The OCC have just dropped a short video announcing the new Top 10 award. I think somewhere on one of the threads here recently some were questioning if there even needs to be a Number 1 award, so I'm wondering what we think about a Top 10 award. Based on the video it seems to apply to both singles and albums. I can't help wondering whether that means that charttoppers now get both awards. Or if they don't what happens if an artist is issued with a Top 10 award one week, then the next week they rocket up to number 1, do they have to give the Top 10 award back when they receive the Number 1 award? How retrospective are the awards? I think some of the past charttoppers who predate the existence of the Number 1 award have received Number 1 awards for those past hits, but by no means all of them (nobody's gonna track down Gary Glitter and give him three Number 1 awards for a start). If they are gonna backdate the Top 10 awards then people like Madonna and Cliff Richard better look into hireing a van.....

 

It's definitely not "needed", and I think in a sense it's a bit much, but a good move on their part in the sense that a lot of the artists will probably my make a social media post about the award which is good promo for the OCC. Plus it is probably easier for them to get interviews with artists for their website if they're giving out awards. So I can see it being a good business decision for the OCC. And at least these days there's not that many top 10 hits compared to like 2004 lol.

This does feel quite pointless to me. A top 10 also seems like something that can be manipulated to get a peak position that is misleading on a song’s actual impact. At least with number one you need significant sales to get there. Can’t see the OCC handing one of these to The K*nts for their Boris Johnson Christmas singles as one example where I don’t expect distribution compared to artists the occ might want to highlight. For hits not reaching number one but making a big impact, there are the bpi certifications.

Wish they introduced this a year ago so we could see Kylie and Madonna getting one!

I think it's a nice thing to do! Obviously an intensive job if they're backdating them, but nowadays top 10 feels like a bigger achievement when the turnover is slower, and this is a lovely thing particularly when brand new artists can achieve their first.

I'm not a fan of open right-hand (CD jacket-style?) side of the award. It doesn't need to be designed inside. It must have cost much to manufacture as well.

Edited March 11, 20241 yr by All★bySmashMouth

Given the charts are boring as, it’s nice to see they’ve found some way of justifying their existence.

The charts are definitely not the same as they used to be. I remember listening in the 80s when it was exciting to find out if your favourite record had made the T10. Now the charts are just boring and often tracks seem to cling on for weeks with little movement. I’m not sure what the point is of this new award or what it will achieve. I don’t listen to the charts anymore or follow them.

I think if it is to happen, it should just be given to artists who have hit the top 10 for the first time. Otherwise it'll be a situation where every time Drake releases a fart, he gets a Top 10 award!

Even the #1 award doesn't get given out to literally everyone who gets a #1 (as far as I'm aware anyway), I'm sure it's something they'll just pick and choose to give out whenever they feel like it / when the artist agrees to do a photoshoot for it.

Just as pointless as BPI's one billion streams award. :D

 

Buzzjack should have an award for every user who logs on at least once a week.

I can understand giving it the first time an artist gets a top 10 but otherwise it feel like an overkill a participation trophy so to speak

"let's celebrate those who under-achieved and couldnt get a number one".

 

Grown-ups know they just got a top ten and that is it's own reward. Literally a reward financially and publicly. Celebrate someone who just hit 40 top 10's? yes, that's an achievement (unless it's just album tracks from the latest 2 or 3 albums, then it's not an achievement, it's just week one playlist plays and streaming curiosity). Hi, Ed!

As others have said it’s not needed however from a marketing point of view, to pull in revenue (the awards are not free) and to get social media exposure as artists/labels love an award and will post about it then it’s a great move.

Surely these would just be pointless dust collectors for acts who have so many top 10 hits? :???:

Please tell me they're backdating them as I want artists like MC Mario, Zig & Zag and the WWF Superstars to finally get their shining moment.

Please tell me they're backdating them as I want artists like MC Mario, Zig & Zag and the WWF Superstars to finally get their shining moment.

:cheeseblock: :cheeseblock: :cheeseblock: PRECISION TUNES :cheeseblock: :cheeseblock: :cheeseblock:

This talk of incongruous Top 10 hit makers made me realise 6ix9ine's two Top 10s peaked at #6 and #9

Clearly, it's overkill in terms of recognition, as many have already discussed above. And to backdate would be ludicrous given the number of Top 10 hits there've been, even just in this century!

 

But I do concur that it's likely a good call for both the OCC, labels and artists. The former are looking for extra revenue and promotion, while the latter two are seeking the same, plus further public recognition of any vaguely-notable career achievements, and even in this era of virtually no real paid-for sales, passive streaming from pre-conceived playlists, and a manipulated chart to artificially lessen the effects of streaming en-masse over very long periods or just in a week or two of all a new album's tracks, securing an 'official' Top 10 chart position is still worth shouting about if you're an artist or the team helping them. OCC wouldn't be daft enough to spend money on manufacturing these additional awards if they didn't perceive there to be some greater reward for them down the line, and wouldn't have done it without industry input confirming there'd be support for the scheme.

 

It's likely also seen as something that could help to do the job that the charts used to do when they were more popular, via the Top 40 show and Top Of The Pops, which was to give some extra profile to current hits. In an internet-led era with so many music feeds vying for people's attention, presenting a weekly chart alone (especially as has been pointed out, one that is so slow-moving and stagnant) doesn't cut through, so any additional emphasis that can be given to acts' achievements on it will be welcomed by all involved. Indeed, one of the founding purposes of the OCC is to find innovative ways of furthering awareness of their charts and it's their duty to keep focused on that. The Top Ten award is presumably just the latest attempt - however lame some of us might consider it to be and however little the bestowing of such awards may register with us.

 

As observed earlier, at least we can be satisfied that this is being launched in a period of much steadier Top 10 activity than we've seen at times in the past. Launching this initiative any time between 1995 and 2005 would've made a mockery of it, and done the complete reverse of its aim of promoting a Top 10 chart position as an 'achievement', as so many singles were during that era able to attain it just through front-loaded promo campaigns and strong fanbase support, often only managing week 1 in the upper reach before disappearing downwards often without a majority of music lovers or radio listeners even having heard the song! Awarding such a fleeting and frequent event would've been laughable, discredited the charts even further, and cost them a fortune in manufacturing costs for the innumerable awards they'd have needed to present!