Maybe not at his own will, but he's probably listened to a Robbie song. He is a radio presenter after all!

Listened and heard have different meanings though...

Listened and heard have different meanings though...

 

Anyway, Nick is 28 which is on the cusp of Radio 1's target audience, so maybe his personal taste shouldn't be a barometer for "relevance"

Not only don't Radio 1 play "old" act, but they don't like acts with a big gay audience - that was one reason they gave for not play-listing Madonna, aside from the age issue. It's completely stupid because NO-ONE decides not to buy a song just because the artist is "old" or has a "gay fan-base".

They hammered Gaga to death last era. Supported Britney at first too. Not to mention The Saturdays and Girls Aloud!

So Jealousy doesn't appeal to radio 1 or Capital's audience? As goodelta says each song should be judged on merit not on who the artist is.

 

He had a whole album beforehand that had Radio 2 written all over it and "Jealousy" was hardly a huge departure, I see no major problem with it being snubbed. Clearly didn't do much harm either.

 

If R1 had just come out and said "Candy screams hit single even without our support and will inevitably be played to death by all of our competitors so we have no great incentive to play it" there would be no argument. I find it bizarre that people think Robbie Williams is more deserving/in need of Radio 1 support than, for instance, Disclosure.

He had a whole album beforehand that had Radio 2 written all over it and "Jealousy" was hardly a huge departure, I see no major problem with it being snubbed. Clearly didn't do much harm either.

 

If R1 had just come out and said "Candy screams hit single even without our support and will inevitably be played to death by all of our competitors so we have no great incentive to play it" there would be no argument. I find it bizarre that people think Robbie Williams is more deserving/in need of Radio 1 support than, for instance, Disclosure.

 

But that's not the reason they chose not to play it - they have deemed him irrelevant which is the issue. It has nothing to do with artists "deserving" airplay or not.

But that's not the reason they chose not to play it - they have deemed him irrelevant which is the issue. It has nothing to do with artists "deserving" airplay or not.

 

Exactly, they made the right decision for the wrong reasons.

They hammered Gaga to death last era. Supported Britney at first too. Not to mention The Saturdays and Girls Aloud!

 

The age issue will be the main thing then. With Britney at 30 now, it wouldn't surprise me if they ignored her next single, especially if they only supported her first one or two singles from her last album.

I really don't get Radio 1. They always have such stupid reasons for not playing artists. I remember somebody on DS sent an email in when they had Alexandra on their blacklist (they did playlist Elephant, this was befor this), and they replied with a similar thing to what they said about Robbie, about her not being relevant to the audience's taste. Which is complete crap tbh, they actively play the likes of Rihanna, Nicki Minaj, Misha B, Little Mix and Tulisa who are musically pretty similar to Alexandra. Same with Robbie, Candy is pretty similar to something that say Olly Murs would release, and while I personally hate the song but love Olly's, you can't say he isn't relevant to the audience's taste if they play similar artists!

 

As for 'he's too old', didn't they A-List Train when Pat Monahan is in his 40s? I just don't get it. Obviously they can't playlist every song, but if there's significant demande they should, unless it really is totally out of their target audience's tastes.

Exactly, they made the right decision for the wrong reasons.

 

On the basis of artists getting "blanket airplay" and therefore not playlisting them as a result they could choose Rihanna, Katy Perry, Olly Murs etc but that is never going to happen

The age issue will be the main thing then. With Britney at 30 now, it wouldn't surprise me if they ignored her next single, especially if they only supported her first one or two singles from her last album.

Yeah, I think Britney could very easily go ignored next era. She'll really need to smash it worldwide next time round (and not just a 5 minute worldwide #1 like HIAM) for Radio 1 (and the UK in general) to take notice. Of course it wouldn't hurt if she'd actually promote but we can't expect miracles :lol:

Edited November 5, 201213 yr by Umi

Yeah, I think Britney could very easily go ignored next era. She'll really need to smash it worldwide next time round (and not just a 5 minute worldwide #1 like HIAM) for Radio 1 (and the UK in general) to take notice. Of course it wouldn't hurt if she'd actually promote but we can't expect miracles :lol:

 

Did she do any UK promotion? :lol: She must have done lots in the US as she was MASSIVE in 2011!

Not one UK performance :( She did a few interviews towards the tail end of the era but by then it was long dead. She did a bit in the US, few TV performances around the album release date and like one awards show performance (and even then only for about a minute) after that :lol: Radio was very good to her in the US in 2011.

I don't have a problem with Radio 1 not playlisting certain artists if they don't deem them acceptable, its just like Capital not deeming a song 'worthy' if it doesn't do well in the charts (which is far worse imo) or Heart not deeming a song worthy if its not adult-oriented, they need to stick to their target audience which primarily should be 15-29 year olds. However, I don't really like the way they go about it, saying Robbie is 'irrelevant' or certain artists aren't relevant' (and as already mentioned pretending they don't exist) is clearly untrue.

