<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Invisible Glove: Jackson Presides Over Parallel-Universe Charts</title>
	<atom:link href="http://idolator.com/5252452/the-invisible-glove-jackson-presides-over-parallel-universe-charts/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://idolator.com/5252452/the-invisible-glove-jackson-presides-over-parallel-universe-charts</link>
	<description>Music News, Reviews, and Gossip on Idolator.com</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 12:55:40 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: bckslng</title>
		<link>http://idolator.com/5252452/the-invisible-glove-jackson-presides-over-parallel-universe-charts/comment-page-1#comment-955072</link>
		<dc:creator>bckslng</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:56:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://idolator.com/?p=5252452#comment-955072</guid>
		<description>I was also liking the UK take on things and it seems like it&#039;s the first time &#039;Smile&#039; has ever charted (74).

http://www.theofficialcharts.com/top40_singles.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smile_(Charlie_Chaplin_song)#Michael_Jackson_version</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was also liking the UK take on things and it seems like it&#8217;s the first time &#8216;Smile&#8217; has ever charted (74).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.theofficialcharts.com/top40_singles.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.theofficialcharts.com/top40_singles.php</a></p>
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smile_(Charlie_Chaplin_song)#Michael_Jackson_version" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smile_(Charlie_Chaplin_song)#Michael_Jackson_version</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ILL WITH THE COMPOSITION</title>
		<link>http://idolator.com/5252452/the-invisible-glove-jackson-presides-over-parallel-universe-charts/comment-page-1#comment-954982</link>
		<dc:creator>ILL WITH THE COMPOSITION</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 12:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://idolator.com/?p=5252452#comment-954982</guid>
		<description>DAMN. MJ really WILL live forever, won&#039;t he?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DAMN. MJ really WILL live forever, won&#8217;t he?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jaxxalude</title>
		<link>http://idolator.com/5252452/the-invisible-glove-jackson-presides-over-parallel-universe-charts/comment-page-1#comment-954922</link>
		<dc:creator>jaxxalude</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 20:39:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://idolator.com/?p=5252452#comment-954922</guid>
		<description>@&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-954892&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Chris Molanphy&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;i&gt;The fact is, Billboard allows a handful of recent songs like “That’s Not My Name” to reappear on the Hot 100 at least once or twice a year; these cases are not all that rare. (A label very belatedly gets radio to start playing a months-old song, and they ask the magazine for an exception because it’s finally catching on).&lt;/i&gt;
What happened with &quot;That&#039;s Not My Name&quot; is, in a way, a variation over these rules. Not only the song must be actively promoted to radio, but it also has to have enough chart points to be positioned in the 50-and-above portion of the chart. This was what effectively happened.
Nevertheless, there was an exception to this rule even rarer than The Return Of The Golden Oldies in late 1999. At the time, Amber&#039;s &quot;Sexual (Li Da Di)&quot; had had a 20-week run hovering below the Top 50 and, of course, was prepared to be removed next week. But given that the song had been rising for two or three weeks straight and looked set to maintain such pace, the &lt;i&gt;Billboard&lt;/i&gt; chart managers allowed it to keep charting below the #50 mark - most likely at the label&#039;s request, of course. And the song did eventually peak in the Top 50 later: a disappointing #42.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@<a href="#comment-954892" rel="nofollow">Chris Molanphy</a>: <i>The fact is, Billboard allows a handful of recent songs like “That’s Not My Name” to reappear on the Hot 100 at least once or twice a year; these cases are not all that rare. (A label very belatedly gets radio to start playing a months-old song, and they ask the magazine for an exception because it’s finally catching on).</i><br />
What happened with &#8220;That&#8217;s Not My Name&#8221; is, in a way, a variation over these rules. Not only the song must be actively promoted to radio, but it also has to have enough chart points to be positioned in the 50-and-above portion of the chart. This was what effectively happened.<br />
Nevertheless, there was an exception to this rule even rarer than The Return Of The Golden Oldies in late 1999. At the time, Amber&#8217;s &#8220;Sexual (Li Da Di)&#8221; had had a 20-week run hovering below the Top 50 and, of course, was prepared to be removed next week. But given that the song had been rising for two or three weeks straight and looked set to maintain such pace, the <i>Billboard</i> chart managers allowed it to keep charting below the #50 mark &#8211; most likely at the label&#8217;s request, of course. And the song did eventually peak in the Top 50 later: a disappointing #42.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DocStrange</title>
		<link>http://idolator.com/5252452/the-invisible-glove-jackson-presides-over-parallel-universe-charts/comment-page-1#comment-954912</link>
		<dc:creator>DocStrange</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:59:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://idolator.com/?p=5252452#comment-954912</guid>
		<description>Also, i&#039;m currently watching 3 active songs that have the possibility of breaking a record on the Modern Rock/Alternative chart: Most weeks on the chart, which was set by &quot;The Kill (Bury Me)&quot; by 30 Seconds To Mars in 2005-2006 and was for 52 weeks. 

