Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

There is a difference between a rejected #4 song and a rejected #1 song.

4O1TBns.gif

  • Replies 39.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Ger

    6597

  • Raphy23

    1712

  • FAN

    1411

  • pride4jc1222

    1392

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

Bye, no one is going to look at a chart and say "well, it was just 200 spins away from #2." 

 

And it's all relative. "We Are Never Getting Back Together" peaking in the runner up spot as Taylor's first true pop song is nothing compared to a #1 debut after a massive era that ended up stalling at #4 on pop radio. :fan:

 

Can you come up with a reasonable justification as to why "Look" got all those suspicious massive updates and declined so heavily after it hit #1? It was such a normal occurrence and it was all the radio programmers I'm sure.:fan:

 

 

Edited by Cap10Planet
Posted

LWYMMD is a bop and that's all it matters

FfTEOyj.png

Posted
3 minutes ago, DangerousSwiftie said:

They already have a reasonable justification as to why LWYMMD’s run looks like it does.

What's the reasonable part? That they're making room for a new single? Still doesn't justify stalling at #4 a week ago, getting big updates for three days until it hit #1 and then dropping like a fly. I also read some nonsense about performing at some event. Sounds like a cover that is obviously transparent.

 

I think the payola claims and thirst for another #1 sound more reasonable.

IMG_0170.gif

 

Posted
17 minutes ago, Cap10Planet said:

Bye, no one is going to look at a chart and say "well, it was just 200 spins away from #2." 

 

And it's all relative. "We Are Never Getting Back Together" peaking in the runner up spot as Taylor's first true pop song is nothing compared to a #1 debut after a massive era that ended up stalling at #4 on pop radio. :fan:

 

Can you come up with a reasonable justification as to why "Look" got all those suspicious massive updates and declined so heavily after it hit #1? It was such a normal occurrence and it was all the radio programmers I'm sure.:fan:

 

 

And no one is going to look at a chart and think a #2 song was highly bigger than a #4 song. Like nobody is going to look at a chart and think a #8 song is much bigger than a #10 song. :rip: They’re viewed similar. 

 

And yes it is relative. Love Story reached #1 on Pop, and her first full Pop lead single after a million debuting album failed to reach #1 during a time when Pop Radio also controlled Hot 100. Why would her label have not tried to push it to #1? 

 

I said yesterday why I thought her second wind began. iHeartRadio announced her as a performer for Jingle Ball tour the same day her gains began. It looked like radio politics (bias towards artists performing with them). Then with a new single coming they dropped it from playlists after she reached #1. 

 

The rise and fall is unusual and I never said it was normal. I just said I didn’t think it was payola. ATRL thinks anything not transparently explainable on radio is payola with no if,and, or but which is actually naive.

 

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, DangerousSwiftie said:

Illegal methods & thirst for a chart position that nobody cares about is more reasonable than radio stations playing her song every hour because she’s performing at their events (which, given the fact that she is Taylor Swift, will help them sell thousands of dollars worth of tickets)? Delusional.

 

Was her agreeing to sign on for these events at this time probably planned? Yeah. But is it “payola”? No.

Stop saying that "nobody cares" about having a #1 on major chart. It's simply not true. You're the one that is delusional. Stats and numbers will be the end all be all for pop acts, hence Taylor dropping her "it's about the people behind the scenes" act and succumbing to streaming services. Illegal methods have always been made in radio. No one is going to admit to illegal methods, even when it's as obvious as night and day. :rip: 

 

And if they wanted to play her song every hour, why waste it on "Look" for a couple of days (especially a song we have been hearing for months now) and not "Ready for It?" or not saving it for her next single that would have been released a week later? Doesn't add up, sorry.

 

Edited by Cap10Planet
Posted

Katy also had similar situation with CTTR, week before Bon Appetit was released.

-3.413, -4.713, -4.414, -5.462, -5.804, -4.930, -5.749, -4.613, -3.795, -4.168, -5.646, -3.672 in the following days.

 

It's looking bad for Taylor tho.

Posted

She made a deal to get the Pop #1. Otherwise she wouldn’t have done the Z100 Jingle Ball. It was pretty obvious. I wouldn’t be surprised if all her singles this era goes #1 on Pop radio. 

