Rich Bradley: The Blog

Chris Molanphy has confirmed it:

The results, in week one: the original song sold just under 13,000 copies, and each of the four stems sold between about 9,200 and 9,800 copies. (If you’re curious: the vocal stem sold best, then guitars, strings/effects, drums; as in life, bass pulls up the rear.) Total sales for all six pieces combined were just shy of 60,000.

Billboard had to make a policy decision for “Nude.” When the original iTunes sales were tallied by SoundScan, the original song plus each stem were logged and charted separately. But for Hot 100 purposes—in keeping with Billboard’s tendency to treat it as a “songs” chart, not a “tracks” chart—”Nude” is charting in one cumulative position, which makes it look bigger than it is. If the original song, sans stems, were to chart by itself, it would have made No. 96 on the digital sales chart and likely would have missed the Hot 100 entirely.

As a chart fan, there’s one way to look at this that’s a bit cynical, and one that’s more optimistic. You could look at this as chart pollution—since when is a bass loop a legitimate proxy for a hit single? It’s as if Radiohead is propping up a minor hit by finding a loophole through U.S. chart policy, not unlike the 2004 Prince album that was allowed to include free copies handed out at concerts in its Billboard tally, and charted much higher than it should have.

On the other hand, it’s pretty obvious this chart event wasn’t the intention of Radiohead’s multi-mix release strategy. And it’s undeniable that, as usual, they’re coming up with innovative ways to get fans excited about actually paying something for music.

So maybe this isn’t the investigative scoop of the century, but it remains an interesting case study in chart manipulation, intentional or accidental, in the iTunes era. I’m not so willing to concede that “it’s pretty obvious” TBD Records wasn’t shooting for exactly this result from the beginning — it is mighty clever, and it gives the label the ability to go back to Radiohead and say, “Look, we got you back on the US charts, use us again to distribute your next record.”

And really, beyond giving the label some bragging rights, “Nude” being a Top 40 hit is probably meaningless. I don’t imagine anyone racing to buy In Rainbows or tickets to a Radiohead concert because they saw “Nude” hit #37. It’s possible that the single gets some radio exposure out of the deal, but I predict it will still be roundly ignored.

Maybe it’s earned a spot on the next NOW compilation?

Last update about this:  After the Idolator story confirmed my original entry with some hard data, Pitchfork made the decision that this was newsworthy. And of course, once it hits the ‘fork, that’s enough to earn an explanation from the folks at Billboard themselves:

Contrary to online reports, the high Hot 100 debut this week by Radiohead’s “Nude” is not due to a “technicality,” nor a new Billboard charts policy decision.

The track opens this week at No. 37 on the Hot 100 after selling 60,000 digital downloads, according to Nielsen SoundScan. That total represents combined sales for the original song and five different “stems,” which the band invited fans to download and use to create their own remixes. Remixes uploaded to Radioheadremix.com are available for fan voting through May 1.

The No. 37 debut was fueled entirely by these downloads, as the song is only being played on 3 of the 1,289 stations monitored by Nielsen BDS. It received just 6 plays during the April 4-April 10 tracking period.

According to Hot 100 director Silvio Pietroluongo, “Billboard abided by its long-standing remix policy in regards to “Nude.” For the purpose of our airplay, Hot 100 and Hot Digital Songs charts, Billboard merges remixes with the original version as long as the music and/or lyrics of the remix remain true to the original.”

So there you go: the stems are “remixes,” or close enough that the Billboard rules treat them that way. And how nuts is it that a song that got played a total of six times on radio stations around the country broke into the Top 40?

 PLEASE SEE THE UPDATE AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS POST.

 Ah, the Billboard Hot 100. The most dependable list of overplayed, overproduced R&B and pop drivel you could ever ask for. If you ever find yourself thinking, “you know, current pop music isn’t really so bad” (and I don’t know why you would, but stay with me here), you need only click over to billboard.com to have your optimism quickly and mercilessly pummeled.

Today’s headline: “Mariah’s ‘Body’ Remains Atop Hot 100,” gleefully reminding us that she has moved past Elvis and now has the second-most #1 US hits ever (now only behind some old English band with a misspelled name). Reading on, more depressing (but unsurprising) news: “Madonna’s ‘4 Minutes’ holds at No. 3 after selling 217,000 digital downloads”; “Flo Rida’s ‘Low’ featuring T-Pain is No. 10 for a second week”; “The Hot 100’s top debut is Radiohead’s ‘Nude’ at No. 37″.