 

Admittedly that article title is very misleading and I think Nick makes a fair point.

Edited November 5, 201213 yr by C.W

I really don't understand why people don't get that Robbie Williams doesn't need Radio 1 support. He's just not what makes the target audience tune in (they should be aiming for all teenagers really). I like Candy, but it's ridiculous to suggest that it needs to be playlisted just because it's a hit record. He's just not relevant to what Radio 1 should be aiming for. Most teenagers do not want to hear Robbie Williams in the morning because he's not as cool as One Direction or Justin Bieber. They want to hear the cool new stuff that's played on Capital. It's as simple as that.

 

And I can see the Alexandra Burke argument as well - Rihanna, Nicki Minaj, Misha B, Little Mix and Tulisa are all relevant, while Alexandra is... a cookie-cut musician.

 

Radio 1 do a stunning job in playing new and fresh music. If you don't appreciate that or if you don't like Radio 1, don't tune in. It's as simple as that.

Edited November 5, 201213 yr by Grief

I think one of the radio presenters said it. I don't think they are "anti-gay" as they have many gay presenters, but perhaps it's just an issue with the public, like with the age relevance?

 

It certainly is an issue with the public, you only have to read Twitter to see that.

 

My sister is 22 years old-slap bang in the middle of Radio 1's target audience-and she loves Candy. I had an excited text from her earlier today when she found out it was no.1. I am a couple of years older, still within the target audience, and Candy is the first no.1 I've really liked since Spectrum. It makes no sense to call Robbie's music 'irrelevant'. It's top of the charts FFS. There must be some young people buying it. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when these decisions are made. Personally I'd listen to Candy, Moves Like Jagger, Jealousy, Your Body and Euphoria over most of the crap they do playlist.

My sister is 22 years old-slap bang in the middle of Radio 1's target audience-and she loves Candy. I had an excited text from her earlier today when she found out it was no.1. I am a couple of years older, still within the target audience, and Candy is the first no.1 I've really liked since Spectrum. It makes no sense to call Robbie's music 'irrelevant'. It's top of the charts FFS. There must be some young people buying it. I'd love to be a fly on the wall when these decisions are made. Personally I'd listen to Candy, Moves Like Jagger, Jealousy, Your Body and Euphoria over most of the crap they do playlist.

 

But that's not what Radio 1's target audience should be. As a youth radio station, Radio 1's target audience should appeal to teenagers only (there should be another cool BBC adult radio station for people who are a little bit older).

if you don't like Radio 1, don't tune in. It's as simple as that.

Except it's not. People don't care about this because they want to hear Robbie (or whoever we're arguing over at whatever time) on the radio, they're arguing because Radio 1 has a massive influence on the charts. I never listen to Radio 1, it doesn't get broadcast in this country. Yet I'm still here arguing this. It all comes back to the charts in the end on here :lol:

 

Also T Boy and his sister are the people Radio 1 are after - they're comfortably in their target demographic (15-29).

But that's not what Radio 1's target audience should be. As a youth radio station, Radio 1's target audience should appeal to teenagers only (there should be another cool BBC adult radio station for people who are a little bit older).

 

Oh my goodness you've just taken narrowmindedness to another level.

 

First of all, Radio 1 clearly try to cater to teenagers more than anyone else in the target audience. Teen awards, constant phone calls with 1d, a pathetically childish chart show.

 

Problem is, teenagers DO NOT listen to the radio that much. At least not Radio 1. I spend 8 hours a day with teenagers and none of the get up early just to hear the Breakfast Show and are in school for the last hour and half of it. They can't listen to any of the daytime shows because most of them are in school for most of the year. The Breakfast Show was always good for a car journey to work/school, but a lot of teenagers would rather plug into their ipods and listen to what they want. This wasn't so much the case when I was a teengaer but it is now, I can't move for teenagers with earphones in.

 

So Radio 1 is trying desperately to cater to a lost cause and so their average listener is still aged 3 to 4 years above the upper level of the target audience.

 

I find it insulting that you think Radio 1 should have just ignored me and my sister as if we were 'irrelevant' just because we hit 20. I'm 24 and I don't feel a day older than I did at 18.

Except it's not. People don't care about this because they want to hear Robbie (or whoever we're arguing over at whatever time) on the radio, they're arguing because Radio 1 has a massive influence on the charts. I never listen to Radio 1, it doesn't get broadcast in this country. Yet I'm still here arguing this. It all comes back to the charts in the end on here :lol:

 

Also T Boy and his sister are the people Radio 1 are after - they're comfortably in their target demographic (15-29).

 

Yes, but they shouldn't be. A youth radio station should appeal to all teenagers more than anything else imo.