Radio ban?

[naturalplayboy]

I keep reading about the radio ban during Britney’s prime. I was like 10 so didn’t really care about things like that. Can someone explain?

and if she didn’t have that radio ban would her numbers be even bigger than recorded? 

[Applejack]

Britney used to tour with Clear Channel Entertainment (iHeart Media today), up until DWAD where the promoter was Concerts West (AEG Live btw).

The only problem in all of that is that CCE owned (owns) almost all radio stations in the US, so for switching parties she was banned from the US radio from late 2001 (a couple of weeks after DWAD's opening and Slave's release I think) till MATM's release.

[troubleguy]

57 minutes ago, Applejack said:

Britney used to tour with Clear Channel Entertainment (iHeart Media today), up until DWAD where the promoter was Concerts West (AEG Live btw).

The only problem in all of that is that CCE owned (owns) almost all radio stations in the US, so for switching parties she was banned from the US radio from late 2001 (a couple of weeks after DWAD's opening and Slave's release I think) till MATM's release.

its so unprofessional from their side tbh  but who cares, iconic songs speak for itself  

[Mohd93]

1 hour ago, Applejack said:

Britney used to tour with Clear Channel Entertainment (iHeart Media today), up until DWAD where the promoter was Concerts West (AEG Live btw).

The only problem in all of that is that CCE owned (owns) almost all radio stations in the US, so for switching parties she was banned from the US radio from late 2001 (a couple of weeks after DWAD's opening and Slave's release I think) till MATM's release.

This all seems extremely petty and unprofessional. Maybe because she was the biggest star at the time so they saw it as a huge loss and that made them angry? But nonetheless, still very petty and shady. 

[Mr_Steven_Spears]

She still slayed though and had iconic songs   

[Iexpectyouto]

I feel like I read somewhere that the Pepsi deal had something to do with them not going with the clear channel deal, but idk.

and to answer your second question, her chart success would've been much, much stronger. Slave, Not a Girl, and I believe boys were all top 10 hits in several markets, including the U.K. Now Britney's singles always did better in the U.K. and other markets than the US, but slave almost certainly would've been a top 10, not a girl and the other singles would've easily been top 20s/40s. This in turn might have bumped the Britney album's sales a bit more, but probably not by much. 

[Isla]

1 hour ago, Iexpectyouto said:

I feel like I read somewhere that the Pepsi deal had something to do with them not going with the clear channel deal, but idk.

and to answer your second question, her chart success would've been much, much stronger. Slave, Not a Girl, and I believe boys were all top 10 hits in several markets, including the U.K. Now Britney's singles always did better in the U.K. and other markets than the US, but slave almost certainly would've been a top 10, not a girl and the other singles would've easily been top 20s/40s. This in turn might have bumped the Britney album's sales a bit more, but probably not by much. 

I agree tbh. Slave probably would have gone top 10 had it not been for that stupid ban. 

[The_Original_Toy]

i thought the ban was bc she was too ******  thats why i thought the ban was stupid and didn't make sense

but it still sounds stupid with these other reasons 

[nux1989]

2 hours ago, Isla. said:

I agree tbh. Slave probably would have gone top 10 had it not been for that stupid ban. 

And not released as CD single.

[Applejack]

4 hours ago, Iexpectyouto said:

I feel like I read somewhere that the Pepsi deal had something to do with them not going with the clear channel deal, but idk.

and to answer your second question, her chart success would've been much, much stronger. Slave, Not a Girl, and I believe boys were all top 10 hits in several markets, including the U.K. Now Britney's singles always did better in the U.K. and other markets than the US, but slave almost certainly would've been a top 10, not a girl and the other singles would've easily been top 20s/40s. This in turn might have bumped the Britney album's sales a bit more, but probably not by much. 

CW outbidded CCE and, also, her team wanted to promote Crossroads and CW actually owned theaters - so kill two birds with a stone.

CC used to actually have a blacklist (or maybe iHeart still does that idk). Britney wasn't the only one who was blacklisted, but probably was the bigger one.

With Onyx Hotel she signed up with CC again and all was well (until the lawsuits for the cancellation lul).

Another 2001 ban is her TWYMMF duet in the MJ's 30th Anniversary Special. Because of the Live From Las Vegas HBO special, she was banned from everything on TV but HBO, so that's why her performance is edited out in the first broadcast.

But Britney went on diamond ww either way so stay winning 2001 brini 

[Iexpectyouto]

3 hours ago, Isla. said:

I agree tbh. Slave probably would have gone top 10 had it not been for that stupid ban. 

