Billboard Hot 100: 12/26/2020

[dremolus - solarpunk]

I'd say Watermelon Sugar was one of the more worthy number ones. The methods were shady for sure but culturally, it felt big. Also Mood was wayyyy bigger than Toosie Slide

[Ｓｏｕｎｄｃｌ🕤ｃｋ]

Dec 16, 2020 11:16:45 GMT -5 neverduplicated said:

I find it funny how the tone of these threads recently has been, "OMG, Christmas songs are ruining the charts, let's find out what's really popular at the moment" and now it's "OMG new songs by popular artists are ruining the charts, we need Christmas songs to stay at #1." It seems no one is ever happy with the Hot 100.

I disagree with this only.

People don't mind new songs by popular artists at #1, people mind discounted remixes, multiple versions, website sales...

If willow hits #1 it will be one of my favorites #1s of the year, but it just doesn't feel like a #1 to me. BUT AGAIN, we had like 20 #1s this year, maybe we should stop care that much about the most consumed song of the week only. There is always a year-end list that is more relevant.

[Hefty Hanna]

Dec 16, 2020 9:51:45 GMT -5 strongerq said:

Dec 16, 2020 2:43:08 GMT -5 Hefty Hanna said:

I don’t see any harm with these remixes. I also don’t see the difference between this and all of the chart tricks from the 90s, 00s and 10s etc. Also they tend to usually not make much of a difference at all when all is said and done?

I think the only thing I can’t stand behind is payola.

Well these sales tactics are way more impactful than every other tactic used before.

I would say before this the biggest chart tactic was mid 00s when they released songs to radio only, and when the song started peaking on radio labels released it on digital download retailers. And the song would jump from 30s/40s to top5/#1.

They just synced the biggest sales week (#1) & biggest radio week (nth week) for maximum points. Quite a few songs if they were released "normally" (on DSPs week 1) wouldn't have gone #1, there are some that wouldn't even be top 5 hits.

But this sales tactic has bigger impact. Lets say other tactics could give you 10-15% of the points, this one is way more.

The rule in place says you can purchase 4 copies per version per credit card. So if you have  4 versions, you can get 16 sales from 1 person. ofc this is the extreme case.

So lets point out a real example:

Chart week 09/26: There were ~66k website sales, which came from 6.1k orders. Around 11 copies per order. The same week on Itunes the song had ~12k sales.

The song ended #2, this was an extreme case. It has never been this high ever again. BTS fans were trying to push the song so it can remain top 2. They succeeded.

Under normal rules and all the song would have been way out of top 10 that week, but instead it was #2.

That week 42.5% of the points came thanks to "rules abuse". Sorry but you won't be able to find this in any other decade, no matter how hard you try.

The previous week 09/19: There were ~8.7 copies per order. It isn't surprising knowing like other have pointed out there were 15 versions combined through different weeks.

I will repeat again more than half of these #1 wouldn't happen if the formula was "normal". aka it didn't value sales that much. I already posted this 2 weeks ago link . (reply #397 if it didn't copy correctly, can't quote because locked thread).

Another thing that need to be pointed out is "THE INTERNET" and social media. You didn't know weather Song A was aiming for #1/#5/#10, you could only speculate. Nowadays you have countless sources that give you real time data about the song performance. So people know weather the song is 25 points or 5 points behind #1. That is why pushes like this are 5 to 10 times more common than they were in any other era. And that is why it is tireing to see stuff like this  (it happends way too often).

Bonus (for the internet): idk if you are aware to the dedication of fanbases nowadays. There are so called "funding accounts", fans from outside of the US send money so fans from inside of the USA can purchase 10+ copies so the song/album will chart higher. During the past few weeks there were funding accounts with like 20/30k $. This was not possible before social media. And it is not 1 fanbase, i have seen this from so many fanbase, although some are more organized than others. I won't go into for what better purposes the thousands upon thousands of $ could have been used, that is another discussion.

---

Regarding: Don't blame the players, blame the game:

Cardigan is as legitimate #1 as TROLLZ, and TROLLZ is as legitimate #1 as The Box. And willow will be as legitimate as them aswell, if it hits #1.

Simply based on the rules during those weeks, those were the songs that accumulated the most points. No matter how bad the rules were.