These are three songs that might prospectively break that record:
Anberlin - Feel Good Drag (40 Weeks)
Kings of Leon - Sex on Fire (46 Weeks)
Shinedown - Second Chance (42 Weeks)

Although that Shinedown track is falling fast and probably won&#039;t make it another month, &quot;Sex on Fire&quot; is actually getting recurrent-equivelant airplay while still being on the chart! (ditto with MGMT&#039;s &quot;Kids&quot;, which got a kick in airplay after the video was finally released and has remained on the chart for only 34 weeks, but the single went Gold just this week)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, i&#8217;m currently watching 3 active songs that have the possibility of breaking a record on the Modern Rock/Alternative chart: Most weeks on the chart, which was set by &#8220;The Kill (Bury Me)&#8221; by 30 Seconds To Mars in 2005-2006 and was for 52 weeks. </p>
<p>These are three songs that might prospectively break that record:<br />
Anberlin &#8211; Feel Good Drag (40 Weeks)<br />
Kings of Leon &#8211; Sex on Fire (46 Weeks)<br />
Shinedown &#8211; Second Chance (42 Weeks)</p>
<p>Although that Shinedown track is falling fast and probably won&#8217;t make it another month, &#8220;Sex on Fire&#8221; is actually getting recurrent-equivelant airplay while still being on the chart! (ditto with MGMT&#8217;s &#8220;Kids&#8221;, which got a kick in airplay after the video was finally released and has remained on the chart for only 34 weeks, but the single went Gold just this week)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DocStrange</title>
		<link>http://idolator.com/5252452/the-invisible-glove-jackson-presides-over-parallel-universe-charts/comment-page-1#comment-954902</link>
		<dc:creator>DocStrange</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:49:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://idolator.com/?p=5252452#comment-954902</guid>
		<description>As i&#039;ve said before, The UK Singles Chart does not have the same rules as the Billboard Hot 100 and look at how dominant Michael Jackson is on that chart: http://uk.launch.yahoo.com/c/uk/single_charts.html

Also, AllAccess and Mediabase are reporting that &quot;1901&quot; by Phoenix, my favorite song of the year, will debut somewhere between #31 and #37 next week on the Billboard Modern Rock/Alternative chart. That settles it: Alternative has finally returned to its own chart (Silversun Pickups, Cage the Elephant, Manchester Orchestra, Metric and Yeah Yeah Yeahs all getting sizable hits? Yeah, alternative - or at least the indie rock subgenre - is making swell business now) and kicked out the WTF Hard Rock stuff like Guns &#039;n&#039; Roses.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As i&#8217;ve said before, The UK Singles Chart does not have the same rules as the Billboard Hot 100 and look at how dominant Michael Jackson is on that chart: <a href="http://uk.launch.yahoo.com/c/uk/single_charts.html" rel="nofollow">http://uk.launch.yahoo.com/c/uk/single_charts.html</a></p>
<p>Also, AllAccess and Mediabase are reporting that &#8220;1901&#8243; by Phoenix, my favorite song of the year, will debut somewhere between #31 and #37 next week on the Billboard Modern Rock/Alternative chart. That settles it: Alternative has finally returned to its own chart (Silversun Pickups, Cage the Elephant, Manchester Orchestra, Metric and Yeah Yeah Yeahs all getting sizable hits? Yeah, alternative &#8211; or at least the indie rock subgenre &#8211; is making swell business now) and kicked out the WTF Hard Rock stuff like Guns &#8216;n&#8217; Roses.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Molanphy</title>
		<link>http://idolator.com/5252452/the-invisible-glove-jackson-presides-over-parallel-universe-charts/comment-page-1#comment-954892</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Molanphy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 12:40:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://idolator.com/?p=5252452#comment-954892</guid>
		<description>@&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-954862&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;jaxxalude&lt;/a&gt;: &lt;i&gt;While all Chris said was true, there is other factor in the rules: the song in question has to be actively promoted to radio in order to either re-enter or be kept in the chart.&lt;/i&gt;

