{"id":2204717,"date":"2025-12-18T22:24:18","date_gmt":"2025-12-18T22:24:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/?p=2204717"},"modified":"2025-12-18T22:24:18","modified_gmt":"2025-12-18T22:24:18","slug":"youtube-protests-billboards-new-formula-by-pulling-data-from-music-charts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/youtube-protests-billboards-new-formula-by-pulling-data-from-music-charts\/","title":{"rendered":"YouTube protests Billboard’s new formula by pulling data from music charts"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\n

YouTube\u00a0<\/strong>and\u00a0Billboard\u00a0<\/strong>can\u2019t agree on the best way to count digital viewership for the latter company\u2019s pop music rankings, so YouTube is taking its proverbial ball and going home. The video hub has chosen to withdraw its data from the Billboard charts as a protest against recent adjustments to the music publication\u2019s weighting formula.<\/p>\n

Viewership data from YouTube was first factored into the Billboard charts in 2013. The move seemed uncontroversial on the surface; with its embrace of YouTube, Billboard accounted for the shifting media diet of the average music consumer.<\/p>\n

Immediately, however, the YouTube data warped the charts. Baauer\u2019s \u2018Harlem Shake,\u2019 an unassuming EDM tune that happened to be the soundtrack for a tidal wave of memes, shot to the top of the Hot 100<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Subscribe to get the latest creator news<\/h3>\n

Subscribe<\/span><\/div>\n

The chart-topping performance of the \u2018Harlem Shake\u2019 exemplified the inherent flaws of Billboard\u2019s formula. The song didn\u2019t owe its popularity to intrinsic qualities, but rather to its role in a viral fad. In theory, any other EDM song with a big drop could have been the soundtrack for that meme. The \u2018Harlem Shake\u2019 just happened to occupy that role.<\/p>\n

The importance of the Billboard charts depends on their ability to accurately reflect cultural tastes, and with a 2018 update, the publication tried to move closer to reality. It increased the weight<\/a> of listens that came from subscription-based streaming services (such as Apple Music or Spotify), thus limiting the importance of ad-supported streams on platforms like YouTube.<\/p>\n

A recent blog post<\/a> published by Billboard forecasted future changes to the formula. Beginning in 2026, on-demand streams of both the ad-supported and subscription-based varieties will be weighted more favorably in comparison to album sales.<\/p>\n

That change will actually tighten the ratio between ad-supported streams and subscription-based streams, but the update doesn\u2019t go far enough for YouTube\u2019s liking. The official stance of YouTube Head of Music\u00a0Lyor Cohen<\/strong> is that \u201cevery play should count equally,\u201d and since Billboard won\u2019t commit to that equilibrium, YouTube is pulling its data from the charts.<\/p>\n

\u201cBillboard uses an outdated formula that weights subscription-supported streams higher than ad-supported,\u201d Cohen wrote<\/a> in a blog post. \u201cThis doesn\u2019t reflect how fans engage with music today and ignores the massive engagement from fans who don\u2019t have a subscription.\u201d<\/p>\n

Rather than working with Billboard, YouTube is promoting its own music charts<\/a>, which it updates on a weekly basis. Cohen wrote that the in-house charts identify \u201cwhat music is making waves on YouTube,\u201d but given how much the platform seems to be exaggerating its viewership numbers<\/a> these days, it\u2019s fair to question whether the accounting of those charts is any more fair than Billboard\u2019s version.<\/p>\n

Ultimately, in the fragmented pop culture reality we live in, it\u2019s hard to say whether any particular track can dominate the zeitgeist<\/a>. Both Billboard and YouTube use flawed methodologies to inform their estimates, and working separately from one another won\u2019t change that truth.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n