Wait a fucking minute.

No, that’s not a joke. Radiohead has their first Top 40 hit single since “Creep,” and that’s without getting any mainstream radio airplay or face time on MTV. There they are, just a few spots under the Jonas Brothers and a few above Taylor Swift. Congratulations to the Oxford boys and all, but seriously, what the fuck happened?

Clearly the main culprit is iTunes, which is now the biggest music retailer in the US and pretty much the only truly significant distributor of singles these days. But a bunch of web geeks all buying the “Nude” single on iTunes, months after the whole of In Rainbows was made available for free download by the band itself? Seems pretty unlikely, right?

A quick check of iTMS’ current top songs confirms my suspicion: Madonna, Mariah, Jordin Sparks, Chris Brown, et al. Four Taylor Siwft songs in the top 100, in fact, but no “Nude” — no Radiohead at all.

To figure out this puzzle you have to do a search on Radiohead. Bring up the page displaying all their available music on iTunes, and you’ll see In Rainbows, Nude (Single), Nude (Bass Stem) - Single, Nude (Drum Stem) - Single, Nude (String FX Etc. Stem) - Single, Nude (Guitar Stem) - Single, and Nude (Voice Stem) - Single. Under “Top Songs,” iTunes shows the five most popular downloads, and as you might have guessed it looks like a goddamn nudist colony.

Earlier this month, Radiohead’s label announced a contest in which you could remix “Nude” and post your track to radioheadremix.com (the prize: fleeting internet fame). You could purchase each of the “stems,” or individual instument tracks, from iTunes — for the full single price of a buck apiece. Now, there couldn’t possibly be enough people remixing Nude to account for a Top 40 hit, right? But what if each stem counts as a download for the single? That would explain why “Nude” doesn’t show up in iTMS’ chart — it’s not the quantity of people buying the song, it’s that each person who does is buying it five times. Then tack on however many downloads of the full track itself, and you’ve got yourself a hit!

I can’t prove this, of course, but it looks like Radiohead has cheated their way onto the Hot 100.

Does that make it any less sweet to see them on there, though?

Update: I want to put out a small fire before it starts. Wired has quoted me on this (very flattering for my modest blog), but they seem to have misunderstood my point about Nude showing up under “Top Songs” in iTunes. I am referring specifically to the Top Radiohead Songs on the artist page. The fact that all the stems dominate here shows that there is a level of popularity for each, but not enough to push them into the Top 100 songs on iTunes overall. This is why I draw the conclusion that the stems are being individually counted as single sales. I am NOT implying any kind of conspiracy on the part of Apple, Radiohead, or anyone else. I just think it’s kind of a tricky way to get a song charting, and not necessarily even a dishonest one.

Lisa Murkowski
Junior Senator from Alaska
Party: Republican
Assumed Office: 2002
Age: 50
Pros: Frank Murkowski, US Senator from Alaska, vacates his seat upon being elected Governor of Alaska; he is now in the unique position of having to appoint his successor; and when this happens in Alaska, that means your daughter gets a new job! And then gets reelected to her own full term! Alaska: Where the nepotism is.
Cons: How is it even possible to have a 50% rating from the National Right to Life Committee? “Yeah, I’m kind of against abortion sometimes…I dunno…can you like just abort the legs?”

Patty Murray
Senior Senator from Washington
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 1993
Age: 57
Pros: Strom Thurmond felt her up in an elevator. What an honor!
Cons: Until right now I honestly had no idea we had a Senator named Patty Murray.

Ben Nelson
Junior Senator from Nebraska
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 2001
Age: 66
Pros: It’s not easy being a Democrat in Nebraska; that’s why he usually just votes Republican.
Cons: Dubbed “the Benator” by George W. Bush, but his first name is actually Earl; nickname therefore should, in fact, be “the Senatearl.”

Bill Nelson
Senior Senator from Florida
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 2001
Age: 65
Pros: Dude went into fucking space!
Cons: There really should be a one-conservative-Democrat-named-Nelson-in-the-US-Senate-at-one-time limit.

