Your Doctor May Dump You

Beware of any non-invoice-type mailings from your physician. That fancy envelope may contain a thinly veiled blackmail attempt to extort more cash from your already strapped budget!

It just happened to me---and I should point out the title of this blog may be misleading, because, in a way, I dumped my doctor.

Why?

It’s a new breed of medical greed, disguised as the VIP treatment. In fact, it’s even called MDVIP (although there may be other for-profit outfits like it out there with different names).

Here’s how it works:

1) The initial letter from your doctor attempts to break the news slowly. Your overworked (and apparently underpaid) physician is “excited” to announce a new level of healthcare for you! This mailing is followed by invitations to little wine and cheese get-togethers at local country clubs to answer your questions (and put the hard sell on you). Fancy brochures, FAQ’s that downplay your financial obligation and other materials are employed to convince you that this new level of medical care is indispensable.

2) Acknowledging the lousy service we consumers of healthcare already get, the blame is attributed to having too many patients and too little time for individual attention. But, fear not! Your doctor has the solution!

3) By signing up for MDVIP, you retain the same doctor, yet now you can get same day or next day appointments! You will receive an extensive series of tests in an annual “wellness” program! You’ll receive a mini-CD with all your medical information for your wallet or purse—and---get this, your OWN personal health website!

4) And…..oh yeah, the yearly cost to you is a mere $1,500---on TOP of whatever you are already forking over for healthcare. This fee is NOT covered by health insurance.


Such a deal.

I can understand why the doctors are all for it. They slash their patient list to 600 total. At $1,500 per patient, that’s a cool $900,000 per YEAR in new revenue! Imagine being able to cut your workload and still pull in that kind of dough!

My guess is that the physicians cough up (pardon the pun) maybe half of this amount in order to be affiliated with MDVIP. Still, $450,000 is not a bad start to their kid’s college fund—every year, no?

The other chunk-whatever it is---goes to another medical corporation whose real interest is recruiting doctors who in turn recruit patients. It’s a pretty good racket.

Call me a cynic, but most insidious is the marketing campaign that touts all of these “advancements” as being in MY best interest!

Please.

Instead of treating disease—it’s about being proactive about my health—making “wellness” the goal. So……..why wasn’t that the goal before? Can they not accomplish this without my extra fifteen hundred bucks?


Check out the “news” segment where the doctor interviewed spouts the party line—and then ask yourself: “Wasn’t he supposed to be doing all of these things all along?”



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca4xjttBghc

So, what happens when you decline such a tempting offer?
You get dumped.

I like my doctor, but I am not yet-thankfully, a huge consumer of healthcare. I go for an annual physical, which goes something like this:

a) I arrive on time or ahead of time, but I still wait to be seen. I could be the first appointment of the day, yet still I wait….and wait.

b) A nurse takes my vitals, weight and blood pressure and then I am ushered into another room…to wait again, this time in my underwear. It is often a long wait.

c) My doctor arrives, runs the checkup for about 15 minutes or so and that’s it.

In the end, I have spent more time waiting than being waited on, as the medical profession as an industry has no respect for the fact that their patient’s time is just as valuable as theirs.

I tried hard to envision how my experience would be enhanced for the extra fee. Maybe I would get a cup of espresso while sitting around in my skivvies.

I like my doctor. He’s a good guy and I believe that he is knowledgeable and truly cares about his patients. In short, despite my limited contact with him yearly, I feel that he has provided a decent service in keeping me healthy.

But I can’t afford him anymore. And frankly, even if I could, I’m not sure I should. You see, there is something inherently wrong in an association that recruits physicians to strong-arm their patients into a program they may not want. If it were an option, I could choose to enjoy the increased level of service. Or…I could stay where I am, happily seeing my doctor one or two times a year.

“Sorry, Mr. Moore…that’s not an option”
Too bad the Hippocratic oath didn’t address the refusal to serve those who are not prepared to write a big bonus check to the doctor.

So, I’m outa here—as I offer a new twist to the saying , “Doctor, heal thyself”

How about, “Doctor, steal for thyself?”

Anyone know a good physician to recommend to a fifty-some DJ? I’m all ears.


