Mariah Carey Surpasses Elvis — But The Context is Missing

Show your support.
Buzz this article up.

• Share
• Print View
• Comments

The AP runs a story announcing to the world that Mariah Carey has surpassed Elvis for the most sold No. 1 singles on the Billboard Chart, and is now second only to the Beatles in single sales. Big. And statistically correct. But statistics, like everything, should be viewed in context.

Ms. Carey is appropriately humbled. The AP story says Ms. Carey is gratified not only because of her personal success, but what it meant for women and minorities. "That's a completely different era and time. I'm just feeling really happy and grateful," she said.

She certainly is justified feeling grateful but it's less about women and minorities and more about technology and distribution. It was a completely different era. Elvis and the Beatles sold their music in the mostly vinyl 45 & LP era where customers schlepped through city streets and malls to stores called Tower, Rose and Goody. Tower Records doesn't have stores anymore. Rose is gone and Sam Goody has no New York or Chicago location and its only Southern California outlet is in San Diego, California's second largest city.

Ms. Carey's time is the steroidal, digital download era where music is just a 99 cent click away, in-between meetings at the office. Digital downloads have created a tsunamical change in the music business. It's a given that many more record sales will be eclipsed in the download era. Ms. Carey can be proud she is among the first to demonstrate the power of digital sales. But to imply she's in the Elvis and Beatles sales league is like comparing Barry Bonds to Hank Aaron. Billboard might want to accompany Ms. Carey's success with an asterisk.

The AP bears responsibility here. One guess is the Carey PR people were the propellant behind this news story and the AP's Music Writer, Nekesa Mumbi Moody, ran with it without doing what lawyers call due diligence. Reporters are supposed to have well-honed critical thinking skills -- assume nothing, question everything. Where Ms. Mumbi erred is leaving out that all important ingredient in a news story called context. Context is the 'when' part of journalisms road map to Who? What? Why? Where? and WHEN?

Comments

[pizzmoe]

When I got married in Vegas, I had a difficult time choosing between an Elvis ceremony or a Mariah ceremony.

[TJinSoCal]

Mariah = Satan's Siren

How this ear-piercing, singing ego can be compared to any great musician or singer is beyond me...

[Vivaviagra]

Contrary to the premise of this post, the record Mariah Carey broke this week was for the most #1 singles -- not total number of singles sold.

Since there is only one #1 single each week on the Billboard Hot 100, and only 52 weeks each year, if you compare which performers have had the most #1 hits, it doesn't matter whether singles are sold on vinyl, cassette, CD, digital download, or whatever may come up in the future. It still represents impressive career longevity to achieve 18 #1's.

[OttoMann]

As for Mariah versus The Beatles (should she get two more #1s), it's not even remotely close. The 60's was THE era of the 45 -- a ton of competition, a ton of great songs all over the place. And of course, the biggest difference: The Beatles wrote their songs; they didn't just have a producer hand them hits, or have a staff of pros writing them (a la Mariah, Elvis, or, for that matter, The Monkees).

More important, though -- when I read this story, my initial thought was, I can't think of any Mariah Carey songs. They haven't penetrated the general music atmosphere the way Elvis and The Beatles did. In other words, even if you didn't care for Elvis or The Beatles, you still know of many of their hits.

And, the notion of a song being #1 is way over-rated. The first Beatles single not to hit #1 was not only one of their all-time best (Penny Lane / I Am The Walrus) it got stuck at #2 because of.........Englebert Humperdink (or however it's spelled -- I can't bear to Google that one ).

[jay150]

You might be unaware of this, but the fact is that Mariah is a prolific songwriter. In fact, when Touch my Body reached number one , she surpassed Barry Gibbs as the third most succesful songwriter in Billboard Hot 100 history; she is only second to two Beatles: Paul and John. It seems to me that most people critizing her achievments, which are plenty, do so based solely on a personal dislike for her and not really facts. You may dislike her work, but you can't deny the fact that she has had a huge impact on popular music, that she is an extremely versatile and prolific songwriter and with great numbers to prove it. I don't need to like an artist to recognize their accomplishments(Elvis). As for Mr. Alderman's assertion that it is a journalist's job to do their homework and put things in context, I find it ironic that he fails to do just that. He bases his entire claim that Mariah's achievment doesn't have the same merit on the sole argument that digital downloads have benefit her. First, it is obvious he ignores how the Billboard Hot 100 charts are calculated: they're a combination of Airplay, physical and digital sales. Mariah ranks among the most airplayed artists in history, not considering that is a huge mistake. Second: Mr. Alderman also forgets to metion that 15 of Mariah's 18 number ones topped the charts between 1990 and 2000, way before the beginning of the legal digital download era.

[Vivaviagra]

Actually, "Penny Lane" did hit #1 for the Beatles (at least in the USA). Earlier Beatles singles that missed #1 included "Yellow Submarine" (#2), "Nowhere Man" (#3), "Matchbox" (#17), "I'll Cry Instead" (#25), and "And I Love Her" (#12). And that's just for their Capitol Records releases; when Capitol in the USA had turned down a few early Beatles singles, other record companies picked them up, sometimes hitting #1 but more often not. (Admittedly, some of those Beatles singles may have been blocked from the top slot by other Beatles singles.)