Posted

Omg -5.65m on pop again! :dies:

 

Posted

Swifties being so stubborn in this thread it's boring and eyeroll now. Just accept it and move on. The numbers speak for themselves and we all see it.

Posted
48 minutes ago, iHype. said:

And no one is going to look at a chart and think a #2 song was highly bigger than a #4 song. Like nobody is going to look at a chart and think a #8 song is much bigger than a #10 song. :rip: They’re viewed similar. 

 

And yes it is relative. Love Story reached #1 on Pop, and her first full Pop lead single after a million debuting album failed to reach #1 during a time when Pop Radio also controlled Hot 100. Why would her label have not tried to push it to #1? 

 

I said yesterday why I thought her second wind began. iHeartRadio announced her as a performer for Jingle Ball tour the same day her gains began. It looked like radio politics (bias towards artists performing with them). Then with a new single coming they dropped it from playlists after she reached #1. 

 

The rise and fall is unusual and I never said it was normal. I just said I didn’t think it was payola. ATRL thinks anything not transparently explainable on radio is payola with no if,and, or but which is actually naive.

 

But you acknowledge that it could be payola? Because that explanation is specific enough that even you can’t be sure. You wouldn’t rule out the possibility would you

SilencePlease
Posted
1 minute ago, Fruity said:

Swifties being so stubborn in this thread it's boring and eyeroll now. Just accept it and move on. The numbers speak for themselves and we all see it.

Can't wait for another exposé by legend @Mediabase tonight. Clearly one wasn't enough. :siptea:

Posted

Saying "nobody cares about a #1 on pop" :rip: The complete lack of self awareness, do you even know your own fave? Because everyone else does. And the tea is she's obsessed with her own legacy. She obviously cares.

peterstyles13
Posted

Not people in this chat still arguing over Look :rip:

Taylor's never dying impact on ATRL, I guess :rip:

 

Posted
30 minutes ago, Catch22 said:

Katy also had similar situation with CTTR, week before Bon Appetit was released.

-3.413, -4.713, -4.414, -5.462, -5.804, -4.930, -5.749, -4.613, -3.795, -4.168, -5.646, -3.672 in the following days.

 

It's looking bad for Taylor tho.

It's not similar at all considering that radios didn't drop CTTR to play the next single, they completely ignored all her songs after that. 

Posted

Taylor would not kill her own single to make room for another. Especially her lead.

 

I agree with @Deemy. But definitely shady business.

 

Posted

Y'all still bothered because she reached #1, not matter how :rip: move on! Get ready to think what to say when she starts up the crazy updates for Gorgeous :wink: 

Posted (edited)

I'm too tired to argue with people today, but just my two cents on the matter:

 

Look isn't falling like a ROCK on radios to make room for Gorgeous. It's actually the opposite: Gorgeous is being rush released because Look is falling massively on all metrics, and they need/want a solid hit before album's release. 

 

Do you really think Taylor Swift would allow her LEAD single after her most successful era to flop and spent less than 10 weeks in the top 10 just to "give the second single room to grow". It'snot very smart. I mean: Shake It Off / Blank Space were TOP 10 on the Hot 100 AND pop radio during multiple weeks at the same time. Many artists have 2 songs smashing at the same time. 

 

I don't know why  some people here are using the "they are letting LWYMMD seem like the biggest flop and radio poison ever to make room for single #2, which is being rush released in less than two months after the lead single release" narrative. It's just not realistic.

 

 

Edited by Blue Honeymoon
QueenofCopyPaste
Posted
11 minutes ago, Jorq said:

Y'all still bothered because she reached #1, not matter how :rip: move on! Get ready to think what to say when she starts up the crazy updates for Gorgeous :wink: 

No matter how, this will be remembered

 

Posted
14 minutes ago, Blue Honeymoon said:

I'm too tired to argue with people today, but just my two cents on the matter:

 

Look isn't falling like a ROCK on radios to make room for Gorgeous. It's actually the opposite: Gorgeous is being rush released because Look is falling massively on all metrics, and they need/want a solid hit before album's release. 

