The buzz last week was all about the music charts. There was a battle for the number one spot on two of the charts and the different methodology used by BDS and Mediabase allowed for the each song to claim a number one spot. You would think that this was satisfactory to the labels. Oh NO!
I have to tread softly on this topic because Music Row publishes a chart and my best friend operates another widely watched chart. Still I think there are a couple of points to be made regarding charts and what they have created in the music and radio industries. Some good and some bad.
Recently in this space I talked about liking lists. I do. They are simple and ordered. Is that redundant? Music charts are just lists. Lists of the most popular songs based on some prescribed criteria that is both easily described if not always easily defended. Having two major charts that use different methodology creates the need to defend one or the other position. As I said earlier, last week’s battle was won by both players, which speaks to both the need for two methods and the need to have only one. But like two radio stations in the same market, one playing older songs and one playing newer songs, everyone should be happy at all times. That doesn’t happen.
The good stuff is that music charts have made stars of Casey Kasem, Bob Kingsley and Lon Helton. All fine chaps. Charts have created long time spent listening to the radio, which is very good and produced some nerds about top ten lists like Barry Mardit and even superstar Blake Shelton, who used to write down every song in the top ten so he would be the authority in high school the next day. The bad stuff is in trying to get a record to number one, when head to head with another song also fighting for the top spot on the chart, radio stations and record companies do some bad stuff. By bad I don’t mean illegal, but certainly unethical and not in the best interest of the listeners.
When Record A is vying for the number one position against Record B, programmers and record promoters are known to embellish the strength of one of the records, often even decreasing the strength of the other. This is done at times not to reflect real world strengths of individual records but to boost one of the record’s chart position at the expense of the other. The listener to that station suffers, albeit painlessly, by hearing one of the songs much more often. Maybe three or four times a day more than they would normally while being deprived (again this is not life or death to the listener) of hearing one of their favorites. This may go on for a full week or just a few days, but it is wrong.
What if you were a dealer at a Hold ‘Em game in Las Vegas and you decided to pass one player an extra ace after the flop? One hand. Heck there are going to be scores more in the coming hours so what is one hand going to hurt to help a friend? Well it is not moral. Both players thought the cards played were being dealt fairly. What if the player you slipped the extra ace to agreed to tip you from his winnings or helps you get tickets to the prize fight in the casino later that week? Now this becomes unethical.
Favors should be distributed equally to all parties that can benefit your interests without them being held over their heads. Changing your procedure to accomplish something that is not directly beneficial to your listeners or your responsibilities as a programmer should cause you to pause and ask the question, “If the chart can be manipulated at the top by 10-15 players, then what real value does it hold when you’re using it to program your radio station each week?”
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of MusicRow.)
