Billboard Hot 100: 07/03/2021

[gs]

Jun 28, 2021 17:55:09 GMT -5 sergf13 said:

Jun 28, 2021 17:53:19 GMT -5 gs said:

No, it's active consumption based on your flawed definition of it. A real sale is one in which a person buys in order to listen via the medium, not to game the charts.

Then obviously we will get nowhere in this discussion if we don't even agree on what the definition of consumption is.

And thank god for that. The real valid truth of what something really aims to measure will always reign supreme over the gamed, fraudulent, greedy financially-driven nature of this current chart. The Hot 100 should aim to measure real listenership in a vacuum, not something that stans are able to tactically influence week over week. You can disagree as much as you like, but your bias isn't going to get in the way of what a real, valuable chart intends to measure.

[spiritboy]

The thing is nobody knows or cares whether the sales are fradulent or not. Butter is officially the #1 song for the past 5 weeks according to Billboard, that's what counts, not the opinions of some chart fans lurking on a forum. :kii:

[sergf13]

Jun 28, 2021 17:58:04 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

Jun 28, 2021 17:51:55 GMT -5 sergf13 said:

Buying music is always active consumption, regardless of whether you listen to it or not. You are directly spending money in order to have a copy of a song.
edit: I know people will have strong opinions about this statement lmao

Well if money is what it takes to be active, then "passive streaming" wouldn't be a thing as there is monetary compensation from any type of legal stream.

Funny you should say that, I would prefer to have methods of consumption weighed based on how much money they make per interaction.

[gs]

Jun 28, 2021 18:02:20 GMT -5 sergf13 said:

Jun 28, 2021 17:58:04 GMT -5 Au$tin said:

Well if money is what it takes to be active, then "passive streaming" wouldn't be a thing as there is monetary compensation from any type of legal stream.

Funny you should say that, I would prefer to have methods of consumption weighed based on how much money they make per interaction.

"good 4 u" is #1 in revenue though?... it objectively is earning more money with its consumption in the US.

Regardless, it says a lot that you value money over real listenership, representing literally everything wrong in this world (greed, corruption and fraudulence over valuable mathematical truths). Congrats!

[sergf13]

Jun 28, 2021 17:58:53 GMT -5 gs said:

Jun 28, 2021 17:55:09 GMT -5 sergf13 said:

Then obviously we will get nowhere in this discussion if we don't even agree on what the definition of consumption is.

And thank god for that. The real valid truth of what something really aims to measure will always reign supreme over the gamed, fraudulent, greedy financially-driven nature of this current chart. The Hot 100 should aim to measure real listenership in a vacuum, not something that stans are able to tactically influence week over week. You can disagree as much as you like, but your bias isn't going to get in the way of what a real, valuable chart intends to measure.

You do realize that it has always been impossible to prove whether or not everyone who bought a song or album actually listened to it, right?

[lazer]

Jun 28, 2021 18:02:19 GMT -5 spiritboy said:

The thing is nobody knows or cares whether the sales are fradulent or not. Butter is officially the #1 song for the past 5 weeks according to Billboard, that's what counts, not the opinions of some chart fans lurking on a forum.

You would not have the same mindset if we lived in the 90s when Don't Speak, Lovefool, Killing Me Softly, and Iris never charted on the Hot 100. 2020 was also a bad time for the charts. Billboard is never perfect. 

[sergf13]

Jun 28, 2021 18:09:19 GMT -5 gs said:

Jun 28, 2021 18:02:20 GMT -5 sergf13 said:

Funny you should say that, I would prefer to have methods of consumption weighed based on how much money they make per interaction.

"good 4 u" is #1 in revenue though?... it objectively is earning more money with its consumption in the US.

Regardless, it says a lot that you value money over real listenership, representing literally everything wrong in this world (greed, corruption and fraudulence over valuable mathematical truths). Congrats!

What does the revenue of g4u have to do with anything I said? Also, I can guarantee you that all of the labels who push their songs up the charts do not care about anything but money.

[phieaglesfan712]

An argument can be made for Butter being #1 during its first 3 weeks. However, the last 2 weeks, it is pretty clear that Good 4 u was the #1 song in the US. Other than mass buying, there is no metric Butter beats G4u in these past 2 weeks.

[gs]

Jun 28, 2021 18:11:55 GMT -5 sergf13 said:

Jun 28, 2021 18:09:19 GMT -5 gs said:

"good 4 u" is #1 in revenue though?... it objectively is earning more money with its consumption in the US.

Regardless, it says a lot that you value money over real listenership, representing literally everything wrong in this world (greed, corruption and fraudulence over valuable mathematical truths). Congrats!

What does the revenue of g4u have to do with anything I said? Also, I can guarantee you that all of the labels who push their songs up the charts do not care about anything but money.