Barry Obama

Mark Pryor
Junior Senator from Arkansas
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 2003
Age: 45
Pros: Highly touted USC pitcher, 2nd pick overall in the 2001 MLB draft.
Cons: Only managed 42 wins over five seasons with the Cubs due to an ongoing series of injuries, signed to a limited contract by the San Diego Padres this year and placed on the 60-day disabled list for — wait, Pryor? With a “y”? Who the fuck is Mark Pryor?

Jack Reed
Senior Senator from Rhode Island
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 1997
Age: 58
Pros: One of the most liberal votes in the Senate; former Army Ranger and paratrooper.
Cons: Roundness of head well beyond ridiculous, into “definitely Photoshopped” territory.

Harry Reid
Senior Senator from Nevada
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 1987
Age: 68
Pros: Senate Majority Leader; knows the ins and outs of the Senate rules better than just about anybody.
Cons: Maybe only marginally more effective than Tom Daschle was during his tenure; Mormon and pro-life, not exactly the best representative of Democratic ideals.

Pat Roberts
Junior Senator from Kansas
Party: Republican
Assumed Office: 1997
Age: 71
Pros: Chairman of US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, which means you could fully count on him to produce a complete and honest report on the intelligence failures leading up to the Iraq War, right?
Cons: Seriously though, this guy sucks. But hey, that’s Kansas, you know?

Jay Rockefeller
Junior Senator from West Virginia
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 1985
Age: 70
Pros: What’s that? You’re surprised there’s still a Rockefeller kicking around in the Senate? So is everyone else! But he’s good-natured about it. He always goes around talking in a loud, over-the-top 19th century oil tycoon kind of voice, has a money pit that he takes swims in, y’know, he’s mostly just there for show. Like Ted Kennedy.
Cons: Strongly supported going to war in Iraq back in 2002-3; did an about-face on the telco immunity thing; wants the FCC to be able to regulate broadcast AND cable AND satellite TV.

Next time: Know Your US Senators, part 9: Salazar through Stevens. So close!

Matt Taibbi has an excellent article in Rolling Stone discussing why a McCain presidency is such a frightening prospect. Please read.

The 2007 movie year has officially closed for business with a surprisingly decent Academy Awards ceremony. Kyla and I have put together our individual lists of the best films and performances of ‘07, same as we did last year.

Here they are:

It looks like nothing short of death is going to prevent John McCain from becoming the GOP presidential candidate in 2008. McCain is going to be a lot more popular among independents and some Democrats than George W. Bush ever was, but there are still some questions that make his inauguration less than a sure thing: his apparent inability to win the trust of his party’s conservative base, his advanced age, his lack of support in the Bible Belt. Not to mention the fact that he may well be running against a strong, respected, young African-American candidate with a proven record of rallying support well beyond his own party faithful, in what’s considered to be a tough year for Republicans anyway. So how does John McCain most strategically select a running mate? I’ve listed what I wager to be his top 5 choices below, along with the key pros and cons of each.

1. Mike Huckabee (former Governor of Arkansas)
Pros:  Obviously hugely popular among the key Evangelical Southern conservative demographic, a group that hasn’t exactly been gung-ho on John McCain so far
Cons:  Currently really pissing off a lot of the Republican establishment by staying in the race for the presidential nomination; doesn’t help McCain win over economic conservatives, has been derided by Limbaugh’s crowd for being too liberal

2. Charlie Crist (Governor of Florida)
Pros:  Guarantees a McCain win in the essential state of Florida (which, to be fair, neither Clinton or Obama will ever have a chance of winning anyway); counters many of McCain’s perceived shortcomings with his stance on guns and immigration
Cons:  Perhaps not quite socially conservative enough to win over some of the Bible Belters who are against a McCain presidency; is sometimes blamed for refusing to intervene in the Schiavo right-to-die case as Florida’s Attorney General (though frankly this will be considered a pro among a majority of the country’s non-Evangelical voting population)

3. Mark Sanford (Governor of South Carolina)
Pros:  At 47, young enough to counter the potential Obama v. McCain age debate; experienced Southern governor with strong economic libertarian views that should solidify McCain’s support among independents
Cons:  Could be viewed as a little too Ron Paul-ish by some; may not help McCain win Evangelical support