Even Billboard when they changed the rules, they called out 6ix9ine/Nicki & Justin/Ariana for abusing the rules, admitting how legit those #1s were and that their rules weren't perfect.

P.S. i replied because i see this often here "rules have been abused since the begining" - true, but never in this magnitude, and never had this much impact on the charts. That is upsetting to some chart watchers. It happens way way more often coz of social media and the sales tactic is the easiest to game, compared to previous ones.

The biggest/worst chart manipulation to date i would say is when that artist said he wouldn't perform at a concert if he didn't have the #1 album in the country. Can older chart watchers help me with the name i forgot it. lol

I totally get where you’re coming from, and I understand why some chart watchers would be upset by the players making moves to get to #1, but it definitely doesn’t upset me at all. I give kudos to the artists clever enough to make the charts work for them.

[neverduplicated]

Dec 16, 2020 11:49:55 GMT -5 Ｓｏｕｎｄｃｌ🕤ｃｋ said:

Dec 16, 2020 11:16:45 GMT -5 neverduplicated said:

I find it funny how the tone of these threads recently has been, "OMG, Christmas songs are ruining the charts, let's find out what's really popular at the moment" and now it's "OMG new songs by popular artists are ruining the charts, we need Christmas songs to stay at #1." It seems no one is ever happy with the Hot 100.

I disagree with this only.

People don't mind new songs by popular artists at #1, people mind discounted remixes, multiple versions, website sales...

If willow hits #1 it will be one of my favorites #1s of the year, but it just doesn't feel like a #1 to me. BUT AGAIN, we had like 20 #1s this year, maybe we should stop care that much about the most consumed song of the week only. There is always a year-end list that is more relevant.

But without Christmas songs, it would be a surefire #1, with or without remixes.

And for the record, I am ok with Christmas songs being on the chart since they are insanely popular.

[m450n]

Dec 16, 2020 11:38:23 GMT -5 dremolus - solarpunk said:

I'd say Watermelon Sugar was one of the more worthy number ones. The methods were shady for sure but culturally, it felt big. Also Mood was wayyyy bigger than Toosie Slide

You could say the same for Say So

[kingvavis]

Dec 16, 2020 11:38:23 GMT -5 dremolus - solarpunk said:

I'd say Watermelon Sugar was one of the more worthy number ones. The methods were shady for sure but culturally, it felt big. Also Mood was wayyyy bigger than Toosie Slide

Toosie Slide's week at number one felt more deserving since it did not rely on sales tactics. For that week at number one, Toosie Slide felt more culturally relevant than Watermelon Sugar's relevancy during its week at number one.

[Harx]

This year's billboard #1s feel like they were specifically designed to cause a shitstorm

[kcdawg13]

Dec 16, 2020 12:06:31 GMT -5 Harx said:

This year's billboard #1s feel like they were specifically designed to cause a shitstorm

Probably cuz there's nothing interesting happening this year in entertainment, of course aside from celebrities breaking quarantine when 3k americans are dying everyday, but that's pretty much all. 

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Dec 16, 2020 8:28:30 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

Dec 16, 2020 8:22:55 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

Traditionally, remixes exist to give a song a wider audience. In this case, that’s what willow’s first remix was. The other two seem more fan-bait to me, which I think goes against the good nature of charts - but then again, so have nearly all remixes in the last decade. But, I also prefer remixes to any other type of “allowable chart manipulation” because it gives something new to a song we’re already familiar with.

Yeah people have been overly familiar with "willow" and were ready for a new way to experience it.

I mean, in most cases yes. In this case, I think the first remix was just to give fans who were probably alienated by folklore and evermore something m. The other two remixes are, to me, fan-bait. But they still serve the same basic purpose despite your attempt at snark. 🥰

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Dec 16, 2020 9:23:24 GMT -5 HolidayGuy said:

^I don't even recall either album version ("I'm Real" or 'Ain't It Funny") getting pushed/played much prior to the release of the new songs with the same titles.

With I’m Real, they played the album version on American Top 40 for most of its run - or at least up to and including when it hit number one. I’m not sure how that paired up with its run on the Hot 100. I think Ain’t It Funny was mostly the ‘remix’, though in Canada it was released to radio as the album version, I think even before I’m Real. I’d have to go back and check. The video played a lot on MuchMoreMusic lmao.