 

Do you really think Taylor Swift would allow her LEAD single after her most successful era to flop and spent less than 10 weeks in the top 10 just to "give the second single room to grow". It'snot very smart. I mean: Shake It Off / Blank Space were TOP 10 on the Hot 100 AND pop radio during multiple weeks at the same time. Many artists have 2 songs smashing at the same time. 

 

I don't know why  some people here are using the "they are letting LWYMMD seem like the biggest flop and radio poison ever to make room for single #2, which is being rush released in less than two months after the lead single release" narrative. It's just not realistic.

 

 

:clap3::clap3:

Posted
16 minutes ago, Blue Honeymoon said:

I'm too tired to argue with people today, but just my two cents on the matter:

 

Look isn't falling like a ROCK on radios to make room for Gorgeous. It's actually the opposite: Gorgeous is being rush released because Look is falling massively on all metrics, and they need/want a solid hit before album's release. 

 

Do you really think Taylor Swift would allow her LEAD single after her most successful era to flop and spent less than 10 weeks in the top 10 just to "give the second single room to grow". It'snot very smart. I mean: Shake It Off / Blank Space were TOP 10 on the Hot 100 AND pop radio during multiple weeks at the same time. Many artists have 2 songs smashing at the same time. 

 

I don't know why  some people here are using the "they are letting LWYMMD seem like the biggest flop and radio poison ever to make room for single #2, which is being rush released in less than two months after the lead single release" narrative. It's just not realistic.

 

 

Audiences don't like LWYMMD and her label knows it. Why keep beating a dead horse? She got the benefit of being #1 just by accepting to headline the biggest radio tour in the US. :laugh:  Kiii  @ you saying it is rush released when the timing is more than okay :rip: two weeks prior the album release, yeah, she's fine. It's completely useless to keep giving it spins when it will be stealing potential AI from Gorgeous. Simple as that, LWYMMD is polarizing and it doesn't fit in radios, well, at least, not something they want her to sound. 

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Jorq said:

Audiences don't like LWYMMD and her label knows it. Why keep beating a dead horse? She got the benefit of being #1 just by accepting to headline the biggest radio tour in the US. :laugh:  Kiii  @ you saying it is rush released when the timing is more than okay :rip: two weeks prior the album release, yeah, she's fine. It's completely useless to keep giving it spins when it will be stealing potential AI from Gorgeous. Simple as that, LWYMMD is polarizing and it doesn't fit in radios, well, at least, not something they want her to sound. 

But I was told by the swifties that LWYMMD was a super-smash that ascended to #1 on pop radio organically, and that the only, and only reason the song is bombing right now is because the label wants to "make room for the second single".

Edited by Blue Honeymoon
Posted
1 minute ago, Blue Honeymoon said:

But I was told by the swifties that LWYMMD was a super-smash that ascended to #1 on pop radio organically, and that the only, and only reason the song is bombing right now is because the label wants to "make room for the second single".

Yeah, it organically shot up to #1, the last three days were the push. :D Call-out scores are bad, that's why. So no, not the only only reason as you're making it out to be. But of course, the main reason is because Gorgeous is coming. I'm pretty sure no one wants to hear three songs by Taylor Swift without an album yet on the radio constantly . She'll burn out fast. As LWYMMD did thanks to the hype. Gorgeous being the single that pushes up the album, leave RFI/LWYMMD in the dust, and deservingly so, what leaves? Taylor winning. As always :1stplace:

Posted

Officially the queen of payola! Congrats:dies:

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Jorq said:

Yeah, it organically shot up to #1, the last three days were the push. :D Call-out scores are bad, that's why. So no, not the only only reason as you're making it out to be. But of course, the main reason is because Gorgeous is coming. I'm pretty sure no one wants to hear three songs by Taylor Swift without an album yet on the radio constantly . She'll burn out fast. As LWYMMD did thanks to the hype. Gorgeous being the single that pushes up the album, leave RFI/LWYMMD in the dust, and deservingly so, what leaves? Taylor winning. As always :1stplace:

This makes absolutely no sense . Okay,  you are free to believe whatever you want.  But, please, don't try to convince people actually using logic and common sense to agree with you. It's just not gonna happen, the numbers don't lie.

 

 

Edited by Blue Honeymoon
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.