Of Fish And Trees

12/2/1994

“There are fifteen-hundred-and-thirty-two guitar pickers in Nashville.”

And only one chart. The R&R chart. Quickly becoming referred to in Nashville as “the x@#%-ing R&R chart.”

R&R is hopelessly out of touch with the industries it pretends to serve…radio and records. And the Country chart is a testament to exactly how far out of touch R&R pretends not to be.

To understand the deep resentment harbored for the R&R chart, one must first understand the R&R chart and the methodology behind it.

And therein lies the rub.

There is an ancient Japanese proverb that says in order to win in combat, you must first confuse your opponent. R&R must define its publishing venture as combat and R&R must believe that its opponents are those in the record and radio industries. If those in the radio and record industries are the opponents and confusion is the barometer, then R&R has accomplished its task.

Well, they aren’t and it ain’t. If you get my drift.

First, we must look at R&R’s methodology. And for the sake of time, let’s not get into how R&R chooses its panel of reporters. How a station gets to become an R&R reporter is one of those great mysteries of life. Why one station makes it and another doesn’t is impossible to comprehend. Why some rules are broken on some occasions, yet not on others, seems to be more contingent upon outside forces than on any standard or mathematical equation.

Go figure.

Then again, don’t bother. You can’t.

In a world of reality, where the entire industry is interested in “how many times did the record get played,” R&R has designed a system that is impossible to explain, comprehend or compute…unless you’re one of the guys in the computer room at R&R. But then, you look at the Country chart and you have to ask yourself, “What are these guys doing? Throwing darts?

To confuse its opponents (that’s people in the record and radio businesses), R&R designs a system that boggles the mind.

Total plays. Total spins. That’s what the industry wants.

But R&R doesn’t care about the needs of the industry, does it? If so, perhaps someone from R&R would have conferred with different people in the record and radio industries before coming up with a system that serves only R&R’s needs.

Oh, let’s give R&R a break. After debuting the new charts (and let’s not forget that R&R went kicking and screaming to a Plays Per Week system only after Network 40 and BDS reflected the industry standards for months), R&R changed them several times. Unfortunately for R&R the changes weren’t for the better…only done to pretend that R&R would occasionally listen.

Forget for the moment that R&R’s chart is based on inaccurate representation. We covered projecting Plays Per Week last week. And any final calculations of inaccurate numbers to begin with result in an inaccurate conclusion. Garbage in…R&R chart numbers out. Let’s focus on weighting.

R&R’s weighting system is so out of whack that it’s hard to discuss with any degree of accuracy. Stations are weighted by market size (in some cases) and audience reach determined by Arbitron, the least reliable audience-measuring system known to man. Is there anyone programming a Country radio station anywhere who believes Arbitron accurately reflects the station’s listeners? As programmers, we have to live with Arbitron’s figures because Arbitron is a sales tool Do we have to live with it in a publication that supposedly cares about radio’s realities also?

There’s nothing in the weighting system of R&R’s charts to reflect how a station impacts Country music sales. If you’re a Country PD and you play a record and it sells, doesn’t that count for something? Not with R&R. Country music sales have nothing to do with R&R’s Country charts.

And what, may I ask, is an “Add Factor?”

Don’t answer. No one knows. Not even the people at R&R. If anyone did, they would be able to offer a rational explanation as to how, a few weeks ago, the Rhett Akins song received seven adds, increased in plays by a total of 282, yet went #44 to #44 on the R&R chart with no bullet. Then, the next week, the song got two adds, lost six stations (probably because of the previous week’s chart), increased in plays by 37, yet moved from #44 to #39 with a bullet! And the same week, The Wiggens’ record, ranked #50 the week before, got 15 adds, no drops and fell off the chart!

What’s wrong with this picture? To quote an expression R&R is quite familiar with…the fish are in the trees.

Of course, it’s easy to criticize R&R when we don’t have a chart yet. We’re not worried. It will still be easy to critique them when our chart debuts. The biggest difference between R&R and Network 40 is that we talk with those in the radio and record industries before we debut a chart. We get the industry’s input and design a chart that meets the industry’s needs…not our own.

The Network 40 Country chart will be a reflection of the Country radio and record industries. The Network 40 Country chart will reflect total plays. The Network 40 country chart will be based on accurate Plays Per Week, not projections. The Network 40 Country chart will weight stations based on each station’s ability to impact Country music sales and the Country music audience. Country music is different. It cannot be judged by total sales or total audience.

How do we know this? Because we asked those of you in the Country music and radio industries. And we will continue to ask for your input. Why? Because, unlike those at R&R, we believe you know more than we do. R&R needs to face reality. The industry wants Plays Per Week, not projections. The industry wants a weighting system based on Country music and audience impact, not Add Factors and Points.

It ain’t brain surgery.

Although I did hear two doctors talking before a delicate cranial operation in which the life of the patient was in danger. One doctor patted the other on the back before they entered the operating room and said, “Relax, it’s not like we’re doing R&R’s charts.”