|
Post by trekkielo on Sept 12, 2015 11:59:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by blackbowl68 on Sept 12, 2015 14:14:50 GMT -5
Billboard began posting the pop chart Radio & Records tabulated as their Mainstream Top 40 chart when the publication folded in late 2008. So I believe that R&R data is currently owned by Billboard.
That website doesn't have legal access to R&R chart data. Unless you cite a book published showing Radio & Records was used by permission, Wikipedia will not consider the info you provide.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Sept 12, 2015 14:23:20 GMT -5
Billboard began posting the pop chart Radio & Records tabulated as their Mainstream Top 40 chart when the publication folded in late 2008. So I believe that R&R data is currently owned by Billboard. That website doesn't have legal access to R&R chart data. Unless you cite a book published showing Radio & Records was used by permission, Wikipedia will not consider the info you provide. Not sure about current ownership. But as far as not having legal access? Not true. The guy who compiles the site obtained permission from R&R to begin with, and either has done the same with Mediabase (technically Premiere; Premiere owns Mediabase), or it hasn't been necessary. In any event, the site would not still be up and running today if its existence violated any legalities.
|
|
|
Post by trekkielo on Sept 12, 2015 14:28:48 GMT -5
Billboard began posting the pop chart Radio & Records tabulated as their Mainstream Top 40 chart when the publication folded in late 2008. So I believe that R&R data is currently owned by Billboard. That website doesn't have legal access to R&R chart data. Unless you cite a book published showing Radio & Records was used by permission, Wikipedia will not consider the info you provide.
But this user's explanations are "non notable chart", "Not a notable / official chart." or just plain "No" when I answer with "Radio & Records (R&R) was just as notable as Cashbox and Record World!" and has absolutely nothing to do with my source!
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Sept 12, 2015 14:29:57 GMT -5
Also: As far as adding R&R information to all the Wiki pages...yeah, good luck with that. While they were an airplay chart provider, they've never been held in the same regard as either Billboard or Cash Box - not by the general public, anyway. Bigger chart-watchers (such as many of us) might hold them in regard...but at best, they were probably something like a Tier II publication to Billboard's + Cash Box's Tier I.
|
|
|
Post by trekkielo on Sept 12, 2015 15:08:00 GMT -5
Also: As far as adding R&R information to all the Wiki pages...yeah, good luck with that. While they were an airplay chart provider, they've never been held in the same regard as either Billboard or Cash Box - not by the general public, anyway. Bigger chart-watchers (such as many of us) might hold them in regard...but at best, they were probably something like a Tier II publication to Billboard's + Cash Box's Tier I. Well, IF Billboard does indeed own Radio & Records as of 2008, then that sure changes all of that, it makes R&R Tier I now!
|
|
|
Post by blackbowl68 on Sept 12, 2015 15:58:38 GMT -5
Another factor would be that Radio & Records may not be considered a prime source for chart data to represent US performance since Wikipedia has international readers.
|
|
|
Post by trekkielo on Sept 12, 2015 16:18:32 GMT -5
Another factor would be that Radio & Records may not be considered a prime source for chart data to represent US performance since Wikipedia has international readers. IF that's true then Cashbox and Record World should not be considered prime sources for chart data to represent US performance either!
|
|
|
Post by blackbowl68 on Sept 12, 2015 19:03:11 GMT -5
In all honesty, I've seen few articles on Wikipedia cite chart performances from Cashbox or Record World. (If they did, they have or might get removed.) But not one cite Radio & Records. The United States is one of the few countries in the world that include radio airplay to determine a record's ranking. Almost all other countries and territories with record popularity charts (notice I didn't say music) base their lists exclusively on sales reports. So it's likely Wikipedia feels a source that doesn't use sales reports like R&R should not be considered. Not saying it's right; just giving a possible explanation.
Back in the 60s & 70s, many chart watchers considered Billboard, Record World & Cashbox to be equally relevant. Without having seen a copy of the latter two publications' pop charts, my guess is the difference of all three is where they get their data. Once it's acquired, I believe all three tabulate their charts the same way. Unless someone can find copies and read the fine print, that is my guess.
|
|
|
Post by Shadoe Fan on Sept 13, 2015 3:13:23 GMT -5
Personally, I consider R&R a solid source. If it was good enough for Rick Dees & Casey to use on their countdowns, then it's good enough for me. I believe Ryan's AT40 still references R&R for stats from before Ryan hosted. (I use R&R for my Hot AC database up until the time Billboard bought them out, from then until now I use Mediabase.)
|
|
|
Post by adam31 on Sept 13, 2015 15:06:54 GMT -5
I think the bigger reason Rick Dees' and Casey's producers chose R&R was because the information was free, not because the data was more solid than Billboard.
|
|
|
Post by mkarns on Sept 13, 2015 15:15:46 GMT -5
I think the bigger reason Rick Dees' and Casey's producers chose R&R was because the information was free, not because the data was more solid than Billboard. In Rob Durkee's book, Casey is quoted as saying that he thought the Radio & Records charts were better than Billboard's, but that they decided (in 1998, when AT40 was revived) they'd rather choose something they didn't have to pay for. I think that the R&R charts were about equal in merit to Billboard and Cashbox throughout much of the 70s and 80s, except for the fact that for a while they weren't big enough for a top 40 countdown (from 1976-83 R&R was only 30 positions.) In the 1990s and after, I actually prefer R&R. Billboard's Hot 100 suffered for a long time from not including radio-only singles that were big hits and helped sell a lot of albums, while overweighting relatively modest singles sales, and while it improved thereafter, the seemingly constant tweaks to the methodology produced some odd and/or inconsistent results. The Cashbox charts of course ceased to exist for a decade from 1996-2006, and for several years beforehand had been producing weird results (most notably Wayne Newton's "The Letter" hitting #1 in CB in 1992 while never charting anywhere else.)
