Home› Music
Options

Streaming included in the singles chart - form of corruption?

Neil_NNeil_N Posts: 6,026
Forum Member
✭
in Music #1
Since the inclusion of streaming in the UK singles chart, it seems to be hindering a lot of acts from getting a decent placing or even making the top 40.

The same old tired songs from last year ( "All of Me" STILL in the top 40 12 months on), just will not leave and seem to be having an impact on the chart making it stale and boring.

1D would not be in this weeks Top 40 if it was sales only, yet they are because of their muppet fans.

Would you say including this is a form of manipulation and due to amounts of money being exchange or do you see this as good thing?

Comments

  • Options
    HitstasticHitstastic Posts: 8,634
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #2
    The only advantage to adding streaming to the official UK chart is that the #1 singles are more likely to be worthy of their status compared to the hilarious weekly turnover of new chart toppers last year - and most of them really weren't worthy of being classed as a UK #1 hit.

    As for John Legend, you can blame Celebrity Big Brother for that one. All Of Me was used on the show during the week which actually saw the song climb on iTunes so therefore it was its iTunes boost that has kept the song in the chart.

    I do agree that it's going to be difficult for independent artists to get a top 40 new entry. Then again, if an act on an indie label scrapes into the top 40 then falls out of the top 75 the following week what impact has that act exactly had? Especially if Radio 1 didn't play the song on the UK Top 40.

    To conclude, money talks.
  • Options
    BRITLANDBRITLAND Posts: 3,443
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #3
    I see it as moving on with the times.

    If you think our chart rules are bad look at America, they include radio play & YouTube views in their chart which led to Robin Thicke at no1 for 12 weeks during the summer and sent Wrecking Ball back to no1 due to a parody of the video going viral on YT (that Steve guy with the long hair)

    If we had their rules the likes of Radio 1, Capital, Heart, Kiss, Radio 2 as well would be controlling the chart
  • Options
    HitstasticHitstastic Posts: 8,634
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #4
    BRITLAND wrote: »
    I see it as moving on with the times.

    If you think our chart rules are bad look at America, they include radio play & YouTube views in their chart which led to Robin Thicke at no1 for 12 weeks during the summer and sent Wrecking Ball back to no1 due to a parody of the video going viral on YT (that Steve guy with the long hair)

    If we had their rules the likes of Radio 1, Capital, Heart, Kiss, Radio 2 as well would be controlling the chart

    The biggest mockery in the US charts with regards to YouTube views was when Harlem Shake spent something like 9 weeks at #1 because everyone was watching 30 second videos on YouTube.

    It's a sad reflection when you consider just how much bigger impact Gangnam Style had in America, yet that song could only reach #2 behind that all time classic...erm...One More Night by Maroon 5 ?!!! :confused:

    I suspect Psy's success on YouTube is the very reason for those changes to the US chart but viral videos don't seem to be as prominent as they were in 2012. I don't see Elastc Heart by Sia topping the US charts this week, although Uptown Funk! has already passed 100,000,000 views so that's like a counter argument. :p
  • Options
    Aura101Aura101 Posts: 8,327
    Forum Member
    ✭
    #5
    i think they should just stick to good old traditional sales.
  • Options
    Nebworth90Nebworth90 Posts: 1,266
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #6
    It has certainly killed off the older acts reaching number one... Or even getting anywhere near the top 10. I don't see madonna's new single faring well with the streaming numbers included...
  • Options
    StratusSphereStratusSphere Posts: 2,813
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    #7
    I disagree, it just means they have to do more work with staggering releases, but the new system works well for songs that can be a 'sleeper hit' - not chart hugely well at first, but stick around and grow to do well. - e.g. the Hozier song at #3 at the minute originally entered much lower and only moved up - I would imagine a lot of that's because of streaming and people discovering it.

    I don't know if the chart with streaming in it should be the main chart though, that placings count on for artists' successes.

    So, I'm torn. Something that would be interesting would be expanding the top 40 to a top 50 or 75 in light of streaming impacting how high songs debut. That would be useful for people who find music to listen to from what's in the charts, I think.
  • Options
    TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    #8
    I stopped paying attention to the charts long before streaming was included so it's no odds to me. The music I listen to and buy is is unlikely to break into the charts either way.
Sign In or Register to comment.