If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

Your Pain Is Funny...But Not Mine

THE FOLLOWING IS AN ENCORE TIM MOORE BLOG, BACK BY POPULAR DEMAND!

What is it about human beings that we find humor in other people’s pain?

Admit it.

You laugh when people fall down, get bonked in the head or take one in the crotch.Sometimes when it happens to US, we too, will crack up—only after we’ve checked to see there is no blood--or no body parts sticking out at funny (and by funny I mean unusual) angles.

Usually though, we are somewhat angry and offended when, after getting up from a spill, we gaze into the faces of our “friends”, who are too busy peeing in their pants to ask if we’re OK. Sometimes it’s a stilted, “Wow, are you alright” spoken through the gritted teeth of someone who is visibly suppressing laughter. Other times, your “buddies” are now themselves on the floor, rolling around and laughing like hyenas.

“Thanks for your CONCERN!”

The internet and the proliferation of video recording on cell phones, etc. has provided enough footage of people slamming themselves into walls, slipping on ice and generally making painful fools of themselves to keep us “entertained” for hours.It’s probably a good thing that we don’t get to see the trips to emergency rooms, hospitals and the morgue that come from these clips.

So, just how good are YOU?

Can you watch the following video and not even crack a SMILE?Betcha you can’t:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdAYwMPFDcs

How did you do?

Perhaps we’ll get our just desserts in the next life (“Table for one in HELL, please!”)I operate with the ASSUMPTION that all injuries for which I have laughed at above were minor—and that the victim was a good sport.

And the next time I wipe out, my first reaction will be to look around and make DAMN sure no one is filming!

If you’d like my blog in your box daily, just let me know! Tim.moore@citcomm.com

Equality: Why The Debate?

My friend and colleague Lori Voornas made front-page news today in the Portland Press Herald.

She didn’t cure cancer, discover the fountain of youth or even hold up a local convenience store.

She “came out”, admitting that she is gay.

Huh?

Why is this “news”?

Lori is one third of the #1 rated morning radio program in Portland, “The Q Morning Show” on 94.9 WHOM’s sister station WJBQ (Q97.9) and she made the revelation on the air this past Tuesday.

Of course, those close to her were always aware of her orientation—and many listeners and advertisers had suspected she was gay. All of us were a bit taken aback with the attention the announcement has garnered.

After over 20 years on the air at Portland, Maine radio stations, Lori chose to “come out” due to significant changes in her life—ones that she felt needed to be shared with listeners who have come to know her over the years. While the Q audience has been well aware of her other radio partner’s personal lives and families (Meredith and Jeff regularly share this info), Lori was sometimes the mystery woman. Single, living on Munjoy Hill and sometimes referencing a “roommate” in the past, we knew about her cats, but that’s about it.

Fast forward to the trifecta of changes, all taking place in days: moving to Falmouth, getting married to her significant other (complete with children) and, oh yeah…...the gay thing. Too many momentous elements to keep from a weekly audience who consider her a friend in so many ways.

The response to the “news” (ahem) has been overwhelmingly positive—from listeners and advertisers alike. An outpouring of congratulations, love and support have graced the Q Morning Show Facebook page, e-mails and over the phone.

Have there been “haters”? Yes, on the Press Herald website in the comment section and at least one phone call from someone who:

a) was a huge fan of the show but
b) now will stop listening following the “revelation”

That’s OK—never was there an intent to “promote” a lifestyle, be controversial or shock the audience. The need was simply to be real---re-enacting a discussion that happens in families every single day.

All I know is that Lori Voornas is a kind, funny and wonderful person—and her life partner Jen is as well. I wish them all the happiness in the world and know that her true friends feel the same way.

The larger issue would be the notion that anyone’s personal life choices should be fodder for judgment. The politics that have blocked legislation aimed at ensuring rights for those denied them always mystifies me.

I don’t need to “agree” with a gay lifestyle—or even understand it. It’s like “agreeing” with oxygen. It just is. It’s a fact of life—and the estimate that about ten percent of the population is gay means that we’re talking about A LOT of people. Those seeking to “protect marriage” somehow believe that gay unions somehow dilute heterosexual marriage.

