tsk tsk chart cheaters...
The Billboard Hot 100 chart has long been the driving force in determining what flops and what major mainstream artists can proclaim a hit. In its 53 years as head indicator-of-cool for the industry, artists have done anything possible to acquire a coveted spot in the Top 10.
Those who complete this rare feat do so by succeeding in two distinct judged areas – sales and airplay. Both sales and airplay are combined to determine the overall positions of each song on the chart each week.
While this process is pure in theory, it has been debased and bastardized by sales tricks that make its reliability more questionable.
The airplay category of judging is fairly hard to cheat on. There is little a record label can do to manipulate radio airplay if there isn’t a fan base that wants radio stations to play the particular song.
Sales, on the other hand, have become the main area of distortion.
It’s important to clarify that The Billboard Hot 100 tracks individual sales, not funds earned through sales. This means that the sale of a song at $0.25 is equivalent to that of a song priced at $1.99 according to Billboard.
This aspect of chart tracking has encouraged labels to boost their sales point by offering severe discounts on new singles. While this does reduce the amount of money made from the sales, it helps get a single into the promise land of music charts – the Top 10.
The Top 10 offers exposure that makes any discounting worthwhile. On the iTunes Top Songs chart, only the Top 10 are displayed predominately within the program. The publicity from a spot in the iTunes Top 10 can help maintain and boost sales, even if the song is returned to normal price. This publicity raises awareness and creates buzz, which in turn translates into radio requests and plays. So, in theory, a spot in the iTunes Top 10 leads the way to a more brag-ready Hot 100 Top 10 slot.
Mainstream pop stars have been the primary abusers of these strategies. Rihanna discounted “Only Girl (In the World)” to give it an extra boost to reach the number 1 spot on the Hot 100 chart after it had stagnated in the middle of the Top 10. Lady Gaga used a similar strategy for her Born This Way album – it went on sale for $0.99 on Amazon for the first day of its release.
Other strategies are just as questionable. Added collaborations have become a clear strategy for revenue boosts late in an album campaign because it requires people who have already bought the album to buy the new version of the single. Katy Perry’s hit “E.T.” was released without a collaboration on the album, but later was re-released as a single with a featured verse from Kanye West. That version of the single went to Number 1 on The Hot 100. Some of the downloads of the new version of the song were presumably from people who had already purchased the album. More money in the bank for the record label.
These strategies all work very well. But they have gone too far – the continued manipulation of the chart has brought its credibility into question.
Lady Gaga’s Born This Way sold over 1 million copies in its first week (earning a No. 1 debut on the Billboard 200), making her only the fifth woman to ever do so. But that feat – and many of the feats that modern pop divas have bragged about in recent years – seem far less impressive when her extreme sales-boosting techniques are considered. If the album had been priced at $11.99 instead of the outrageously low price of 99 cents, the sales mark would have been far more honest. In its second week, after the price cut had been removed, the album suffered form a 94% drop in digital sales, selling only 38,000 copies.
It is frustrating for fans to know that whatever artist they admire may have reached certain achievements only because they essentially cheated.
The integrity of the Billboard charts needs to be protected. As artists break legendary records more quickly than ever before, the chart becomes increasingly disrespectful to the former record-setters it once honored fairly.
Artists should focus more on creating and releasing material that deserves the top spot on The Hot 100, rather than focusing on methods of sales manipulation to boost so-so material.
Billboard has made efforts to battle against pricing chart manipulation schemes. In November, the music industry giant announced that albums priced under $3.49 within four weeks of their release would not be considered for charts. Singles priced under $0.39 will be disqualified as well. This is certainly a step in the right direction, but Billboard can only do so much if labels continue to try to do everything possible to boost a single’s standing on the coveted Billboard Hot 100.
Above else, artists should have greater respect for the historic chart that has driven the industry for so long, and have greater respect for the die-hard fans that care deeply about their success.
In this industry, artists (or their record companies) indeed have the independence to set prices as they so choose. Prices rise and fall from week to week, essentially keeping music lovers on their toes. Clearly the fall in price for a particular album or single encourages more fans to gobble up the music, thus improving its ranking on the Top 10. Yet, the practice also benefits fans who can score great deals on music they want.
The problem with the manipulation is that artists constantly market and re-release their music to spur mass sales. The smaller, less successful artists cannot compete against this, and therefore have a harder time making it on the Top 10. It’s essentially Wal-Mart Lady Gaga cuting prices to attract the masses leaving Mom and Pop bands in the dust.
To deny changes would be to deny realities. I\’m using the plural on purpose.