[DCDan]

Nicely stated, OttoMann.

However, you meant of course Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields. (I Am The Walrus was the B-side to Hello Goodbye.)

[OttoMann]

Thank you for those corrections, both of you! I was thinking of the UK charts anyway.

[pizzmoe]

Seeing Mariah in the same sentence as Elvis or The Beatles makes me a little ill.

[Sumocat]

"She certainly is justified feeling grateful but it's less about women and minorities and more about technology and distribution." -- True enough, but you seem to think current tech and distribution is somehow an advantage.

Elvis emerged in an era when national distribution was nowhere near what it is today. Compared to Mariah, Elvis faced little national competition and was able to dominate the store shelves and airwaves through sheer volume. His handlers kept him on a frenetic pace to churn out records and movies and maintain his momentum. He squeezed out the competition to stay on top. Mariah can't do that. There is no shelf space to take up in the digital world, and every recording artist has access to national and even international distribution.

Also, Elvis released 62 singles in the 1950's, 96 in the 1960's, and 56 in the 1970's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Presley_discography
Mariah has released 59 since her debut.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariah_Carey_Singles_Discography

Yes, comparing straight numbers ignores the context, but in context, Mariah faces greater competition and an inability to dominate shelves, screens and airwaves, yet a considerably higher percentage of her releases have been #1 hits. Elvis is still the king, but that status should not diminish Mariah's accomplishment.

[Micah616]

An excellent rebuttal to a flawed post. Context, indeed.

[SenorPinball]

Each succeeding generation of musicians is the beneficiary of whatever the latest technology is; Elvis Presley was a beneficiary of the 45 r.p.m. vinyl technology which replaced the larger and more fragile 78 r.p.m. shellac records. Disk records in general replaced the Edison cylinders which first dominated recorded music.

For all we know, the most popular musician of all time (on a per-capita basis, playing to inns and local fairs) was William of Warwickshire, an itinerant (and imaginary) 12th-century English troubadour. Who knows what he could have achieved, had he only access to digital downloads?

[LeftVetPatriot]

But I'm not bitter.

Jeeze, Pops... As an aged Elvis fan ("pre-Army", please) I offer Ms Carey due props.

[Grulg]

HuffPost's Pick

Elvis top 40 hits-114. Mariah-41. That ain't even in the same ballpark.

I've posted this elsewheres but I will here again just for clarity. Joel Whitburn, who puts out all those Billboard top 40 chart books-gives Elvis credit for 18 #1's, the problematic count here is 'Don't Be Cruel' being the flipside of 'Hound Dog'. I don't think that many people consider them to be just the one song, save for the occ. bean-counter over at Billboard(calling ya out, Fred Bronson!).

Then, you should remember, there was Cashbox magazine which was every bit as good as Billboard, ran til about '96, they usually just tallied up the Sales charts, and ignored the airplay stuff until the 80's or thereabouts, unlike Billboard which equated both.

Sales #1's-Cashbox credits Elvis w/ 20. They give him 'Return to Sender', 'In the Ghetto' and 'Burning Love', all of which Billboard sticks at #2. And then there's Radio and Records, who put 'Crying in the Chapel' at #1.... well you get the idea. It's important to remember that while Billboard Magazine is the standard, it ain't the Only standard for looking at the charts--and as this writer sez-it's a totally different ball of wax selling 45's vs. downloads from Apple.

But I thought I would toss that out there just so you could see where this story got it wrong. Mariah's run is more like the Supremes or Elton John's if you wanna know.

[Nommo]

Not to mention that Elvis did not have to compete with the same artists he stole from.

[TheWesternBreed]

The article I saw ALSO quoted Mariah Carey, however, as beginning her reply to the AP by saying (appropriately) "I really can never put myself in the category of people who have not only revolutionized music but also changed the world," like Elvis Presley. Nothing against Mariah Carey, although I'm not a fan of her style of music, but she'll never have many people making pilgrimages to her grave, there will probably never be a "Mariah" channel on Sirius, Mariah-impersonators will never be a persistent feature on the cultural landscape, and where are her three dozen cornball "Mariah movies"? Come to think of it, how many people other than her die-hard audience can name half a dozen of her songs off the top of their heads? So relax. As long as somebody stayed alive and kept churning out dance hits and power ballads with regularity for a couple of decades, breaking Elvis's 30-year-old record was inevitably going to happen.

[Micah616]

I hate to tell you, but plenty of people can name a half-dozen or so Mariah Carey songs off the tops of their heads that are not die hard fans. Not that I'm hating on your overall point, which is a good one, but you do it a bit of disservice with the hyperbole. No, I'm not a Mariah fan, not in a musical sense, but I can name 6 Mariah Carey songs, as well as 6 Elvis songs.

[lilyflower8604]

Just think though, if she's surpassed Elvis in sales, I wonder what it would look life if you took into account the number of illegal downloads for Ms. Carey? Considering that today's culture has no concept of purchasing music.

[jvarga]

Ahh the digital version of "get off my lawn you durn kids".