TMJ
TMJ's Top: The Neighbourhood › Sweater Weather (2wks@1)
Posts: 785
|
Post by TMJ on Feb 21, 2013 17:45:28 GMT -5
So I found out Billboard changed their rules (once again) to include YouTube streams for their Hot 100 chart. I'm all for getting on with the current times and trends, but I'm not sure how that's even measured to correctly represent popularity AND on the heels of a recent "scandal" concerning third-party manipulations of some big stars' Youtube view counts, or so I read, it does seem... untimely? Not to mention "Harlem Shake" unfairly benefiting from this change being made at the song's peak of viral popularity. I've been watching these viral videos for about two weeks now, so I think a "#1 debut" is really undeserving. A climb to #1 in a short period of time would've been better, if at all seriously. And something's not right if they're counting all these viral videos for the song, and they must be. A quick search today shows this: the top 2 videos for Harlem Shake (one released 9 months ago and the other 6) have 17M views combined. The biggest meme video on the first page (published 2 weeks ago) has 17M plays as well ("Public statistics have been disabled" I might add). On the other hand, let's say, Rihanna's top 3 videos for Stay have a combined view count of 45M, 29 of which are for the OFFICIAL music video which was released last week, yet it's up to #3 as Digital SALES gainer. And the biggest question, who is really watching Harlem videos for the song itself? Would things have been different if the meme had gone viral with a song that had recently been a big hit already? The song is popular ok, but because of a 30-sec audio clip. A 30 second clip has obvious advantages over 3+ minute long songs/videos. So, unless they're adding preview clips to the math as well, it all seems like a big mess. And how do you compile info for a song that has multiple video sources on that one platform alone anyway? I buy a song (one sale) and play it on my own countless of times, so that means my scrobbles (last.fm) should count as well since I don't find it productive sitting in front of my computer 24/7 playing my favorites songs over and over again on Youtube. But many "rabid" fanbases did before and more than ever will from now on, without even having to buy the song in the first place. Oh right! If I'm playing my songs on my iPod I'm not being bombarded by tons of unwanted advertisement. MHO
|
|
TMJ
TMJ's Top: The Neighbourhood › Sweater Weather (2wks@1)
Posts: 785
|
Post by TMJ on Feb 21, 2013 18:07:09 GMT -5
Oh and I forgot about location views, so my rant really makes no sense without this info. Geographical data was also available before on Youtube but now it's gone so...
|
|
|
Post by billcs on Feb 21, 2013 21:26:52 GMT -5
You raise a lot of good points! When new formulas are put into place they take a bit of time to even out and unfortunately it creates an imbalance on the chart. But the biggest imbalance took place last year. That's when Gangnam Style was held out of #1 by One More Night - an embarrassment to the rest of the world because the chart formula had suddenly fallen behind social media times.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2013 23:19:03 GMT -5
I find this rule change to be ill-advised. A lot of YouTube views are just people checking out what's hot, or watching a music video for the music video and not the song itself. YouTube is not a music site and therefore should not influence a music chart. You raise a lot of good points! When new formulas are put into place they take a bit of time to even out and unfortunately it creates an imbalance on the chart. But the biggest imbalance took place last year. That's when Gangnam Style was held out of #1 by One More Night - an embarrassment to the rest of the world because the chart formula had suddenly fallen behind social media times. That was pretty embarrassing, but I believe that had a lot to do with radio airplay. For some reason, "Gangnam Style" stalled around #10 on Top 40 here in the states, while "One More Night" spent an unusually long time on top. The whole situation was very sketchy. I think anytime you have a chart based on different elements (airplay, sales, streaming, etc.) you are in store for a mess. Maybe I'm bias because I've never been a Billboard guy, but that is honestly how I feel.
|
|
TMJ
TMJ's Top: The Neighbourhood › Sweater Weather (2wks@1)
Posts: 785
|
Post by TMJ on Feb 21, 2013 23:20:27 GMT -5
Thanks Bill. Like I said I'm not at all against it. Evidently they needed an update, but it seems like while trying to catch up they went completely overboard. And it's not like a #1 debut wouldn't happen eventually, but even viral hits tend to take a little time to explode. Like you said every change in methodology brings imbalance, but if 30-sec clips are indeed being counted that obviously raises an eyebrow, or both. And not because of Harlem Shake (which to me still goes down in history as an undeserving #1 debut anyway) but because of the tracking methods of these streams. What difference does it make if I stream an entire song or just a snippet? The table is served for every gimmick you can imagine, case in point a meme, looking on the innocent side of gimmicks.