|
|
|
Post by chrislc on Sept 13, 2015 22:37:34 GMT -5
During the Casey AT 40 years, R&R was for programmers. The charts were based on "airplay", meaning what was reported as airplay in an attempt to satisfy record promoters. There were "paper adds" and songs reported as hot rotation that were in light rotation, and other falsehoods - but - most of the data was an accurate reflection of airplay, which was at least in part determined by what the listeners actually wanted to hear. Billboard charts were based on sales and airplay (or "airplay") and sometimes what Hugh Gibb wanted, but with the sales in there, that meant the charts were more legit. I think the general public was more aware of Billboard's charts by a 100-1 margin over R&R or Cashbox or the rest. Of course most of the general public wasn't aware of any of it, but thanks to AT 40, many people had at least heard of Billboard.
|
|
|
Post by adam31 on Sept 14, 2015 11:56:05 GMT -5
During the Casey AT 40 years, R&R was for programmers. The charts were based on "airplay", meaning what was reported as airplay in an attempt to satisfy record promoters. There were "paper adds" and songs reported as hot rotation that were in light rotation, and other falsehoods - but - most of the data was an accurate reflection of airplay, which was at least in part determined by what the listeners actually wanted to hear. Billboard charts were based on sales and airplay (or "airplay") and sometimes what Hugh Gibb wanted, but with the sales in there, that meant the charts were more legit. I think the general public was more aware of Billboard's charts by a 100-1 margin over R&R or Cashbox or the rest. Of course most of the general public wasn't aware of any of it, but thanks to AT 40, many people had at least heard of Billboard. You hit this right on the head about the programmers. IMHO, Overall the Billboard Hot 100 had the slightly better data from 1973-1991 because sales and airplay were tracked. However, R&R was more accurate on what was being played on stations (it being an airplay chart) and that was a more accepting choice to Program Directors with the fragmentation and demise of CHR at the end of the 80s. R&R was better suited for countdown shows after that fragmentation as PD's could keep specific songs (rap mainly) off their airwaves. Again, IMHO, During the 90s, the Hot 100 was NOT the better chart because airplay did not have to come from single releases. Billboard really messed up by requiring a singles release for inclusion on the Hot 100 up until 1997-98. They should have instituted that policy a lot sooner. A good time to have done it was during the Nov. 1991 shakeup. If Billboard had, they would be the better chart data wise and it may have kept a lot of the rap and country from overtaking the chart during the 90s. The Hot 100 could have been more of a true "POP" chart as it was before. The producers of Casey's Top 40 really had no choice but to go with R&R when they started in 1989 because AT40 had exclusive rights to the Billboard charts. Later on, I'm sure they patted themselves on the back for being forced to go in that direction. They really lucked out that the format fractured as badly as it did, as they had no rights fees to worry about and could also create spinoff shows from the other R&R charts without spending an extra dime. Billboard handcuffed AT40 in the end, but there is no question they are the chart authority since 1940 and the model of reference today for music history.
|
|
|
Post by blackbowl68 on Sept 14, 2015 12:53:34 GMT -5
You hit this right on the head about the programmers. IMHO, Overall the Billboard Hot 100 had the slightly better data from 1973-1991 because sales and airplay were tracked. However, R&R was more accurate on what was being played on stations (it being an airplay chart) and that was a more accepting choice to Program Directors with the fragmentation and demise of CHR at the end of the 80s. R&R was better suited for countdown shows after that fragmentation as PD's could keep specific songs (rap mainly) off their airwaves. Again, IMHO, During the 90s, the Hot 100 was NOT the better chart because airplay did not have to come from single releases. Billboard really messed up by requiring a singles release for inclusion on the Hot 100 up until 1997-98. They should have instituted that policy a lot sooner. A good time to have done it was during the Nov. 1991 shakeup. If Billboard had, they would be the better chart data wise and it may have kept a lot of the rap and country from overtaking the chart during the 90s. The Hot 100 could have been more of a true "POP" chart as it was before. The producers of Casey's Top 40 really had no choice but to go with R&R when they started in 1989 because AT40 had exclusive rights to the Billboard charts. Later on, I'm sure they patted themselves on the back for being forced to go in that direction. They really lucked out that the format fractured as badly as it did, as they had no rights fees to worry about and could also create spinoff shows from the other R&R charts without spending an extra dime. Billboard handcuffed AT40 in the end, but there is no question they are the chart authority since 1940 and the model of reference today for music history. This is a perfect example why R&R has no clout internationally. True chart watchers don't care about the opinion of radio programmers and directors; they care what the public says. (If they did, "Relax" could not have topped the UK chart because the BBC never played the song.) Radio people in America wished many non-singles in the 90s topped the Billboard Hot 100 so it can say a hip hop single never did! Problem is almost hip hop record that did reach the top 10 sold over a million copies. Many popular airplay songs that DID get single release sold very poorly in the market. Plus the biggest selling single of the DECADE didn't even reach the top 30 at R&R!!!! So even if it wasn't suitable for countdown shows, the Hot 100 was THE chart during the 90s internationally speaking. It's my primary source for all seasons and I'm glad they held out from allowing "Stairway To Heaven" album cuts from appearing. That would've created an uneven playing field.
|
|