I was just thinking about this the reason that Urban artist do the best in Airplay is because they can crossover to Rhythmic and Pop alot eaiser than a Pop artist can crossover to Urban & Rhythmic.

Gwen Stefani only made the Top 10 because of Rhythmic radio and Massive Pop

Artist like Ciara & Llyod haven't even crack the Top 20 on Pop and manage to Peak in Top 5. Well anyway I just thought it was unfair when Pop-Only songs like Candyman & With Love fail in airplay because of this.

What do you guys think

Well it comptely agree with you

and its very complex, and you never know they will end up

Yeah but for Justin Timberlake it's easy because he get's pop and urban play

Yeah, same with Beyonce

but Justin can't always do that but most of the time he does

I wonder if the lil john remxi of candyman would make urban. I'd be shocked

if she wanted urban Back In The Day would have been better

Fergie is surprising me #56 on Urban w/ 190+ bullet and 3 Million in audience

Yeah.It's kinda hard for most artist to crossover from Pop to Urban but JT,Fergie and Mariah Carey made it.

Yeah, I noticed that.
But it all depends on the genre of the singers, people like JT, Fergie and Beyonce are not totally "pure pop", that makes them easy to do crossover to both Pop and Urban.
While, pure pop artists find hard time to do crossover, because their songs arent too much appealing and "fit in" to Urban stations.

i agree with 1-n-only...i´m sceptic to radio still having big impact on the hot 100 chart, maybe they should split up the charts in airplay and buyed singles!...candyman is a download hit, but a close to flop on radio, i don´t she has been exposed to this dilemma (if she even cares duh!) since dirrty, which of course was an extreme case...

Hot 100 Formula (not exact)

66% = Downloads

33% = Airpaly

and way back when "Dirrty" was out the hot 100 was 100% airplay

Actually it was a lot percent airplay and the rest was single sales

yeah, but it still wasn't fair

nobody buy singles anymore

Radio isn't just unfair to pop-only artists. Radio isn't fair to artists that aren't influenced by urban styles or aren't influenced by Nickelback clones. In America, if you're actually trying to do something different, all you'll get is a pat on the head and a "well done", not success. It's pathetic.

^yeah I've noticed that but you will get credit @ the grammys

it might seem unfair but it all goes by audience, and if people weren't listening to these urban stations then they wouldn't help artists as much as they do. America just has a higher following for Urban radio, so there are more stations than there used to be, therefore more audience reach.

Rhythmic radio has more stations than Urban

Pop - 140
Rhythmic- 95
Urabn - 78

not exact

Top song on pop right now has 64.791 million for its audience reach.
Rhythmic is 62.010 million. Urban is 47.124 million.

My point that you missed is, since so many people are actually LISTENING to these urban and rhythmic stations (as you can see with audience reach, I hope) it is completely fair. If people weren't listening to the stations, their audience reach would not be as high as it is. The Hot 100 reflects what is most listened to, and when urban and rhythmic stations have such large audiences, it is only because people are listening.

In the 90's, urban and rhythmic stations were not as big, so they didn't have as much of an effect on the charts (much like the effect rock stations have right now - top song on any rock format only has a little over 10 million audience). If a song doesn't have crossover appeal, it simply reflects the fact that a lot of people in America don't like that kind of music. This is not JUST a pop music nation anymore, and pop songs can still become successful if they're downloaded a lot, but they aren't supported by rhythmic and urban radio stations because their listeners don't want to hear it.

that´s really interesting.