If anything I think the Hot 100 will be even less dynamic than before, except for the occasional internet sensation.
|
|
|
Post by Jason on Feb 21, 2013 23:26:37 GMT -5
I think it's great that Billboard is trying to keep up with the new ways that our favorite songs can be delivered to us. I would hope that only YouTube videos with the full length song - whether fan created or "official" videos released by the record label - are being counted toward Billboard chart position. However, reading TMJ's example with "Harlem Shake," it seems as if this may not be the case. To one of the other great points TMJ made, Billboard isn't run by a group of fools who have no idea what they're doing, so I'm sure before implementing this new formula, they worked with YouTube to make sure they can combat inflated view counts. I agree with what Bill said about things taking time to even out when new formulas or new ways of accessing music are introduced. Similarly, but not exactly the same as the new Billboard formula, I remember a few years back when "f*ck You" by Cee-Lo became this huge YouTube sensation. Everyone was talking about it. But, at the same time, you couldn't hear it anywhere on the radio. By the time radio finally caught up and started playing it, the craze had died down and most people had moved on to the next "hot" thing. I remember a time when songs used to build in airplay and take several weeks to climb an airplay chart. Now, radio has shifted they way they play new songs to try and accommodate these songs that catch on really quickly via YouTube and social media. Now, it's not uncommon for a song to have no airplay one day and then two days later, its one of the most played songs in the country. It took radio some time to catch up with all of the other ways people are discovering songs and artists that they might otherwise not have discovered before. One other thing. Kind of off topic, but just an observation. It's funny to me how the Harlem Shake is the hot "new" thing right now. I remember back in the mid and late 90s...and even in the early 2000s... That dance was done in so many Hip-Pop videos by NYC-based artists, especially off of Puff Daddy's Bad Boy Records. I guess everything old is new again! I wonder what the next hot "new" dance will be...The Hustle? lol!
|
|
TMJ
TMJ's Top: The Neighbourhood › Sweater Weather (2wks@1)
Posts: 785
|
Post by TMJ on Feb 21, 2013 23:39:08 GMT -5
I find this rule change to be ill-advised. A lot of YouTube views are just people checking out what's hot, or watching a music video for the music video and not the song itself. YouTube is not a music site and therefore should not influence a music chart. You raise a lot of good points! When new formulas are put into place they take a bit of time to even out and unfortunately it creates an imbalance on the chart. But the biggest imbalance took place last year. That's when Gangnam Style was held out of #1 by One More Night - an embarrassment to the rest of the world because the chart formula had suddenly fallen behind social media times. That was pretty embarrassing, but I believe that had a lot to do with radio airplay. For some reason, "Gangnam Style" stalled around #10 on Top 40 here in the states, while "One More Night" spent an unusually long time on top. The whole situation was very sketchy. I think anytime you have a chart based on different elements (airplay, sales, streaming, etc.) you are in store for a mess. Maybe I'm bias because I've never been a Billboard guy, but that is honestly how I feel. I kind of disagree on the Youtube thing. For one, it is indeed a source for free music no matter how hard the labels try to not make that happen. And I'm not talking about the music videos. Also, it's one of the best sources for finding music from independent artists and other great stuff you would never hear on the radio. Now that you mention airplay, I'm not even sure if it's relevant at this point if a song has huge airplay or not. It seems Billboard has just killed the radio star. And Digital downloads might be next. I'm not a Billboard master myself at all, but I do check it weekly just as much as I do with charts from other parts of the world.