Thanks, and exactly right -- I should have stated this a bit more clearly. This is, in fact, the line &lt;i&gt;Billboard&lt;/i&gt; uses when a song is allowed to reappear; the magic words are &lt;b&gt;&quot;actively promoted to radio.&quot;&lt;/b&gt;

This brings up a point I didn&#039;t have room for in the Michael Jackson discussion above -- the rare instances in the last couple of decades where &lt;i&gt;Billboard&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;has&lt;/b&gt; allowed an oldie to chart again (an actual oldie, not just a recent-but-20-week-old song, like the Ting Tings&#039;).

I call it &quot;The &#039;Bohemian Rhapsody&#039; Rule.&quot; In 1992, &lt;i&gt;Billboard&lt;/i&gt; allowed that Queen chestnut, which had already had a successful Top 10 run in 1976 on Elektra, to chart again because new label Hollywood was actively promoting it to radio in the wake of Freddie Mercury&#039;s death and &lt;i&gt;Wayne&#039;s World&lt;/i&gt;. The exception was invoked again in 1994 when Curb was actively promoting a dance remix of the Four Seasons&#039; &quot;December 1963 (Oh, What a Night)&quot; to radio (normally a mere remix of an essentially unchanged song wouldn&#039;t be allowed to re-chart).

These oldie-oldie instances are distinct from a case like the Ting Tings, even though the rationale is the same. The fact is, &lt;i&gt;Billboard&lt;/i&gt; allows a handful of recent songs like &quot;That&#039;s Not My Name&quot; to reappear on the Hot 100 at least once or twice a year; these cases are not all that rare. (A label very belatedly gets radio to start playing a months-old song, and they ask the magazine for an exception because it&#039;s finally catching on.) But the &quot;Bohemian Rhapsody&quot; instances are very rare, because &lt;i&gt;Billboard&lt;/i&gt; needs to be convinced the oldie is being promoted and played like a current pop hit. This is why no amount of iTunes sales could &lt;a href=&quot;http://idolator.com/368015/bonkers-for-buckley-americas-dead-idol&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;get Jeff Buckley&#039;s &quot;Hallelujah&quot; onto the Hot 100 in 2008&lt;/a&gt;, and why none of these Michael Jackson songs, as you point out, are going to be allowed to chart now.