I would disagree—and state that a nearly 50% divorce rate is more of a threat to heterosexual marriage than same-sex unions.

Let’s remove any issue of equality from our politics. Can the conservative right make a decision to focus on fiscal policy and abandon social positions that are a throwback to the 50’s, when there were obviously no gay people in existence? Sarcasm aside, social equality shouldn’t be the subject of debate, but rather of universal consensus.

Who shouldn’t be treated equally?

It was on this date in 1920---less than 100 years ago---that the 19th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified, giving women the right to vote.

At that time, there was actually organized OPPOSITION to allowing women entry to the ballot box.

The same thing is happening today—and a hundred years from now, people in 2111 will wonder why the fight over gay marriage was such a big deal.

For those who use the Bible as a battering ram to block any efforts at enforcing equality, may I quote another verse:

“Judge not, lest ye be judged”

Congratulations, Lori and Jen—we love ya!

If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

The King And His Castle

THE FOLLOWING IS AN UPDATED ENCORE TIM MOORE BLOG:

It was 34 years ago today that Elvis Presley died, the King of Rock & Roll who was a mere shell of his former self, having surrendered to the prison of drug addiction.

His estate endures—and his literal estate-Graceland—is busier than ever.

Someday, I’ll make it to Graceland, the mansion-home-now-turned-shrine to Elvis. Located in Memphis, it is one of the most visited tourist attractions in the U.S., ahead of many national monuments and historical sites. As far as private residences are concerned, only The White House has more visitors each year

The fascination I have with Elvis is more about how someone so successful and wealthy could descend into the pit of drugs and depression that eventually cost him his life.

Of course, there are those who believe that Elvis is still alive. I am not one of them, but were he to walk into my office right now munching on a peanut butter and ‘nana sandwich, I would most likely dissolve into a speechless blob of goo---just like millions of fans.

In fact, my wife and I had the privilege of meeting Elvis’ daughter Lisa Marie Presley a few years ago when she played Merrill Auditorium in Portland. I’d be lying if I didn’t think about how this was the daughter, the flesh and blood of ELVIS PRESLEY while I was shaking her hand and posing for photos. Hell, I even thought about her ex-husband Michael Jackson at the time. Rock & Roll Royalty—and she couldn’t have been sweeter.

But I digress.

Elvis paid the down payment for Graceland on this date in 1957. $1,000 bucks—for a house on nearly 14 acres of wooded land—and a mansion that was priced at $102,500.
Twenty three rooms, including 8 bedrooms and bathrooms. Elvis added on, remodeled (including the infamous “Jungle Room”) and generally made the site the castle fit for a King.

Here’s a short video tour of Graceland:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpGPMGJzR40


Graceland was where Elvis died—and where he is buried. It was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1991. Now essentially a museum, it houses his gold records, memorabilia, his Cadillacs and even his Lockheed jet is nearby. From the signature music-theme gates to the burial site to everything inside, it is a must-see for anyone going to Memphis….and someday I will join the millions who have made the pilgrimage.

When that happens, I’m sure that I’ll be …..well, “All Shook Up”

If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

Jobs: What’s The Answer?

In the afterglow of the Iowa straw poll this past weekend, it seems that Michelle Bachman’s bar-b-que was tastier than that of her competitors, her tent teeming with celebrities like Randy Travis----and it was these critical factors of leadership and organization which allowed her to “win”.

Had 75 of so of her supporters swung to Ron Paul, it would have been Paul who would have taken the day. Ron Paul may be the only common sense Republican candidate, but his drastic views regarding economics (he would have the U.S. default) and foreign affairs (he would make America the ultimate isolationist state) all combine to make him not only unelectable, but also “un-nominate-able”. Republican strategist Mike Murphy warned everyone not to read too much into the Iowa results, stating that he could have garnered “a thousand votes against algebra” in this straw poll.

The economy is driving the election—and the conservative right is actually relishing the sluggish recovery as their only means to grab the reins of power in 2012. Think about it.
Many on the right are actually rooting for American turmoil in order to make Mr. Obama as Ms. Bachman would screech, “a one-term President”.

Great. Then what?

Ask anyone who laments the economic situation—and the topic always turns to unemployment. It’s all about jobs.

