Michael Jackson sold more records than anyone in the country this past week, just like last week: a stunning 800,000 albums in total, including 339,000 copies of Number Ones and 187,000 copies of Thriller, according to Nielsen SoundScan. But just like last week, those two best-sellers were only counted for Billboard’s Top Comprehensive Albums chart due to their age, leaving NOW That’s What I Call Music! 31 to top the flagship Billboard 200 albums chart with a comparatively small 169,000 units shifted. Such are Billboard’s rules. Note that this makes two weeks in a row where catalog albums have soundly outsold the Billboard 200’s No. 1, something that had never happened before in the chart publication’s history. Count it as just one more testament to Michael Jackson’s lasting impact on pop culture.
Not that there weren’t plenty of other strong debuts to go around on the chart. Brad Paisley’s American Saturday Night made it to No. 2 with 130,000 sold. No. 3 went to Rob Thomas’ Cradlesong, with 122,000. Wilco took No. 4 with 99,000 of Wilco (the album) — a career best for the Chicago rockers, breaking the personal first-week record they set with their last album in 2007. “Birthday Sex” singer Jeremih might be marking another day for celebration on his calendar after selling 59,000 of his self-titled debut CD for a No. 6 bow. Killswitch Engage land at No. 7 with 58,000 of their own self-titled disc.
And that’s it for Top 20 debuts this week. What do you think of this week’s numbers?
More from EW’s Music Mix:
Michael Jackson memorial: Who was that singing “Heal the World”?
Michael Jackson memorial: Which performance moved you most?
Black Eyed Peas top the albums chart despite big Michael Jackson sales
New Paramore single “Ignorance”: Stream it today
Maroon 5 covers Frank Sinatra
Comments (1-24) of 24 Add your comment
Boo
The US has a very weird charting system when the most popular album can’t actually make it in. Although I remember once in the UK a Sex Pistols album was on sale for £3 one week in HMV and it suddenly appeared at number 25 in the charts.
I think it’s time for Billboard to change this ridiculous rule that an album older then 18 months can’t make the billboard 200 chart. It should be any album that sells the most no matter who old.
What’s the big deal? “Catalog” albums have always had a separate chart. The numbers are still there for anyone who wants to look at them.
I’m aware that MJ outshines (in every way) just about everyone in the regular top 20, but that chart is for new music, and catalog albums rarely outsell new ones on a week-to-week basis. No reason to change things because of a few unusual weeks.
When the hoopla dies down on MJ’s death, I will quietly buy a “Thriller” CD and an “Off The Wall CD” and MJ’s “Ones” CD. After watching the moving memorial yesterday on TV, I am amazed at the beauty of the songs MJ wrote. His words are so wise!! Michael was magic, alright. And soon I’ll be able to hear that magic once again. I will miss
Michael Jackson dearly & sincerely.
i wish if MJ did not come from america cos they did not appreciate his life & his talent. however, the world has spoken through the love he saved to every single person in this world. also i would like to say that whoever wrote (media) lies about MJ, i ask my creature to destroy their lives as much as they did to Michael Jackson.
That;s a stupid rule by Billboard and not at all reflective of the real world….is there a chart that actually reflects real world sales??
Billboard is an music industry magazine. The record labels are more interested in what new product is selling than catalog. Hence the separate charts.
From what I’ve read over at Billboard, there is a Comprehensive Album Sales Chart that shows Michael Jackson crowding out the rest of the new albums.
I’m a fan of Michael Jackson’s, but not sure Billboard really needs to change the rules for a few unusual weeks, as some state already.
