Quark 7,098 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 o<(0_0)>o I think it's obvious that music charts measure fake success or at least partially real success. The artists that get high chart numbers are usually the ones that promote the most and pay the most money for ads. And even though some artists have real or at least partial appeal (you can tell because these artists are new and or don't promote much and still get high chart numbers), most artists' success is based on other things outside just public interest. All in all, charts are all about who knows how to promote the best and the most. Sometimes chart positions are all about who sells/streams the most in a week even though other songs do better in the long run. Other times is all about what time of year you release, what day of the week you release, what other artists are releasing when you release, how long you wait to release, and how many discounts you provide. It would be nice if it all was based just on public interest, but until the current way of charting remains, then I don't see why people give much importance to charts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sipthistea 21,099 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 I think it's a mix of things. Some labels use payola to promote their artists (so that their videos appear everywhere on YouTube as recommended and get to #1), other artists gain success 'cause people do want to listen to them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIghtmareElm 2,606 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 Nobody cares about charts until their fave dominates the top 10 or an artist they don't like flops. Charts are not everything. However, they are important for big pop artists. Notice that the most sought after concerts are the ones that dominate BB. A big reason why Bruno Mars concert tickets are so expensive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
actsleazy 6,633 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 so does that mean G.U.Y and A-YO were smashes 💓💗💕💘💖💞💘💖💞💘💝💓💖💘💞💗💓💖 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Nook 37,808 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 17 minutes ago, actsleazy said: so does that mean G.U.Y and A-YO were smashes They are Spoiler In my heart Uh Red Wine... Convict... Gah Gah... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GagasPussy 312 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 You all now finally realized this. I bet this thread was not going to be made if Gaga was still on top of the world then you all would throw in numbers and chart records to prove commercial success. Commercial success= Radio support + Media exposure + Industry push. Gaga was big during her early career from 2009 to 2011 because the music industry hyped her up and interscope/managment built her up as a groundbreaking edgy, theatrical popstar with glamorous outfits. She was marketable and she was literally thrown in our face. The Media followed her every move and talked about keeping her name in the minds of the public and playing her music on radio constantly. Gaga is not big because times have changed.She is no longer the It Girl and the industry no longer needs her as much as the new stars and artists that are being pushed by the industry. New faces are new cash cows. Real Success is creating a body of art that effectively expresses the message that you are trying to convey and is a body of work that you can take pride in. One that people take something from and gain inspiration from my own opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quark 7,098 Posted October 11, 2017 Author Share Posted October 11, 2017 2 minutes ago, GagasPussy said: LOL You all are claiming that artists pay for commercial success because Gaga is no longer on top of the mountain and sitting on her pop throne as she was during 2009 to 2011. ALL artists including Gaga have paid/promoted for part of their success. Is just that some have done it more than others. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GagasPussy 312 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 5 minutes ago, Quark said: ALL artists including Gaga have paid/promoted for part of their success. Is just that some have done it more than others. Yes, I understand that but fans are coming to this conclusion that artists pay for commercial success which is true just because Mother Monster is not dominating. Why was this not said or thought of earlier? It took them now for her to descend from her peak to realize that commercial success and charts do not matter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TEETHTEETH 1,742 Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 everything is a money game. nothing good is at the surface Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quark 7,098 Posted October 11, 2017 Author Share Posted October 11, 2017 22 minutes ago, GagasPussy said: Yes, I understand that but fans are coming to this conclusion that artists pay for commercial success which is true just because Mother Monster is not dominating. Why was this not said or thought of earlier? It took them now for her to descend from her peak to realize that commercial success and charts do not matter. Yes. But that is not me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.