Jump to content

TIME: The Ultimate Ranking of Pop Stardom


Recommended Posts

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:umm: what?! :blink::huh:

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 :mellow: MJ stop innovating in his music years before he passed, meanwhile his sister was experimenting with new images and sound...reality is a bitch :coffee:

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I HAD to login just to hit like on this :mellow: MJ stop innovating in his music years before he passed, meanwhile his sister was experimenting with new images and sound...reality is a bitch :coffee:

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 :coffee:

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 :unsure:. 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 :shifty:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not discrediting change :unsure:. 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 :shifty:

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 :D

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...