|
|
Post by mga707 on Dec 9, 2023 21:31:03 GMT -5
By late spring of 1982, Bogus Bill started to be over-generous with the "superstars." Even some songs in the middle of the Hot 100 would get a white star despite minimal movement, such as 56 to 52, or 62 to 57. Some songs would debut on the countdown at, let's say, 39 or 38, move up two spots the following week and still be superstarred. It's hard to know whether the star system was management's main issue with Wardlow, but it must have seemed unnecessary to implement it in the first place. I noticed that very thing when I checked the Hot 100 for this week's '82 show (UMD, my usual 'go to', was temporarily down). My God, that was a whole lotta 'superstars'! Like nearly every song got a 'participation award'.  |
|
|
|
Post by LC on Dec 9, 2023 22:00:10 GMT -5
Wardlow left Billboard in April 1983, so several more months of these kind of charts were still in the offing. He either resigned, or was fired depending on which story you believe. Looking back, I can't believe how long he was able to stay on. The managers of the magazine must have noticed what a mess the charts were becoming under his watch. I'd love to know more details about this, but I don't think there's any out there, plus, it's been so long ago now that memories are probably hazy. By late spring of 1982, Bogus Bill started to be over-generous with the "superstars." Even some songs in the middle of the Hot 100 would get a white star despite minimal movement, such as 56 to 52, or 62 to 57. Some songs would debut on the countdown at, let's say, 39 or 38, move up two spots the following week and still be superstarred. It's hard to know whether the star system was management's main issue with Wardlow, but it must have seemed unnecessary to implement it in the first place. Did he not have anybody "checking his work," i.e., somebody higher up to answer to? If there was no structure in place to prevent such shenanigans, BB really only have themselves to blame for letting it go on so long. |
|
|
|
Post by doofus67 on Dec 9, 2023 22:50:38 GMT -5
By late spring of 1982, Bogus Bill started to be over-generous with the "superstars." Even some songs in the middle of the Hot 100 would get a white star despite minimal movement, such as 56 to 52, or 62 to 57. Some songs would debut on the countdown at, let's say, 39 or 38, move up two spots the following week and still be superstarred. It's hard to know whether the star system was management's main issue with Wardlow, but it must have seemed unnecessary to implement it in the first place. I noticed that very thing when I checked the Hot 100 for this week's '82 show (UMD, my usual 'go to', was temporarily down). My God, that was a whole lotta 'superstars'! Like nearly every song got a 'participation award'. That's World Radio History for ya. That 12/11/82 chart has not a single black star in the top 40! And something else you won't get from UMD: Two back-to-back records in the upper reaches share a couple of credits. "Gloria" had English lyrics written by Trevor Veitch and was co-produced by Greg Mathieson. "Mickey" was produced by both Mathieson and Veitch. |
|
|
|
Post by SFGuy on Dec 11, 2023 1:35:15 GMT -5
For the 12/11/1982 show, could Wardlow had manipulated the charts so that three hearts in a row on the chart (15 - Dionne Warwick "Heartbreak" 16 - Olivia Newton-John "Heart Attack" 17 - Neil Diamond "Heartlight")?
|
|
|
|
Post by OnWithTheCountdown on Dec 11, 2023 8:17:29 GMT -5
For the 12/11/1982 show, could Wardlow had manipulated the charts so that three hearts in a row on the chart (15 - Dionne Warwick "Heartbreak" 16 - Olivia Newton-John "Heart Attack" 17 - Neil Diamond "Heartlight")? Very possible. I feel like it happened during a song's chart descent (within the 40 as well as the entire 100), as well as the more-focused-on ascent. |
|
|
|
Post by michaelcasselman on Dec 11, 2023 8:39:38 GMT -5
To what end would it have served him to manipulate those 'heart' songs, tho?
|
|
|
|
Post by doofus67 on Dec 16, 2023 15:46:30 GMT -5
To what end did any of these manipulations serve him?