4. Tim Pawlenty (Governor of Minnesota)
Pros:  Like Sanford, has the benefit of relative youth (he’s also 47); successfully balanced state budget without raising taxes, meaning he wins all Romney’s supporters easily; recently has been pushing a strong immigration reform policy, undoubtedly to try and get a spot on this ticket
Cons:  Little geographical benefit to McCain as Dems would still be very favored to win Minnesota in November; tax policies have been blamed in part for the Minneapolis bridge collapse; some controversies surrounding appointments to head state departments

5. Bobby Jindal (Governor of Louisiana)
Pros:  Very young (36) and extremely charismatic; Rhodes scholar; not a white guy, thereby adding minority cred to a ticket likely to face Obama; adored by the Republican base, and called “the next Ronald Reagan” by Limbaugh
Cons:  Huge lack of experience question, as he was only sworn in as Governor this year; Republicans may want to save this guy for 2012 or 2016

Sharkapult (6:43:52 PM): I had Feldman and Carl over for Snow Dogs and Baby Geniuses
modified bear (6:44:27 PM): dear god why
Sharkapult (6:44:54 PM): It was to make fun of them
Sharkapult (6:45:03 PM): But instead, they just wore on us horribly
Sharkapult (6:46:01 PM): Do you remember when we got that baptist guy in the chat room and the argument was going nowhere, and I asked him to prove to me that Jesus wasn’t a time-traveling prankster?
modified bear (6:46:11 PM): hahaha yes
Sharkapult (6:46:51 PM): He couldn’t do it, Rich

MarcoMako (12:39:38 AM): Greek people=hairy but friendly
MarcoMako (12:39:55 AM): If I had a tractor, I’m sure a Greek fellow would run it
MarcoMako (12:40:22 AM): And I would say, Greek fellow, here is your day’s pay. You are free to break bread with myself and my wife tonight at supper
MarcoMako (12:40:37 AM): And he’d decline because all they eat are eyeballs and stuff

God damn it, I finish what I start.

Carl Levin
Senior Senator from Michigan
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 1979
Age: 73
Pros: Respected Chairman of the Armed Services Committee; voted against sending troops into Iraq, and has consistently supported legislation to bring an end to the war; opposes New Hampshire’s claim on having the first presidential primary in the US, and I’m betting we’re more or less all in agreement on that one right now.
Cons: Keeps moving his glasses further and further down his face, presumably as a metaphor for the effects of climate change on the polar ice caps; while a deeply moving and thought-provoking image, it is now very unlikely that Levin can actually see.

Joe Lieberman
Junior Senator from Connecticut
Party: Independent (Connecticut for Lieberman)
Assumed Office: 1989
Age: 65
Pros: Well, I mean, he’s not president or vice president. That’s something, right? Right?
Cons: Warmongering, self-righteous traitor to his party and his constituents; member of Connecticut for Lieberman political party, which very sadly has a 100% success rate so far in getting its candidates elected.

Blanche Lincoln
Senior Senator from Arkansas
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 1999
Age: 47
Pros: Youngest woman ever elected to the Senate (age 38); youngest current Senior Senator; excellent name for a politician.
Cons: Mighty conservative in some key respects, being from Arkansas and all; basically useless to the party on Iraq; the name “Blanche” literally means “white,” so her name as a descriptor is basically saying, “Look! There are still some white people named Lincoln in this country!” …and now that’s just racist, isn’t it?

(In this spot, but a month ago, I’d have been able to do a writeup on everyone’s favorite racial punchline senator Trent Lott. Due to his abrupt resignation, however, we must find a way to carry on without him. His replacement, Roger Wicker, will be evaluated at his appropriate alphabetical position.)

Richard G. Lugar
Senior Senator from Indiana
Party: Republican
Assumed Office: 1977
Age: 75
Pros: Finally started coming around last year about Iraq, bluntly stating that the US military’s role should be diminished.
Cons: I think he and Angelina Jolie like each other. Ewwww.

Mel Martinez
Junior Senator from Florida
Party: Republican
Assumed Office: 2005
Age: 61
Pros: Born in Sagua La Grande, Cuba; came to the US during a ’60s humanitarian effort called Operation Peter Pan, which probably had something to with Castro’s tactical use of flying children during the Bay of Pigs invasion.
Cons: Partly responsible for the infamous Schiavo memo; constantly being investigated for campaign donation and reporting violations since his election in 2004.