Thanks for the comments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@<a href="#comment-954862" rel="nofollow">jaxxalude</a>: <i>While all Chris said was true, there is other factor in the rules: the song in question has to be actively promoted to radio in order to either re-enter or be kept in the chart.</i></p>
<p>Thanks, and exactly right &#8212; I should have stated this a bit more clearly. This is, in fact, the line <i>Billboard</i> uses when a song is allowed to reappear; the magic words are <b>&#8220;actively promoted to radio.&#8221;</b></p>
<p>This brings up a point I didn&#8217;t have room for in the Michael Jackson discussion above &#8212; the rare instances in the last couple of decades where <i>Billboard</i> <b>has</b> allowed an oldie to chart again (an actual oldie, not just a recent-but-20-week-old song, like the Ting Tings&#8217;).</p>
<p>I call it &#8220;The &#8216;Bohemian Rhapsody&#8217; Rule.&#8221; In 1992, <i>Billboard</i> allowed that Queen chestnut, which had already had a successful Top 10 run in 1976 on Elektra, to chart again because new label Hollywood was actively promoting it to radio in the wake of Freddie Mercury&#8217;s death and <i>Wayne&#8217;s World</i>. The exception was invoked again in 1994 when Curb was actively promoting a dance remix of the Four Seasons&#8217; &#8220;December 1963 (Oh, What a Night)&#8221; to radio (normally a mere remix of an essentially unchanged song wouldn&#8217;t be allowed to re-chart).</p>
<p>These oldie-oldie instances are distinct from a case like the Ting Tings, even though the rationale is the same. The fact is, <i>Billboard</i> allows a handful of recent songs like &#8220;That&#8217;s Not My Name&#8221; to reappear on the Hot 100 at least once or twice a year; these cases are not all that rare. (A label very belatedly gets radio to start playing a months-old song, and they ask the magazine for an exception because it&#8217;s finally catching on.) But the &#8220;Bohemian Rhapsody&#8221; instances are very rare, because <i>Billboard</i> needs to be convinced the oldie is being promoted and played like a current pop hit. This is why no amount of iTunes sales could <a href="http://idolator.com/368015/bonkers-for-buckley-americas-dead-idol" rel="nofollow">get Jeff Buckley&#8217;s &#8220;Hallelujah&#8221; onto the Hot 100 in 2008</a>, and why none of these Michael Jackson songs, as you point out, are going to be allowed to chart now.</p>
<p>Thanks for the comments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jaxxalude</title>
		<link>http://idolator.com/5252452/the-invisible-glove-jackson-presides-over-parallel-universe-charts/comment-page-1#comment-954862</link>
		<dc:creator>jaxxalude</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:15:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://idolator.com/?p=5252452#comment-954862</guid>
		<description>Another thing I&#039;d like to say concerns the Ting Tings. While all Chris said was true, there is other factor in the rules: the song in question has to be actively promoted to radio in order to either re-enter or be kept in the chart.
This is why Jackson&#039;s songs aren&#039;t re-charting. Even though they have more than enough sales, airplay and streaming points to eventually be bigger hits this week than a lot of the new stuff, the fact is that Sony didn&#039;t push any of those songs to be re-promoted as &quot;current&quot; at radio; hence their non-appearance in the main summit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another thing I&#8217;d like to say concerns the Ting Tings. While all Chris said was true, there is other factor in the rules: the song in question has to be actively promoted to radio in order to either re-enter or be kept in the chart.<br />
This is why Jackson&#8217;s songs aren&#8217;t re-charting. Even though they have more than enough sales, airplay and streaming points to eventually be bigger hits this week than a lot of the new stuff, the fact is that Sony didn&#8217;t push any of those songs to be re-promoted as &#8220;current&#8221; at radio; hence their non-appearance in the main summit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jaxxalude</title>
		<link>http://idolator.com/5252452/the-invisible-glove-jackson-presides-over-parallel-universe-charts/comment-page-1#comment-954852</link>
		<dc:creator>jaxxalude</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:08:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://idolator.com/?p=5252452#comment-954852</guid>
		<description>Well, a lot of things to say here.

First of all, some curious facts about Anberlin:

a) They&#039;re a Christian rock band (OK, maybe not that important, but nevertheless amusing to point out)
b) The most likely biggest Alternative hit of 2009 still hasn&#039;t charted on the Hot 100 yet. It did trouble the Bubbling Under chart for some weeks, but that was it.
c) I have my theory over it: &quot;Feel Good Drag&quot; didn&#039;t pull the very common trick these days of rising simultaneously on the Alternative and Mainstream Rock charts.
d) The strangest here is that anyone who listens to the song agrees that it might be a better fit for Mainstream Rock stations than Alternative ones - though given rock radio&#039;s state of affairs these days, that is basically a moot point.

&lt;b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7vv8b_anberlin-feel-good-drag_music&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Anberlin  Feel Good Drag&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt;&lt;i&gt;Enviado por &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dailymotion.com/SpirotPGM&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;SpirotPGM&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dailymotion.com/pt/channel/music/featured/1&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Buscar outros videos de Musica. &lt;/a&gt;&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, a lot of things to say here.</p>
<p>First of all, some curious facts about Anberlin:</p>
<p>a) They&#8217;re a Christian rock band (OK, maybe not that important, but nevertheless amusing to point out)<br />
b) The most likely biggest Alternative hit of 2009 still hasn&#8217;t charted on the Hot 100 yet. It did trouble the Bubbling Under chart for some weeks, but that was it.<br />
c) I have my theory over it: &#8220;Feel Good Drag&#8221; didn&#8217;t pull the very common trick these days of rising simultaneously on the Alternative and Mainstream Rock charts.<br />
d) The strangest here is that anyone who listens to the song agrees that it might be a better fit for Mainstream Rock stations than Alternative ones &#8211; though given rock radio&#8217;s state of affairs these days, that is basically a moot point.</p>
<p><b><a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7vv8b_anberlin-feel-good-drag_music" rel="nofollow">Anberlin  Feel Good Drag</a></b><i>Enviado por <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/SpirotPGM" rel="nofollow">SpirotPGM</a> &#8211; <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/pt/channel/music/featured/1" rel="nofollow">Buscar outros videos de Musica. </a></i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