|
|
|
|
Post by michaelcasselman on Dec 16, 2023 15:58:21 GMT -5
To what end did any of these manipulations serve him? What I mean is, I could understand it if there was record companies who specifically lobbied for certain singles to be known as a 'certified Billboard Top 10' or 'number one' or some such peak that could be used as a selling point, but other than some one-off recognition on a countdown show (that may or may not have even be noticed by the writers of the show), what does it do for the quirk of deliberately arranging for three 'Heart' songs being back to back to back smack in the middle of the teens on some random week as some manipulation of the chart? Some chart oddities raise more flags than others when it comes to cries of manipulation (and some have better odds of corroboration, even if it's via decades old anecdotes), whereas sometimes you could probably chalk it up to Occam's Razor. |
|
|
|
Post by lasvegaskid on Dec 16, 2023 18:12:11 GMT -5
For the 12/11/1982 show, could Wardlow had manipulated the charts so that three hearts in a row on the chart (15 - Dionne Warwick "Heartbreak" 16 - Olivia Newton-John "Heart Attack" 17 - Neil Diamond "Heartlight")? I doubt it, it sounds like he was more into personal enrichment than playing around with song titles www.avclub.com/larry-harris-1798218561 |
|
|
|
Post by doofus67 on Dec 16, 2023 19:06:55 GMT -5
Every once in a while, LVK, you unearth a gem. Thank you. It took more than three licks on the Tootsie Pop to reach it, but it was well worth it.
So THAT'S what was in it for Bill, in terms of the chart performance of Casablanca artists. Maybe we could hear from someone with RSO. Then maybe -- and this is a lot to ask -- the rest of ten years' worth of his BS, and 20 pages of this thread, could be untangled!
|
|
|
|
Post by LC on Dec 16, 2023 22:53:28 GMT -5
Every once in a while, LVK, you unearth a gem. Thank you. It took more than three licks on the Tootsie Pop to reach it, but it was well worth it. So THAT'S what was in it for Bill, in terms of the chart performance of Casablanca artists. Maybe we could hear from someone with RSO. Then maybe -- and this is a lot to ask -- the rest of ten years' worth of his BS, and 20 pages of this thread, could be untangled! My guess is he had an "arrangement" similar to the one with Casablanca. What I'd REALLY like to know is, which songs/artists suffered on the charts because their label(s) didn't want to play ball with Bill. |
|
|
|
Post by doofus67 on Dec 16, 2023 23:29:24 GMT -5
That would be cool, but it's so hard to quantify. Some labels had a pattern of hitting higher peaks in other trades, such as Motown in Cash Box or, to a lesser extent, Atlantic in Record World.
|
|
|
|
Post by mga707 on Dec 17, 2023 0:59:55 GMT -5
That would be cool, but it's so hard to quantify. Some labels had a pattern of higher peaks in other trades, such as Motown in Cash Box. Ditto for Roulette. In his surprisingly good book, Tommy James relates that label head (and later convicted mobster) Morris Levy always swore that Billboard 'had it in' for his label, as nearly every TJ and the Shondells single charted higher in the other two 'trades' of the era (Cashbox and Record World) than on Billboard. |
|
|
|
Post by chrislc on Dec 17, 2023 21:25:30 GMT -5
That would be cool, but it's so hard to quantify. Some labels had a pattern of hitting higher peaks in other trades, such as Motown in Cash Box or, to a lesser extent, Atlantic in Record World. Hard to quantify, but not impossible. A spreadsheet with the three surveys of the Wardlow Era, then sorting the records that suffered the most in Billboard compared to CB and RW, then sorting the greatest sufferers list (maybe 100 records?) by record label, then compare THAT list to a record label sort of all the records. Call it the Rafferty List. |
|
|
|
Post by LC on Dec 17, 2023 22:57:58 GMT -5
That would be cool, but it's so hard to quantify. Some labels had a pattern of hitting higher peaks in other trades, such as Motown in Cash Box or, to a lesser extent, Atlantic in Record World. Call it the Rafferty List. I know he's the most infamous victim of chart manipulations, but unlike some artists, I think he would not have benefitted much overall from Baker Street being #1 vs. #2. The man just didn't like to play the music industry game, and he didn't want to tour the US. This quote from BBC announcer Paul Gambaccini says it all: ""His song "Baker Street" was about how uncomfortable he felt in the star system, and what do you know, it was a giant world hit. The album City to City went to No. 1 in America, and suddenly he found that as a result of his protest, he was a bigger star than ever. And he now had more of what he didn't like." |
|
