Billboard Adds Streaming You Tube To Chart Calculations

By On 02/21/2013 · 34 Comments · In Charts

Share on TumblrShare via email

You Tube streams are now being considered when compiling Billboard charts. This means a big change to the the Billboard 100 methodology.

Billboard and Nielsen announced today the addition of U.S. YouTube video streaming data to its platforms, which includes an update to the methodology for the Billboard Hot 100, the preeminent singles chart.

The YouTube streaming data is now factored into the chart’s ranking, enhancing a formula that includes Nielsen’s digital download track sales and physical singles sales; as well as terrestrial radio airplay, on-demand audio streaming, and online radio streaming, also tracked by Nielsen.

Billboard is now incorporating all official videos on YouTube captured by Nielsen’s streaming measurement, including Vevo on YouTube, and user-generated clips that utilize authorized audio into the Hot 100 and the Hot 100 formula-based genre charts – Hot Country Songs, Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs, R&B Songs, Rap Songs, Hot Latin Songs, Hot Rock Songs and Dance/Electronic Songs – to further reflect the divergent platforms for music consumption in today’s world.

Monetized song parodies will also count. In other words, if a song evolves into a major internet meme, such as “Call Me Maybe” and “Gangnam Style” did last summer, You Tube views could have a major impact on their chart positions. Currently, “Harlem Shake”, the latest You Tube craze, is the beneficiary of the rule change It debuts at No. 1 on both the Hot 100 and Streaming Songs charts and jumps 12-1 on Dance/Electronic Songs with 103 million views, according to YouTube.

What do you think of the change?

Via Billboard.com

 
← Older Comments
  • Tom22

    Tremendous Links H.A.  and each of them refers to additional great resources.  I got more understanding of the current state of affairs in the last 60 minutes of reading them than hundreds of articles at these fan sites (that to be fair have other goals).

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/HWRPW434YQTROZ3J5E4BSLWEYM H.A.

    People need to listen to the artists who have been in the business for a long time who put out the behind the scene information themselves. None of this is new stuff. Your hearing about the changes now because labels revenue are no longer album, singles sales. The industry can’t live on only 10-15 artists going platinum a year anymore.

  • Incipit

    None of this is new stuff.

     Thank you, H.A. HERE is another look at the payola angle – from an Indie’s POV – and instead of using euphemisms like ‘be very very nice to the PD’s’ – they come right out and say it’s corrupt….and the majors get preference because they are steady paying customers. Refreshing, even while it is disgusting.

    Every time the industry comes close to addressing this, it gets swept under the rug, and some one redecorates…one of the times it almost happened was the Drugs for Play and the Clive Davis scandal in ’73, ’74 at Columbia Broadcasting. I doubt much has changed. IMO.

  • mmb

    I think there is — or hope there is — starting to be a frustration with the continued contraction of radio playlists.  Number 1 songs now frequently get 15-16K spins per week.  That is ridiculous.  Just to get in the top ten now you need @8K spins per week.  That is twice as much as was needed ten years ago.  While fans of certain artists cheer the breaking of top spin records on an almost weekly basis it seems, I think that its horrible for the music industry.  The gap between the number 40 song and the number 1 song at CHR is incredible.  Basically playlists are limited to 10-20 songs. But I’m not sure that the new BB Hot 100 rules are going to do much — other than get some more novelty songs more time at No. 1, and result in lower hot 100 peaks for some artists with strong airplay and sales, but weak streaming/youtube views. 

  • Tom22

    Yeah , H.A.  I understand none of it is new.. and to be honest I have seen many of the things said before. That being said there was more there and more current information.  I hadn’t read about that friendship between Morris and Steve Jobs, and hadn’t really read about the intrigque between vevo and google and googles 650 million payment (investment?) .

    The audio/visual examples of how music was being made to sound crappy (well by my definition of enjoying a crisp but not overwhelming rhythm section behind the melody.. not blurred with it) were also more clear than I’ve seen.  I’ve read about that, but the short videos embeded really made it clear.

    Not everyone clicks links (many posters are spammers and people are smartly wary).  Your links are really interesting to people who are interested in music and were links to large publications sites (businessweek , forbes,  cracked(sorta big).

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/HWRPW434YQTROZ3J5E4BSLWEYM H.A.

    Incipit, good article.

    Top of the Pops: YouTube Shakes Up the Billboard Charts

    Are we entering a new Video-Killed-the-Radio-Star era, a period in which, more than ever, we’ll watch our hit songs? Q&A

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/02/21/_harlem_shake_is_no_1_after_billboard_begins_counting_youtube_views_what.html

  • http://twitter.com/facenfield David Facenfield

    given what the H100 is supposed to track, it makes sense to me to include YT views… it’s more a matter of how they do that… what to include/exclude, what waiting to give it etc… as many have already pointed out

  • HKfan

    But  how can artists sell their records when the radio stations only have  a playlist of about 20 songs. People can’t buy music they don’t hear. Hardly anyone I know listens to the radio anyway, especially the teens and young adults, they all listen to music on line, and find new music through friends and the internet on things like spotify and 8tracks.
    So many people listen to music through the internet now, that its only right that the charts change to reflect this.

  • LongKissGoodnight

    It just came to me that is music videos, covers and parodies count because people are getting exposed to the song, so should TV commercials that are using the song, no?

← Older Comments