John McCain
Senior Senator from Arizona
Party: Republican
Assumed Office: 1987
Age: 71
Pros: As of last night, widely considered to be the GOP frontrunner in the 2008 presidential election; seems to have overcome Mitt Romney’s sharply executed “Who Let The Dogs Out?” political move, which you’d think would have brought in minority voters by the truckload.
Cons: Is it too early to start worrying about this and this?

Claire McCaskill
Junior Senator from Missouri
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 2007
Age: 54
Pros: Defeated a sitting Republican senator, Jim Talent, in the 2006 Democratic sweep; more like Jim Talentless, I’d say! Talent in winning elections that is! Because he didn’t win! jhgljhlkjh
Cons: Looks like she’s angling to be Obama’s running mate; but no one wants a squishy-faced Vice President (we all remember how the last one ended up, don’t we).

Mitch McConnell
Senior Senator from Kentucky
Party: Republican
Assumed Office: 1985
Age: 65
Pros: Great superhero alterego name; that’s about it.
Cons: Blazingly inept Senate Minority Leader; full-fledged Bush apologist and abettor; not actually a superhero, not even Green Arrow or something lame like that.

Bob Menendez
Junior Senator from New Jersey
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 2006
Age: 54
Pros: Second Cuban senator in today’s list, oddly enough; adorably football-shaped head.
Cons: Accused of ethics violations in 2006, but then again by New Jersey Democrat standards the guy’s probably a saint.

Barbara Milkulski
Senior Senator from Maryland
Party: Democratic
Assumed Office: 1987
Age: 71
Pros: Most senior female Senator; more significantly, though not “out” as such, our only lesbian Senator as well.
Cons: Has endorsed Hillary Clinton for President, talking about the whole woman glass ceiling feminist whatnot deal; minor quibble though, Mikulski’s one of the good guys…er, ladies. Not insinuating anything.

Next time: Know Your US Senators, part 8: Murkowski through Rockefeller. And maybe less than four months from now this time!

Whether the Oscars happen or not, nominations will be announced in five days. That means it’s time to end the guessing and place my final bets. Here we go (expected winners in bold):

Picture
Atonement
Into the Wild
Michael Clayton
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood

Director
P.T. Anderson (There Will Be Blood)
Tim Burton (Sweeney Todd)
Ethan & Joel Coen (No Country for Old Men)
Sean Penn (Into the Wild)
Julian Schnabel (The Diving Bell & the Butterfly)

Actor
George Clooney (Michael Clayton)
Daniel Day-Lewis (There Will Be Blood)
Johnny Depp (Sweeney Todd)
Emile Hirsch (Into the Wild)
Viggo Mortensen (Eastern Promises)

Actress
Julie Christie (Away From Her)
Marion Cotillard (La Vie en Rose)
Angelina Jolie (A Mighty Heart)
Laura Linney (The Savages)
Ellen Page (Juno)

Supporting Actor
Casey Affleck (The Assassination of Jesse James…)
Javier Bardem (No Country for Old Men)
Philip Seymour Hoffman (Charlie Wilson’s War)
Hal Holbrook (Into the Wild)
Tom Wilkinson (Michael Clayton)

Supporting Actress
Cate Blanchett (I’m Not There)
Ruby Dee (American Gangster)
Catherine Keener (Into the Wild)
Amy Ryan (Gone Baby Gone)
Tilda Swinton (Michael Clayton)

Original Screenplay
Diablo Cody (Juno)
Tony Gilroy (Michael Clayton)
Tamara Jenkins (The Savages)
Kelly Masterson (Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead)
Nancy Oliver (Lars and the Real Girl)

Adapted Screenplay
P.T. Anderson (There Will Be Blood)
Ethan & Joel Coen (No Country for Old Men)
Christopher Hampton (Atonement)
Ronald Harwood (The Diving Bell & the Butterfly)
Sean Penn (Into the Wild)

I probably have no business making guesses in the other various categories, but I’m going to anyway (except for the short film ones, because I don’t even know what the candidates would be): (Continued)