Slave was a top 10, and in many cases a top 5, in every country it charted EXCEPT the us. In the U.K., slave and overprotected both went to #4, not a girl went to #2, I love rock n roll was #13, and boys was #7. With all the promo she did for all of those singles (except rock n roll) there's practically no way those songs couldn't have at least been top 20s in the us. Meanwhile, in the us, slave went to #27, overprotected to #86, and the rest didn't chart st all. Just looking at the chart data on paper, anyone could see something was up. 

[nux1989]

16 minutes ago, Iexpectyouto said:

Slave was a top 10, and in many cases a top 5, in every country it charted EXCEPT the us. In the U.K., slave and overprotected both went to #4, not a girl went to #2, I love rock n roll was #13, and boys was #7. With all the promo she did for all of those singles (except rock n roll) there's practically no way those songs couldn't have at least been top 20s in the us. Meanwhile, in the us, slave went to #27, overprotected to #86, and the rest didn't chart st all. Just looking at the chart data on paper, anyone could see something was up. 

Because charts in the Europe only counts sales number back in the days.

Radio in us was crazy about R&B and Hip-hop, pop act didn't get that much play.

And the most important thing is... NONE of these singles are physical released in US.

Slave: only 12" single
not a girl: no single released
overprotected: only 12" single
Boys: no single released

(and ILRNR was not promoted in US)

 

In post-My prerogative era, Jive keep the single sale as little as possible to ensure album sales.

That means those single were charted solo on airplay point with little to none help from sales.

That's why her chart numbers are not as high as... say Christina (who release all her single in CD form in US).

And when Britney released proper CD singles (BOMBH, stronger), you can see they chart much higher than other singles that didn't. 

[Applejack]

22 minutes ago, alain0227 said:

Because charts in the Europe only counts sales number back in the days.

Radio in us was crazy about R&B and Hip-hop, pop act didn't get that much play.

And the most important thing is... NONE of these singles are physical released in US.

Slave: only 12" single
not a girl: no single released
overprotected: only 12" single
Boys: no single released

(and ILRNR was not promoted in US)

 

In post-My prerogative era, Jive keep the single sale as little as possible to ensure album sales.

That means those single were charted solo on airplay point with little to none help from sales.

That's why her chart numbers are not as high as... say Christina (who release all her single in CD form in US).

And when Britney released proper CD singles (BOMBH, stronger), you can see they chart much higher than other singles that didn't. 

Slave and Boys could've charted way higher. Slave was her first song to peak in the R&B charts and peaked in the 20s on the Hot 100 before the ban.

Boys was R&B oriented as well. So was Overprotected Remix.

Real problems were OG OP, Not a Girl and ILRNR. She didn't even try the original OP.

And I'd argue the R&B vs Pop radio problem was even worse in 2003/2004, when Crazy in Love and Usher were dominating, so it was a ball more in ITZ's court.

About the single situation, yeah.

[ThisMeowBiteback]

So it just a theory that she was banned no actual proof? Articles from major publications? 

[Isla]

1 hour ago, Rickey3089 said:

So it just a theory that she was banned no actual proof? Articles from major publications? 

No I'm pretty sure it actually happened. Clear Channel who owned most US radio stations at the time were originally the sponsors of the Dream Within a Dream Tour but then Pepsi sponsored the tour because of Britney's deal with them, so Clear Channel got her back by 'banning' her from radio. The ban was lifted around the time Toxic was released. 

[Freakshow__]

BOMT and OIDIA were both diamond but it's crazy to think "Britney" sold 5 million albums without radio support. Not bad at all. It would probably be around 6 or 7M with radio support but... anyway... at least she had MTV. 

[Blackout2006]

On 12/17/2017 at 3:25 AM, Isla said:

I agree tbh. Slave probably would have gone top 10 had it not been for that stupid ban. 

OMG i was looking for sources of when it was uplifted and i found u here

Hello

[Isla]

1 minute ago, Blackout2006 said:

OMG i was looking for sources of when it was uplifted and i found u here

Hello

Hi  

[Blackout2006]

Just now, Isla said:

Hi  

 

[PZHSB]

My uncle worked for z100 for decades and used to tell me they weren’t allowed to play any new Britney single more than x amount of times due to the clear channel nonsense. She would be number 1 every night on the top 9 at 9 but it was one of the few times they could play it. Unreal that they were allowed to get away with that