[HolidayGuy]

^Thanks, along with kier. I didn't really recall about "I'm Real," so good to know.

Do those early streaming ranks audio only? Plus, they sometimes differ from Billboard, don't they?

As for the talks of what will be Swift's remembered No. 1s and all that. No. 1 peaks are nice to pad an act's total; they don't always necessarily represent their biggest hits. Look at the albums chart- it was great that Madonna padded her No. 1s total with a couple of 2010s albums. However, no one would suggest either was more impactful/successful than most of her No. 2-peaking sets.

[gikem]

Since we're once again talking about the worthiness of number-ones in 2020, here's a thought: If sales were downweighted by half and paid/free streaming were upweighted slightly...

• GOOBA would have debuted at #1 (instead of Stuck With U)
• Savage would have seen an additional week at #1 (instead of Rain On Me)
• ROCKSTAR would have seen 3 additional weeks at #1 (instead of TROLLZ, Cardigan, and Watermelon Sugar)
• Laugh Now Cry Later would have debuted at #1 (instead of WAP's second week)
• WAP would lose a week at #1 to Laugh Now Cry Later, but would have seen 4 additional weeks at #1 (instead of Dynamite post-debut week, FRANCHISE, and Savage Love) for a total of 7 weeks there
• Mood would have seen one additional week at #1 (instead of Life Goes On)

That's 13 #1's in 2020 (excluding AIWFCIY and Circles) instead of 19. To me, this makes a lot more sense in terms of what songs people cared about and had longevity. Even GOOBA made sense because it was 6*x9*ne's comeback single, even though it didn't make the 2020 YE.

Now if Willow does debut at #1, would I complain? No, this has been happening all year and I don't see it ending until listening habits and pop culture happenings return to normal in the latter half of 2021. However, under this revised formula, AIWFCIY would probably block it.

[Myth X]

Dec 16, 2020 10:11:25 GMT -5 dremolus - solarpunk said:

Even in terms of chart manipulation, Taylor have three remixes is nowhere the worst of this year, nor the worst Taylor has done.

willow being number one is way more deserving than Say So, Stuck with U, TROLLZ, Franchise, Savage Love, and Life Goes On. Regardless of the fallout next week, she had the biggest song this week: number one on streaming and sales, with a music video that has 28M as of writing, and is already in the top 100 on radio thanks to streaming.

Amazon streams are huge for Christmas songs so Mariah could be #1 on Streaming Songs

[Myth X]

Dec 16, 2020 12:37:51 GMT -5 gikem said:

Since we're once again talking about the worthiness of number-ones in 2020, here's a thought: If sales were downweighted by half and paid/free streaming were upweighted slightly...

• GOOBA would have debuted at #1 (instead of Stuck With U)
• Savage would have seen an additional week at #1 (instead of Rain On Me)
• ROCKSTAR would have seen 2 additional weeks at #1 (instead of Cardigan and Watermelon Sugar)
• Laugh Now Cry Later would have debuted at #1 (instead of WAP's second week)
• WAP would lose a week at #1 to Laugh Now Cry Later, but would have seen 4 additional weeks at #1 (instead of Dynamite post-debut week, FRANCHISE, and Savage Love) for a total of 7 weeks there
• Mood would have seen one additional week at #1 (instead of Life Goes On)

That's 13 #1's in 2020 (excluding AIWFCIY and Circles) instead of 19. To me, this makes a lot more sense in terms of what songs people cared about and had longevity. Even GOOBA made sense because it was 6*x9*ne's comeback single, even though it didn't make the 2020 YE.

Now if Willow does debut at #1, would I complain? No, this has been happening all year and I don't see it ending until listening habits and pop culture happenings return to normal in the latter half of 2021. However, under this revised formula, AIWFCIY would probably block it.

What about TROLLZ?

[gikem]

^Fixed.

[fridayteenage]

You Say topping iTunes again. Wonder if it can rechart on recurrents at least.

[jenglisbe]

Dec 16, 2020 13:18:11 GMT -5 fridayteenage said:

You Say topping iTunes again. Wonder if it can rechart on recurrents at least.

Wow. What happened on iTunes today? Not only that topping, but Swift falling down the top 10 and Trans-Siberian Orchestra getting in there. Lewis Capaldi at #2. I'm going to assume The Voice or something.

