Hell is freezing over on the Hot 100

[Mike]

Jan 28, 2021 20:38:33 GMT -5 dukelightning said:

It's still getting a lot of airplay on my local CHR station. Is this the first time that the act with the #1 song of the year on AT40 will be performing the Super Bowl halftime show? (Btw, the Super Bowl is considered part of the 2020 football season).

Well, upon checking, it looks like the first Super Bowl to have a contemporary performer (defined as: any act that was having current hits at that time or had had hits within the past year or two) wouldn't even be until 1991 (for the 1990 season), with the New Kids. So there goes Casey's entire first run right there.

But it wouldn't be until 1993 (1992 season) and onward that the NFL deliberately turned their efforts toward effectively handing off these shows to top performers. (Both the New Kids in 1991 and Gloria Estefan in 1992 were performers, but those shows were both also shared with multiple non-popular-musical acts as well - Michael Jackson in 1993 was the first where that wasn't the case.)

But to answer your question, the answer is no. Katy Perry did it in 2015 (with "Dark Horse" as the #1 song of 2014). Honorable mention goes to Mark Ronson/Bruno Mars, whose "Uptown Funk" was #1 for 2015 and would be performed in the 2016 show (though Coldplay were the show headliners).

Counting them, this will be the third time it's happened.

[jgve1952]

Hell is freezing over that s**t is allowed in a song title, let alone a lyric. The song I am referencing is Thot S**t by Megan Thee Stallion currently #17 on the Hot 100.

How about when songs with s**t had to be bleeped out from Jet Airliner, Money and Fight the Power--now allowed in a song title? Wow oh wow have the times changed.

[OnWithTheCountdown]

Actually, there have been song titles in the last couple of decades that technically had that word in them, although they just appeared in edited form. Nelly Furtado comes to mind with her early 2002 hit, "On The Radio", with that word appearing before "On".

I haven't paid attention to the Hot 100 in 30 years.

[jgve1952]

OWTC you are so right--just the outrageousness of the last 30 years! Oh those days when you took your allowance and bought a 45 record--to me that is what I want measured--what people spend money on.

Songs debuting at #1 then falling so fast. How can they lose popularity that fast if they were the best record a week ago?

I will now step off my soapbox!

[Michael1973]

Jul 9, 2021 7:58:58 GMT -5 jgve1952 said:

OWTC you are so right--just the outrageousness of the last 30 years! Oh those days when you took your allowance and bought a 45 record--to me that is what I want measured--what people spend money on.

Songs debuting at #1 then falling so fast. How can they lose popularity that fast if they were the best record a week ago?

I will now step off my soapbox!

I totally agree with everything you say here. I liked it so much better when the national charts actually reflected what songs I heard on the radio throughout the week. Now the whole idea is, if it can be streamed or sold online it can chart. I've had several disagreements with people online who are totally in support of this practice, but not me.

Imagine if the charts had always been like this. Casey Kasem: "Well, we have one debut and seventeen re-entries this week, including classics by Bing Crosby, Burl Ives and Brenda Lee." Or, "Well, we have fifteen debuts this week, including fourteen by Drake."

[jgve1952]

Don't forget Taylor Swift! Has she broken records in the 2000s with most songs in the Hot 100?

[seminolefan]

Drake just set the record for most Top 10s on the Hot 100 at the same time, with 9 (all debuts), including the entire Top 5, matching the record set by The Beatles.

[jgve1952]

Sept 13, 2021 13:59:14 GMT -5 seminolefan said:

Drake just set the record for most Top 10s on the Hot 100 at the same time, with 9 (all debuts), including the entire Top 5, matching the record set by The Beatles.

I am also thinking it is a record for the Top 40, of which he occupies a record 21 songs, all of which are also debuts!

[djjoe1960]

To compare the way Billboard gathers information for today's charts with anything in the past is very misleading. Many radio stations played songs in the past, Stairway to Heaven by Led Zeppelin, is one of many examples; but the song never charted due to the fact that it was not released as a single and not eligible to chart due to the way Billboard put together charts at the time.

I think that is why Joel Whitburn's latest books, Pop Singles, are drawing a dividing line between songs that charted from 1955-1989, and songs that charted 1990 through this year. Actually almost every decade could have a stand alone book, as the way charts were compiled changed almost every few years.

The main staying power of pop music is songs that stand the test of time by being enjoyed by multiple generations.

[Mike]

Sept 20, 2021 16:12:21 GMT -5 djjoe1960 said:

I think that is why Joel Whitburn's latest books, Pop Singles, are drawing a dividing line between songs that charted from 1955-1989, and songs that charted 1990 through this year. Actually almost every decade could have a stand alone book, as the way charts were compiled changed almost every few years.

I know decades and all, but I'd have to wonder is there any other quantitative reason for drawing the line at 1989/1990, as opposed to say 1991/1992.

[jgve1952]

Sept 20, 2021 16:12:21 GMT -5 djjoe1960 said:

To compare the way Billboard gathers information for today's charts with anything in the past is very misleading. Many radio stations played songs in the past, Stairway to Heaven by Led Zeppelin, is one of many examples; but the song never charted due to the fact that it was not released as a single and not eligible to chart due to the way Billboard put together charts at the time.

I think that is why Joel Whitburn's latest books, Pop Singles, are drawing a dividing line between songs that charted from 1955-1989, and songs that charted 1990 through this year. Actually almost every decade could have a stand alone book, as the way charts were compiled changed almost every few years.

The main staying power of pop music is songs that stand the test of time by being enjoyed by multiple generations.

True Joe, other examples of songs that weren't released as singles, but received major airplay are: Gold Dust Woman and The Chain by Fleetwood Mac, and of course More Than A Woman by the Bee Gees. The Beatles had so many songs like Back in the USSR, Birthday, Maxwell's Silver Hammer, Octopus's Garden, Oh Darling etc.

When I lived in Northern New Jersey and listened to WMCA, in the Fall of 1969, Abbey Road was #1 on what was normally a chart for 45 singles!

[chadstevens]

@mike - I'd have picked Y2K myself as the dividing line, but 1989 was chosen as it was the end of the 45 rpm single as the standard unit of trade. And there's some logic to that decision as the symbiosis between "singles sales = airplay" and "airplay = singles sales" was starting to fray at that time. The 1990s brought the short-lived cassette single and CD single before giving way to paid digital downloads and finally streaming in the 2010s.

I think it also proves Casey's timing at departing AT40 around that time was impeccable, leaving poor Shadoe to countdown rap records edited down to one minute or taken out altogether.

[jgve1952]

BTS returned to #1 with "Butter" in September from position #7, which broke KC and the Sunshine Band's #4 return to #1 with "That's The Way I Like It."

[jgve1952]

Michael Jackson debuting on the 11-13-21 Chart with Thriller at #19--almost 38 years after he debuted with the song at #20.

[jgve1952]

Industry Baby by Lil Nas and Jack Harlow drop completely out of the Hot 100 from #6 after jumping the week before from #12. Has any other record (other than Christmas record) dropped out of the Hot 100 from as high a position as #6?