The Billboard 200 is the “definitive” listing of top selling albums. I have never heard of the Comprehensive chart. The Catalog chart is an appropriate place to honor older titles with staying power, but if an album’s sales earn it a spot on the BB200 as well, then it should be listed. (Same goes for a rap or Latin album that can appear on multiple charts.) While it will be a rare event (e.g., a movie soundtrack feature, an artist’s death, an “Idol” appearance) for an older album to resurge to the upper echelon of current hot sellers, the BB200 should recognize this when it occurs. Yes, new music should be primarily featured on the showcase chart, but that happens naturally. There’s plenty of room! A comprehensive chart dilutes the importance of the top 200.
Michael Jackson should have topped the list for the past two weeks. Unfortunately, MJ’s sales for July 2009 will not be found when people review Billboard’s preeminent chart.
I think this rule makes sense, and I am glad to know Michael is not topping the BB200 chart or Hot 100. That’s why that have catalogue and recurrent charts… to showcase songs and albums with lasting power. If I recall, this change went into effect around the time of Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon being on the BB200 for over three years. I don’t think changing it for the anomaly of Michael’s death makes sense.
Why does Billboard not have an additional chart that covers all sales? Would it really hurt? They have so many crazy rules for each stupid chart to fulfil the wishes of labels and retailers, it would be nice to know on any particular week what is just selling best; country, catalogue, physical, online or anything else.
Do we really still need six headlines about this? The memorial is over! I want my news back!!!!!!!!!!
Billboard does have a Top Comprehensive Albums chart that combines older titles and newer “Hot” titles. The link below shows a screenshot of this week’s sales chart :
http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/photos/stylus/97333-michaeljackson_pp_02l.jpg
Please stop reporting on this crap.
Pretty archaic rule, if you ask me. Catalog albums rarely reach the numbers attained by the Top 200, so why not acknowledge the rare occasion it actually happens?
That now takes the cake as the most idiotic rule ever established by record keepers. Congratulations to Billboard on becoming members of the When Morons Ruled the World Society. Truly an amazing accomplishment since they had to beat out the tv industry for their asinine tv ratings data system that actually provides for greater monetary rewards for tv shows with low overall total viewers but top demographic numbers. In other words, true popularity doesn’t count for squat using these ridiculous counting methods. So, great shows like Without A Trace that pull in 12 million viewers but only 2 million 18-34 year olds gets canned while a show like True Beauty only pulls in 7 million total viewers but 3 .5 million of them are 18-34 year olds making it a hit show by those standards. Wrong!!! Likewise in music, Billboard can legitimately report erroneously that NOW 31 was the highest selling album of the week. It time for someone, some network, some music empire to take a stand for truth.
that’s really a great album:
http://www.nowgoal.com/21.shtml
When it comes to rankings in entertainment, whether it is music or tv or some other aspect of the industry, the media outlets ought to seek out validity in the reporting. Just because you currently have an accepted concensus of how the rankings should be reported does not mean there’s any foundation of truth in the end result. Thus, you get a report that inaccurately lists the top selling albums of the week. It is amazing that the number one selling album by a country mile won’t get the acknowledgement where it counts for such a mind blowing feat. With cash registers around the country in music stores and departments ringing up historically big sales, I do wonder where this information will be recorded and acknowledged.
Dark Side of the Moon was actually on the top 200 for 14 years, FYI. It and Thriller were the main reasons the top 200 no longer includes catalogue releases. It does seem a little silly, but for marketing purposes, a list of “current” albums is probably more important–and it gives new bands a fairer shake.
For what it’s worth, a current view (rather than the snapshot posted above) of the comprehensive chart can be viewed at http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/charts/chart_display.jsp?g=Albums&f=Billboard+Comprehensive+Albums .
I hope the money from these sales is going to the children. Right?
I hope the money is going to the kids, too. I am afraid of buying anything right now because I don’t know who will truly be capitalizing off it. I wonder if there is a way to find out where the money from the sales of even his old CD’s will go. I am worried about some money grubbing group like AEG making money off it. Does anyone know anything about it?
people are going to refer to the top 200 only. for not letting mj chart is totally wrong and robbing him of his title.
this does not reflect the sales wrong!!!