[myhouse911]

Dec 16, 2020 2:29:30 GMT -5 m450n said:

Dec 15, 2020 20:14:27 GMT -5 myhouse911 said:

As some like to claim here, Taylor's just releasing remixes because she wants to, it was her birthday and it's for the fans, right? lol

Lol, the funny thing is that she is releasing remixes cause she wants to.

I'm not denying that Taylor doesn't care about hitting #1, but I just thought that calling her shameless for releasing one remix at the time was dumb.

You said she released the remix because it was her birthday and she wanted to, with no regard to charts - when I would hope most would realize that was the reason for the first remix, as well as the two remixes that followed.
For the record, I didn’t acknowledge you thinking it’s dumb to call her shameless for the remix. All major artists have their tactics, but to not acknowledge it was a tactic and claiming it was simply because she wanted to and because it was her birthday is ignorant.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Dec 16, 2020 12:37:51 GMT -5 gikem said:

Since we're once again talking about the worthiness of number-ones in 2020, here's a thought:

It's all about context. If a #1 peak is enough for someone to assume a song is a hit, or even for someone to assume a song isn't a hit because it didn't claim #1 "legitimately" or whatever, then there's two trains of thought.

1. Billboard's own accuracy, which is probably what is fuelling most of this discussion anyway, but even then, if Billboard were to add or reduce the weight of streaming and/or sales, there would still be results that people would dispute because both can be 'manipulated' in various ways by organized stans. Which is why #2 is important.

2. Context. A song's peak is one factor in how well a song does. Longevity is another factor. Expectation and promotion is another factor. Artist history, major label vs. indie, in an era or stand-alone, etc, etc, etc. All of these play into it. Just like you wouldn't look at the hottest day of the year in California to determine how warm the earth is for the entire year, you wouldn't look at a song's peak to determine how big a hit it is. It's important, yes, but on its own, it's pretty much useless. I'm sure labels know that, but they can remove the context from things to make them sound better than they might actually be.

[phieaglesfan712]

I would have had a bigger problem with WAP being #1 the week Savage Love was, than any other illegitimate #1. WAP did not feel like the biggest song that week. Savage Love had WAP beat (and by a wide margin) in sales and radio that week.

[gikem]

Dec 16, 2020 14:08:21 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

Dec 16, 2020 12:37:51 GMT -5 gikem said:

Since we're once again talking about the worthiness of number-ones in 2020, here's a thought:

It's all about context. If a #1 peak is enough for someone to assume a song is a hit, or even for someone to assume a song isn't a hit because it didn't claim #1 "legitimately" or whatever, then there's two trains of thought.

1. Billboard's own accuracy, which is probably what is fuelling most of this discussion anyway, but even then, if Billboard were to add or reduce the weight of streaming and/or sales, there would still be results that people would dispute because both can be 'manipulated' in various ways by organized stans. Which is why #2 is important.

2. Context. A song's peak is one factor in how well a song does. Longevity is another factor. Expectation and promotion is another factor. Artist history, major label vs. indie, in an era or stand-alone, etc, etc, etc. All of these play into it. Just like you wouldn't look at the hottest day of the year in California to determine how warm the earth is for the entire year, you wouldn't look at a song's peak to determine how big a hit it is. It's important, yes, but on its own, it's pretty much useless. I'm sure labels know that, but they can remove the context from things to make them sound better than they might actually be.

And I absolutely agree with all of this. The number of weeks that a song stays popular is more important than how high it peaked, and the biggest hits are always a balanced combination of both. That's why I don't consider songs like TROLLZ or Life Goes On to be legitimate #1 hits - they faded from the public consciousness within a month and only got as high as they did because they "manipulated" the system. By contrast, while I don't necessarily agree, I can understand someone saying that Cardigan was a legitimate #1 hit because it did stick around as a radio/streaming hit for a little while - not long enough to matter for something like the 2020 YE, but enough to at least be somewhat recognized by average listeners.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Dec 16, 2020 14:49:38 GMT -5 gikem said:

Dec 16, 2020 14:08:21 GMT -5 Rose "Payola" Nylund said:

It's all about context. If a #1 peak is enough for someone to assume a song is a hit, or even for someone to assume a song isn't a hit because it didn't claim #1 "legitimately" or whatever, then there's two trains of thought.