|
|
|
Post by Jason on Feb 21, 2013 23:40:03 GMT -5
That was pretty embarrassing, but I believe that had a lot to do with radio airplay. For some reason, "Gangnam Style" stalled around #10 on Top 40 here in the states, while "One More Night" spent an unusually long time on top. The whole situation was very sketchy. I had always been more of a Mediabase/R&R person myself. But on the other hand I'm leery of a chart based totally on radio airplay. Radio airplay is controlled by a group of people (PDs and MDs) and they can potentially manipulate airplay to get a desired result based on what a third party (record label) wants played. Radio airplay doesn't always reflect what regular people actually like. This is where what KP said about the airplay fortunes of "Gangnam Style" and "One More Night" versus their actual popularities (I know that's not a real word... ) comes into play. Whatever formula is being used to incorporate YouTube views into the Billboard chart, hopefully Billboard has been wise and thoughtful in determining how large of an impact YouTube views will have.
|
|
TMJ
TMJ's Top: The Neighbourhood › Sweater Weather (2wks@1)
Posts: 785
|
Post by TMJ on Feb 21, 2013 23:43:37 GMT -5
I wonder what the next hot "new" dance will be...The Hustle? lol! Let's bring back the Macarena!
|
|
Bebe Reptar
Dr. Faceless
I like to stomp and roar... hey, I'm just a dinosaur!
Posts: 8,828
|
Post by Bebe Reptar on Feb 21, 2013 23:52:34 GMT -5
My thoughts are right hurr, y'all. They have to do some revising to their overall formula, but it'll hopefully all work out in a few months.
|
|
TMJ
TMJ's Top: The Neighbourhood › Sweater Weather (2wks@1)
Posts: 785
|
Post by TMJ on Feb 21, 2013 23:59:13 GMT -5
Billboard isn't run by a group of fools who have no idea what they're doing, so I'm sure before implementing this new formula, they worked with YouTube to make sure they can combat inflated view counts. I like to think they are smart, and I wouldn't expect less. But if the Gangnam Style debate sparked/rushed/finally pushed this update in methodology, they really didn't invest a vast amount of time in it considering how complex the streaming variable seems to be. By the way, the thing I read about inflated Youtube views is pretty recent.
|
|
TMJ
TMJ's Top: The Neighbourhood › Sweater Weather (2wks@1)
Posts: 785
|
Post by TMJ on Feb 22, 2013 0:14:34 GMT -5
My thoughts are right hurr, y'all. They have to do some revising to their overall formula, but it'll hopefully all work out in a few months. Interesting! Nice title. I took the liberty of bringing this, if that's ok. It basically sums it up. 103M views smh.... Even last.fm set a standard where you have to listen to at least 50% of a song in order for it to scrobble. 30 second or less songs can't be scrobbled.
|
|
|
Post by Jason on Feb 22, 2013 8:50:28 GMT -5
By the way, the thing I read about inflated Youtube views is pretty recent. I read the same thing. It was maybe a month ago...or a little longer. Many artists had large chunks of their Vevo views removed due to the inflation. Maybe that "cleaning house" was in preparation for this rule change to Billboard. Not that past views would factor into current and future Billboard charts. But it would set a precedent for future YouTube view count restrictions. I also agree with a lot of what Adam said in his blog on the topic. If they haven't already, maybe Billboard will institute a similar standard to what Last.fm has set, regarding how long a song has to be played before it will count as being scrobbled. Anyway, as others have said in this thread already, I'm sure eventually, Billboard will get it right after this new formula is implemented....until they change their formula again.
|
|
TMJ
TMJ's Top: The Neighbourhood › Sweater Weather (2wks@1)
Posts: 785
|
Post by TMJ on Feb 23, 2013 14:34:27 GMT -5
By the way, the thing I read about inflated Youtube views is pretty recent. Anyway, as others have said in this thread already, I'm sure eventually, Billboard will get it right after this new formula is implemented....until they change their formula again. At this point we should be placing bets
|
|
|
Post by Lisa-Gail > Madonna on Feb 24, 2013 0:37:57 GMT -5
I think these rule changes are terrible, but I generally hate change anyway. I hope the Aussie charts don't start doing this, I feel like it'd be too easily manipulated, and if it's counting the views of the 30 second meme videos too that's just crap because it's not even a stream of the whole song.
Meanwhile I must be the only one that liked that Gangnam Style didn't make #1 on Billboard; not every novelty song has to go all the way.
|
|