The iTunes Conspiracy
-
Artist:
-
Album:
-
Track:
OK. I am thoroughly convinced that iTunes (or the record companies) skew sales #'s of a band's most popular song(s) to reflect the single of the newest album. If you're scratching your head, let me explain. I am not a huge supporter of iTunes. Let me rephrase that - I'm not fanatical about the iTunes Store. The reviews of albums are frequently slanted in favor of the band. I mean, if you're 16 years old, of course you're going to post a ***** review about how amazing of a singer Jordan Sparks is.
I do go to the store on new release day (ie today) to see what is out there and to listen to some cuts if I can spare the 30 seconds. What I do not understand is how (and in some cases why), a song/single from a band who just released something can be the most "popular" track on a band's extenstive catalog of songs. What constitutes as popular? Billboard magazine? # of downloads? Radio spins? I'm not sure but what I am sure of is that Coldplay's "Viva la Vida" song is the # 1 Coldplay song. Not "Clocks." Not "Violet Hill." Not "Speed of Sound." Some of those songs have had 3-5 years to build momentum as # 1 but "Viva la Vida" (the song) has had a mere 6 weeks to outsell or become the most popular song in Coldplay's catalog... alledgedly... (according to SpyTunes)? Hmmm....
Another example comes from yet another band with a new release out today - The Hold Steady - Their fanbase is probably not as large as Coldplay so I find it really difficult for a band like this to release a track/single like "Sequestered in Memphis" and allow for it to build momentum and popularity in just hours, comparable to the excellent Boys and Girls in America tracks "Chips Ahoy" "Stuck Between Stations" that took many, many months to win the top spot battle. "Memphis" is already the # 1 track in the HS catalog (according to Mr. Jobs).
So, I'll back off a bit and show you an example of where "You've Got Another Thing Comin'" is still # 1 - Judas Priest, a band that has been around longer than I remember listening to music has a new album titled Nostradamus, which interestingly enough contains the title track and "single" if you will. The song is not the most popular JP song on iTunes (yet), but even though Nostrodamus has been out for a measly 18 hours, it still has more "popularity" (notice the "air" "quotes" "everytime") than "Breaking the Law" and "Living After Midnight."
I could go on and on how this week's latest Offspring record produced the most "popular" track "Hammerhead" (single released on May 6) from the new album dropping toda. That damn song has already outshined "Come Out and Play", "Pretty Fly" and "Self-Esteem" but this band really isn't worth mentioning more than just that.
I just find it interesting that bands who put out records and who have had their albums and songs available on iTunes for 5 years and counting can find a way to get their fans to bump a new track to the # 1 position in their catolog without even snapping their fingers. Perhaps it's a sign of genius on the marketing side. Maybe iTunes is getting cash from the record companies to show that thier band's song is indeed more popular than the most played song of the decade. More than likely it's a tell-tale sign of how current singles still dictate the world's largest record store - iTunes - the "Me" store - a place where last year's singles can be forgotten about within a few seasons, months or dare I say, seconds...?
Locating MOG account...
Comments (6)
I understand where you're coming from. I look at new releases every week for my radio show, and I see the overzealous postings of ratings, and it completely slants every release. If you went by the postings, you would think that every album was as good as anything that the Beatles ever put out.
That's the reality of the world of blogs where anyone can be a journalist and no one is held responsible for what they say. Not that my reviews are anything to write home about either - they are admittedly superficial at best, but I enjoy doing them mainly because it keeps me looking out for new music that's worth giving a second listen to.
Anyway, I liked your post, and I feel your pain. I'm about to check it out for myself when I check out all the new releases this week.
I understand where you're coming from. I look at new releases every week for my radio show, and I see the overzealous postings of ratings, and it completely slants every release. If you went by the postings, you would think that every album was as good as anything that the Beatles ever put out.
That's the reality of the world of blogs where anyone can be a journalist and no one is held responsible for what they say. Not that my reviews are anything to write home about either - they are admittedly superficial at best, but I enjoy doing them mainly because it keeps me looking out for new music that's worth giving a second listen to.
Anyway, I liked your post, and I feel your pain. I'm about to check it out for myself when I check out all the new releases this week.
I wonder if part of that is sales per week. It would make sense in my eyes, the thing that always confused me though was the "What listeners also bought" section. Now I have found some great music using that, but other times I wonder just who is buying music on itunes. Anywho, that is my two cents............
I'm not surprised at all, iTunes is only about screwing artists and fans for money.
I like Brian's comment about reliability. It seems as if everyone now a days has stamped their review, blog comments as the ultimate authority. Perhaps there are too many forums from which to voice?
In regards to the sales per week - it's a thought. It doesn't make much sense but it's a plausible way to confuse the consumer.
What about the consumer who has different buying habits than those that typically buy a certain band? I bought a more John Mayer/Dave Matthews/Jack Johnson influence artisit (also a friend of mind) - Damon Vonn on iTunes. When I looked at the Fans Also Bought section, it did not mention anything I had bought in the past. The thing is, he probably hasn't had too many sales to slant that stat to not represent a purchase or two of mine.
I don't use iTunes (with the exception of one time I had a big gift certificate), so I have no idea, but the first thing that came to my mind was what Kevin (Rawkkiddoh) said. If this is true, and they don't specify it somewhere, then it's sly.