Wayne
#87 - "Mama Mia" by Lil Wayne
#69 - "King Of My City" by A Boogie Wit Da Hoodie
#61 - "Mahogany" by Lil Wayne
#60 - "Physical" by Dua Lipa
#50 - "Only The Young" by Taylor Swift
#33 - "I Do It" by Lil Wayne featuring Big Sean & Lil Baby

[fhas]

Unbelievable.

[lights]

Billboard screwed up so damn badly letting the songs that went recurrent over Christmas back onto the charts. I don't care, sucker and only human all still stinking the place up and at least the latter will repeat on the YEC. Great.

[moonlite]

^ Wait IDC is still charting???? Lmfaooooo that song has been dead for months. Same for Sucker