The Friday Canon: DESTINY'S CHILD PLUS

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

DC must rank as one of the most tumultuous groups in recent pop history! All you need to know about ver Child is that

Beyonce was in charge

Except her dad was really

They need no further introduction from me though I feel I must point out that their wikipedia entry is flagged as containing "weasel words", whatever those might be. To bump up the tick factor for today's canon I've included all the UK solo singles as well. You get NINE picks over the 29 songs below.

[Poll #923828]

Comments

Re: SO HARD

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

Definitely not over here but I'm often confused as to what constitutes a single in America – like Kelis's 'Blindfold Me', there were never physical copies and only a video, but some radio stations picked it up so it became a single (did this happen with Beyoncé and 'Upgrade U' too?), this is what I imagine happening with 'All Eyes On Me'. In the UK this obv couldn't happen - except now it can, this year...

Re: SO HARD

[koganbot]

Turns out that "All Eyes On Me" was a promo single, which probably means that hard copies went to radios and bizzers and some critics but never were up for official sale. Sometimes "promo singles" can hit: last year, Britney's "And Then We Kiss" went top 10 in a number of countries as a promo single and made the U.S. dance airplay chart. (I have no idea if overseas it got physical releases as well as airplay.)

Wikipedia's got a good entry about the Billboard Hot 100. The Billboard singles chart combines singles sales and downloads and airplay using some formula that they probably readjust periodically; in December 1998 they began counting songs on their chart even when their was no physical single. (Wikipedia gives an interesting list of massive hits before then that weren't counted owing to there being no physical single: 1995 The Rembrandts "I’ll Be There For You" (number one for eight weeks); 1996 No Doubt "Don’t Speak" (number one for sixteen weeks); 1997 Sugar Ray "Fly" (number one for six weeks); 1997 The Cardigans "Lovefool" (number two for eight weeks); 1998 Natalie Imbruglia "Torn" (number one for eleven weeks); 1998 Goo Goo Dolls "Iris" (number one for eighteen weeks). By "number one" they mean number one on the airplay chart.

I think the Billboard system is better than the British, since it genuinely tries to gauge a song's actual popularity. Singles buyers don't represent the market as a whole. However, the British system does leave more openings for unknown bands to break out, though usually only unknowns that appeal to a particular type of audience: young people, usually indie, who will seek out singles.

In any event, "All Eyes" never charted.

Re: SO HARD

[braisedbywolves.livejournal.com]

I know this is a really old argument, but...

Singles buyers don't represent the market as a whole.

But surely they're a better (as in healthier) match than rotation minutes?

Re: SO HARD

[koganbot]

Well, this is why you have to get a formula, rather than choose one over the other, but in the U.S. basically no one was buying singles physical singles after the mid '80s except teen girls buying pop hits on cassingles, dance fans buying 12-inches, and indie boys buying indie. So you'd get labels releasing singles but barely making them available, and withdrawing them as soon as the album came out (this would make the songs eligible for the chart, but basically only being used to promo albums). Of course, the problem with airplay is that it skews towards "desirable" consumers, those spending a lot on leisure goods that radios advertise, so 18 to 34 year olds who are not poor get disproportionate attention. But no, I don't think physical singles are a good matchup at all, though downloads makes it better.

Re: SO HARD

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

I'm happy with the British system now whereby downloads are included - am very suspicious of any radio airplay being used to count towards the charts as it gives too much power to too few people (whether they're radio DJs, radio station managers, entertainment conglomerate owners, or whoever may be pushing money the way of any of the above). But then you have had better songs in your chart this decade so I guess you win.