You said you'd prefer to have methods of consumption weighed based on how much money each interaction earns, so by this logic you'd rather "good 4 u" be #1 on the Hot 100 as it's the one earning the most money overall? (Using a formula that abides by your rule, that is). But nah, your bias means you'll warp literally everything in a way that ensures Butter tops the chart (you'd probably add touring figures or something lmao, like that has anything to do with a single song).

And yeah, but the labels are pushing songs they think the public will like, and the ones that stick are ones people like, so good on them. Butter is not one of those songs relative to all the songs below it based on its streaming and digital sales platform figures. I'm struggling to understand a world in which you think Butter should be #1 because there is no route in which it makes any logical sense (money, popularity, cultural influence, true active consumption etc.).

[sergf13]

Jun 28, 2021 18:19:56 GMT -5 gs said:

Jun 28, 2021 18:11:55 GMT -5 sergf13 said:

What does the revenue of g4u have to do with anything I said? Also, I can guarantee you that all of the labels who push their songs up the charts do not care about anything but money.

You said you'd prefer to have methods of consumption based on how much money each interaction earns, so by this logic you'd rather "good 4 u" be #1 on the Hot 100 as it's the one earning the most money overall? But nah, your bias means you'll warp literally everything in a way that ensures Butter tops the chart (you'd probably add touring figures or something lmao, like that has anything to do with a single song).

And yeah, but the labels are pushing songs they think the public will like, and the ones that stick are ones people like, so good on them. Butter is not one of those songs relative to all the songs below it based on its streaming and digital sales platform figures. I'm struggling to understand a world in which you think Butter should be #1 because there is no route in which it makes any logical sense (money, popularity, cultural influence, true active consumption etc.).

I think you missed the point. I specifically said "per interaction" and not "overall earnings". Also I'm not even arguing about Butter right now, the chart positions of g4u and Butter are completely irrelevant to what I am talking about. You seem to be pushing a lot of narratives on me that I'm not even advocating for (touring figures on the hot 100 lmao).

[gs]

Jun 28, 2021 18:23:14 GMT -5 sergf13 said:

Jun 28, 2021 18:19:56 GMT -5 gs said:

You said you'd prefer to have methods of consumption based on how much money each interaction earns, so by this logic you'd rather "good 4 u" be #1 on the Hot 100 as it's the one earning the most money overall? But nah, your bias means you'll warp literally everything in a way that ensures Butter tops the chart (you'd probably add touring figures or something lmao, like that has anything to do with a single song).

And yeah, but the labels are pushing songs they think the public will like, and the ones that stick are ones people like, so good on them. Butter is not one of those songs relative to all the songs below it based on its streaming and digital sales platform figures. I'm struggling to understand a world in which you think Butter should be #1 because there is no route in which it makes any logical sense (money, popularity, cultural influence, true active consumption etc.).

I think you missed the point. I specifically said "per interaction" and not "overall earnings". Also I'm not even arguing about Butter right now, the chart positions of g4u and Butter are completely irrelevant to what I am talking about. You seem to be pushing a lot of narratives on me that I'm not even advocating for (touring figures on the hot 100 lmao).

And if you sum up every interaction you get a total value? What does a single interaction have to do with a consumption number? That number is one in which every interaction is added together; you said you'd want them "weighed" that way, suggesting a formula to be used should take that into account. You also liked a post above that stated that Butter being #1 on an official chart is all that "counts". I think you're the one missing something here.

[nathanalbright]

Stan logic.

[sergf13]

Jun 28, 2021 18:27:02 GMT -5 gs said:

Jun 28, 2021 18:23:14 GMT -5 sergf13 said:

I think you missed the point. I specifically said "per interaction" and not "overall earnings". Also I'm not even arguing about Butter right now, the chart positions of g4u and Butter are completely irrelevant to what I am talking about. You seem to be pushing a lot of narratives on me that I'm not even advocating for (touring figures on the hot 100 lmao).

And if you sum up every interaction you get a total value? What does a single interaction have to do with a consumption number? That number is one in which every interaction is added together. You also liked a post above that stated that Butter being #1 on an official chart is all that "counts". I think you're the one missing something here.

My point is that methods of consumption should be weighted based on monetary gain per interaction because that determines which methods of consumption are more profitable in higher quantities. For example, 100k sales generally makes more money than 10M streams do. Once again, I have not said anything about g4u or butter in my arguments. Posts I like have nothing to do with statements that I make.

[spiritboy]

Jun 28, 2021 18:10:41 GMT -5 lazer said:

Jun 28, 2021 18:02:19 GMT -5 spiritboy said:

The thing is nobody knows or cares whether the sales are fradulent or not. Butter is officially the #1 song for the past 5 weeks according to Billboard, that's what counts, not the opinions of some chart fans lurking on a forum.

You would not have the same mindset if we lived in the 90s when Don't Speak, Lovefool, Killing Me Softly, and Iris never charted on the Hot 100. 2020 was also a bad time for the charts. Billboard is never perfect. 