1. Billboard's own accuracy, which is probably what is fuelling most of this discussion anyway, but even then, if Billboard were to add or reduce the weight of streaming and/or sales, there would still be results that people would dispute because both can be 'manipulated' in various ways by organized stans. Which is why #2 is important.

2. Context. A song's peak is one factor in how well a song does. Longevity is another factor. Expectation and promotion is another factor. Artist history, major label vs. indie, in an era or stand-alone, etc, etc, etc. All of these play into it. Just like you wouldn't look at the hottest day of the year in California to determine how warm the earth is for the entire year, you wouldn't look at a song's peak to determine how big a hit it is. It's important, yes, but on its own, it's pretty much useless. I'm sure labels know that, but they can remove the context from things to make them sound better than they might actually be.

And I absolutely agree with all of this. The number of weeks that a song stays popular is more important than how high it peaked, and the biggest hits are always a balanced combination of both. That's why I don't consider songs like TROLLZ or Life Goes On to be legitimate #1 hits - they faded from the public consciousness within a month and only got as high as they did because they "manipulated" the system. By contrast, while I don't necessarily agree, I can understand someone saying that Cardigan was a legitimate #1 hit because it did stick around as a radio/streaming hit for a little while - not long enough to matter for something like the 2020 YE, but enough to at least be somewhat recognized by average listeners.

I think you can question how big a hit it is, but the fact is, it was a #1 hit. So was Life Goes On (BTS). So going back to my second point of context, that's why it's important to look at other factors even beyond the Hot 100 in determining whether something was a hit or not. Songs can be legit hits with just streaming support, or just radio support, or whatever. Regional hits, demographic hits, etc. The idea that a song needs to be recognized by "average listeners" I think is another outdated concept, so is the idea of "public consciousness", because I doubt there are many songs (outside of current holiday ones) that are recognized by the "average listener" unless we defined what "average" meant, and even then, I doubt it means the same for different people. What is an average listener and why?

[Enigma.]

I don't think Trollz or Life Goes On even reached the public consciousness in the first place lol

[Myth X]

Dec 16, 2020 14:45:50 GMT -5 phieaglesfan712 said:

I would have had a bigger problem with WAP being #1 the week Savage Love was, than any other illegitimate #1. WAP did not feel like the biggest song that week. Savage Love had WAP beat (and by a wide margin) in sales and radio that week.

Thanks to the BTS army mass buying

[Henry Suárez]

Will AIWFCIY block Willow from #1?

[𝕡𝕙𝕖𝕖𝕓𝕤]

Dec 16, 2020 16:08:54 GMT -5 Henry Suárez said:

Will AIWFCIY block Willow from #1?

There was a chance for a while, but I don’t see it happening. “willow” is doing really well on Spotify & AM, and the 4 discounted versions on iTunes & her site will make up for the lack of airplay.

[ificanthaveyou]

This is an obnoxious question since I should know, but when does the tracking week end for the Hot 100? Do digital sales and steaming have different dates?

[kimberly]

Dec 16, 2020 16:45:45 GMT -5 ificanthaveyou said:

This is an obnoxious question since I should know, but when does the tracking week end for the Hot 100? Do digital sales and steaming have different dates?

no. sales and streaming weeks both end at 9pm pacific on Thursday.

[Baby Yoda Hot100Fan]

Dec 16, 2020 13:18:11 GMT -5 fridayteenage said:

You Say topping iTunes again. Wonder if it can rechart on recurrents at least.

That update seems to have been a glitch on kworb's end, since it has remained at #3 elsewhere. But sales are probably close to what remains for it, so regarding your question, no.

That said, I have no idea either why it reentered so high, as well as Lil Bit is at #1 in iTunes, One Too Many is at #4 and Before You Go is at #5.

[reputainbow]

i personally think this is still going to be a really tight race with taylor getting the #1. mariah may have the advantage on amazon music and radio, but i think taylor's lead in sales, spotify, and apple music will make up for it... plus there's taylor's website to consider. i feel like if the remixes weren't dropped this week, i'd be favoring mariah here.

edit: willow instrumental version & original songwriting demo now available on taylor's store with the dancing witch and lonely witch remixes respectively.