Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 TIME magazine has their "Answers Issue" out now (which is actually pretty fascinating) in which they use the ominous "big data" world we live in to answer many questions. One of which they rank pop stars. Note, the methodology is explained below the chart. Sorry that I can't post the actual info here. http://time.com/music-ranking/ Janet Jackson is ranked #6 above her brother (#8) and Whitney Houston (#7) by Hits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 Sure, Miley Cyrus is one of the great media stars of the decade. But when it comes to her status as a hitmaker, she is an upstart compared to icons like Rihanna, Lady Gaga, Usher or the legions of greats that came before them. To put the Disney performer-turned-provocateur in perspective, TIME went through every song that reached the top ten of the Billboard 100 back to 1960 to see which artists had both the biggest years and longest careers. We assigned points based on a song’s rank for each week it was in the top ten. Artists who collaborated on songs are both given credit for its success. Artists were chosen for this list based on all-time chart performance and contemporary significance. While the Beatles’ debut year on the American charts reigns as the crowning example of chart dominance–they had 11 songs that reached the top ten and six number-one hits–they are in fact only the second most successful artist or group in a single year. It took 40 years, but Usher finally unseated them. He spent exactly half of all of 2004 atop the weekly Billboard 100 charts between “Yeah!,” “Burn,” “Confessions Part II” and “My Boo” (with Alicia Keys). Methodology Data comes from the Billboard archives. Points are awarded by placement in the Top Ten, from ten points for a number-one hit to one point for a number-10 song. All artists listed by name on a track are given full points for its chart performance, but groups with members who later had solo careers are still counted as separate entities. (Beyoncé, for example, gets points for “Telephone,” a Lady Gaga song in which she is featured, but does not receive points for songs attributed to Destiny’s Child, the trio that launched her career.) Points for songs are assigned to the year in which the song debuted in the top ten, even if its popularity runs into the next calendar year. Correction, Aug. 28, 2014: Due to a programming error, the original version of this post incorrectly attributed three hit songs to Carlos Santana and omitted several by Janet Jackson. The post has been updated to display the correct number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 I don't understand why these publications do this. They don't understand that you can't rank the artists from different generations with one another. There are too many factors that effect the outcome of these charts. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted August 29, 2014 Author Share Posted August 29, 2014 Earlier, the opted out Janet's career post-1995, which had her below her brother and Whitney I'm glad they fixed it PS. I like how they took "JACKSON" off her name and left it at just... janet. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 They should have put "Al Mana", Her REAL name. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HollyHood Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 The fact that they didn't put her surname! They should have put "Miss" before her first name tho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted August 29, 2014 Author Share Posted August 29, 2014 The fact that they didn't put her surname! They should have put "Miss" before her first name tho They had it as JJ before the correction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotboy06 Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 But what other "Janet" would it be? The real shade is when she released Janhova. No need for a last name anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted August 29, 2014 Author Share Posted August 29, 2014 But what other "Janet" would it be? The real shade is when she released Janhova. No need for a last name anymore. Such a sexy name that influenced others to drop their last name Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bailey Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 I like this post, I think it's a great step in the right direction, BUT as other have said you cannot compare these artists today from those in the past, so many other factors are at play. The duration of a hit, the sales, the promo, the number of active years, the time between albums. I love Rihanna, but chile ranking her that high says this system is flawed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trackboy Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 Any list of pop stardom where Michael Jackson doesn't reign supreme is bogus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted August 29, 2014 Author Share Posted August 29, 2014 Any list of pop stardom where Michael Jackson doesn't reign supreme is bogus. what?! So it's bogus bc MJ couldn't reach Billboard Top 10 more than other artists? I guess if you ignore reality, like he did, fantasy will prevail 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bailey Posted August 29, 2014 Share Posted August 29, 2014 what?! So it's bogus bc MJ couldn't reach Billboard Top 10 more than other artists? I guess if you ignore reality, like he did, fantasy will prevail I HAD to login just to hit like on this MJ stop innovating in his music years before he passed, meanwhile his sister was experimenting with new images and sound...reality is a bitch 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted August 29, 2014 Author Share Posted August 29, 2014 I HAD to login just to hit like on this MJ stop innovating in his music years before he passed, meanwhile his sister was experimenting with new images and sound...reality is a bitch 1995 was the last time MJ mattered musically.. And only after he begged Janet to help his dying career bc of the trial he paid to get rid of 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSimba Posted August 30, 2014 Share Posted August 30, 2014 Alright J! And not surprised by the #1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.C Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Any list of pop stardom where Michael Jackson doesn't reign supreme is bogus. Oh, your one of those people that thinks he has to win everything and he is the perfect messiah? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bu. Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 I think in some ways it's silly to say it's a bogus list since it was calculated somewhat scientifically (based on factual information). However it's also kinda silly to make such a list based on chart positions since Billboard changed their rules so many times to make charting fit with the times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share Posted September 1, 2014 I think in some ways it's silly to say it's a bogus list since it was calculated somewhat scientifically (based on factual information). However it's also kinda silly to make such a list based on chart positions since Billboard changed their rules so many times to make charting fit with the times.Things change Bu... It's apart of life.. We can't expect Billboad or any form of medium to keep the same rules of the 80s, 90s and prior, especially since there's new ways of listening to music. Idk why people like to discredit change. Billboard has to evolve or it could become irrelevant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bu. Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Things change Bu... It's apart of life.. We can't expect Billboad or any form of medium to keep the same rules of the 80s, 90s and prior, especially since there's new ways of listening to music. Idk why people like to discredit change. Billboard has to evolve or it could become irrelevant I'm not discrediting change . I agree - things change which is why I think it's silly to make a list like this when songs today have different charting circumstances than songs in the 60s/70s/80s etc. But it's not as if it's opinion based - the list was made using factual chart positions. I'm glad Janet was higher than some people tbh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share Posted September 1, 2014 I'm not discrediting change . I agree - things change which is why I think it's silly to make a list like this when songs today have different charting circumstances than songs in the 60s/70s/80s etc. But it's not as if it's opinion based - the list was made using factual chart positions. I'm glad Janet was higher than some people tbh Shit changes.. Different circumstances doesn't mean current artists' chart position should be discredited or "lesser" than the positions of the past. Those artists of the past paved the way but are still comparable to today's charts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bu. Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Shit changes.. Different circumstances doesn't mean current artists' chart position should be discredited or "lesser" than the positions of the past. Those artists of the past paved the way but are still comparable to today's charts No one said they're lesser or being discredited. I don't think they should be comparable but ok... Bearing in mind that both my faves got great positions (one being #1 the other #6) so I have no reason to be upset 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.