They never charted yet they are all classics. Britney has a ton of songs that weren't released that are regarded as classics. I think some people give too much importance to Hot 100 and pole position. It's always fun to follow the charts, but they are not everything. Olivia is a phenomenon right now, she's slaying more credible charts around the world, plus the album just returned to the top. Her fans should enjoy these facts instead of complaining about Hot 100 position every week. Or they should arrange mass buying parties and counter the BTS fans if they like to be #1 on Hot 100 so much.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Jun 28, 2021 17:51:55 GMT -5 sergf13 said:

You are directly spending money in order to have a copy of a song.

The first time, yes. Not every other time after that.

[tanooki]

i just did the math and more people play GTA V than use iTunes in the US weekly lol

[nathanalbright]

Rip digital sales.

[garrettlen]

Jun 28, 2021 18:10:41 GMT -5 lazer said:

Jun 28, 2021 18:02:19 GMT -5 spiritboy said:

The thing is nobody knows or cares whether the sales are fradulent or not. Butter is officially the #1 song for the past 5 weeks according to Billboard, that's what counts, not the opinions of some chart fans lurking on a forum.

You would not have the same mindset if we lived in the 90s when Don't Speak, Lovefool, Killing Me Softly, and Iris never charted on the Hot 100. 2020 was also a bad time for the charts. Billboard is never perfect. 

The Billboard Hot 100 was always a singles chart up until the late 90's.   You had to have a commercial single release to chart on the Hot 100, it was as simple as that.   It was the LABELS in the 90's that decided to stop releasing certain songs commercially in order to sell as many albums as they could.   If you want to blame somebody for what happened in the 90's, blame them, not Billboard.

And Billboard eventually changed the Hot 100 to a songs chart, instead of a singles chart to adjust to the change.

[nathanalbright]

And, of course, the replacement of the single chart with the song chart, the collapse of sales for most artists, and the rise of streaming led to the prevalence of album bombs in the contemporary era.

[Gary]

And as they always have (although sometimes not right away) they will react to market change if they and their clients feel their is a need to do so. I have never seen them cave to social media fan complaints as a means of change however.

[Groovy]

If anything needs to change it's the person who's in control of their trash ass website.

[Rose "Payola" Nylund]

Jun 28, 2021 20:01:54 GMT -5 Gary said:

And as they always have (although sometimes not right away) they will react to market change if they and their clients feel their is a need to do so. I have never seen them cave to social media fan complaints as a means of change however.

Obviously. Social media has been around for only 15 years.

[musicbuff26]

Jun 28, 2021 18:32:48 GMT -5 spiritboy said:

Jun 28, 2021 18:10:41 GMT -5 lazer said:

You would not have the same mindset if we lived in the 90s when Don't Speak, Lovefool, Killing Me Softly, and Iris never charted on the Hot 100. 2020 was also a bad time for the charts. Billboard is never perfect. 

They never charted yet they are all classics. Britney has a ton of songs that weren't released that are regarded as classics. I think some people give too much importance to Hot 100 and pole position. It's always fun to follow the charts, but they are not everything. Olivia is a phenomenon right now, she's slaying more credible charts around the world, plus the album just returned to the top. Her fans should enjoy these facts instead of complaining about Hot 100 position every week. Or they should arrange mass buying parties and counter the BTS fans if they like to be #1 on Hot 100 so much.

Lol what?? Most of us aren’t even Olivia fans. No single artist should be able to top the charts based on crazy fans mass buying for weeks on end. This is a forum for people that like chart watching. The f**k??

[fridayteenage]

So far this decade, lowest streaming position while #1 on Hot 100:
dynamite #12 *bts
life goes on #14 *bts
savage love #14 *bts
watermelon sugar #18 *1d
butter #18 *bts
butter #19 *bts
butter #24 *bts

I sense a pattern.

[Baby Yoda Hot100Fan]

^Yeah. It's getting worse and worse, taking out Watermelon Sugar.

[Ｓｏｕｎｄｃｌ🕤ｃｋ]

[Naos]

New arrivals this week:
#99 - "My Boy" by Elvie Shane
#94 - "Working" by Tate McRae & Khalid
#93 - "Lumberjack" by Tyler, The Creator
#90 - "Waves" by Luke Bryan
#85 - "We Didn't Have Much" by Justin Moore
#51 - "Fancy Like" by Walker Hayes
#39 - "Ball If I Want To" by DaBaby

[HeyHeyHey]

Good to see “My Boy” debut. That needs to be a huge country hit.

[kimberly]

loving these queens and gays getting new peaks!

[dremolus - solarpunk]

Jun 28, 2021 15:11:04 GMT -5 Caviar said:

Jun 28, 2021 14:49:56 GMT -5 kindofbiased said:

Oh yeah well Olivia Rodrigo gave out ice cream and did a car wash. This is just as bad, if not worse,

That girl is basically an industry plant which is so obvious by her poor material. It must burn for her handlers that she has to keep settling for #2.

The irony of calling out an artist for being a plant, presumably just because of her Disney connections, while also having a pfp Christina Aguilera