So, let’s get a handle on just what we’re talking here.

In 2009, the total U.S. workforce was estimated to be about 155 million people. Since there is always an unemployment baseline of about 5-6%, a 9% unemployment level works out to be a marginal rate of about 4% (rounding up) of what the average low threshold would normally be.

Never is unemployment 0% or even 1 or 2 %. About five or six percent unemployment takes into account those in transition between jobs at any given point in time and also the portion of the population that may be considered “chronically unemployable”—for many reasons, none of which have to do with the state of the economy.

So, 4% of the workforce is that portion of the unemployment picture on which the focus needs to be. This (using 2009 figures) represents about 6 million people—or 120,000 per state.

OK, now that we have the magnitude of the problem defined, the question remains:

What to do?

While the current administration will never get any credit for AVERTING a major economic catastrophe (picture President Bush playing the violin while the U.S. economy burned), he can no longer pin the blame on the former Chief Executive, either.

Imagine “President McCain” allowing General Motors to die-as he would have. Vice President Palin (it hurts just to see this in type) would have been right there supporting McCain in his “let the market decide” philosophy. What would unemployment have been like if GM had NOT been rescued?

But I digress.

To state that our problems would not be solved overnight is one theme that was repeated, but an impatient populace can’t take solace in an extended time frame when the rent is due this month.

So again, back to the White House. What can ANY President do?

Dismiss the vacuous charges of “lack of leadership” coming from conservatives. Ask the prospective Republican candidates exactly WHAT they would do?

It’s likely that the three major things would emerge:

1) Cut government spending
2) Cut the corporate income tax
3) Repeal “Obamacare”

The underlying theme is hard to miss. Give business what it wants and the collective business community will reward America with expansion and jobs. This would make sense if the evidence to the contrary were not so glaring.

While American business has been doing relatively well (last week’s volatility notwithstanding due to the debt ceiling crisis)---Americans themselves have not. Many companies are reporting record profits. Many of the companies who preyed on consumers and helped to cause the housing and mortgage crisis are doing just fine now—while their former customers have foreclosed and are either in personal bankruptcy or crawling out.

These companies that ship jobs overseas, who send their cash to accounts in the Cayman Islands to avoid U.S. income taxes, who enjoy the full benefits of the many tax breaks, subsidies and other federal goodies—still manage to complain about the tax rate. They conveniently blame “Obamacare” as the sole reason they are not hiring, when the reality is that they have learned to produce more with an overworked and underpaid workforce afraid of losing their jobs.

It’s a perfect storm of perceived hardship that can be leveraged for further federal concessions.

It’s no wonder that big business almost invariably favors the Republican candidate in any political race. While the Democrats have been seen as the party of the indigent and dependent (which is true), they are also the voice of a middle class that is seen as increasingly invisible—because they don’t work the levers of government by orchestrating who gets elected via massive campaign cash.

So, if massive cuts that hurt the poor and elderly get blocked by Democrats in the Senate, if the repeal of Obamacare (seen as virtually impossible by strategists on both sides of the aisle) fails—and efforts to cut corporate taxes likewise get bogged down in Congress, what’s left in the Republican toolbox?

Enlighten us. Mr. or Ms. Republican President…what EXACTLY would you do?

They can’t, because they haven’t a clue. Democrats don’t either. The system is broken because rational thought rarely accompanies public policy.

Vested, special interests—and their cash to buy political office—are the major force in influencing the direction of the country.


A President who seeks compromise is ridiculed by an opposition that refuses to budge—and pilloried by his own party for being “weak” and giving away the store.

Maybe there is one man or woman who can truly bring everyone together—but the poisonous atmosphere in Washington makes that likelihood remote. Winning trumps governing—and America is paying the price.


If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

Bonnie & Clyde Liked Fords-Good Advertising?

THE FOLLOWING IS AN UPDATED ENCORE TIM MOORE BLOG

During the crime spree that Bonnie & Clyde were eventually gunned down for, they stole a series of automobiles, switching often in order to keep the police off their trail. It appears, however, that Clyde Barrow’s love for Fords may have been his (and Bonnie’s) undoing.

The lore of Bonnie & Clyde was very real back in the 30’s. Due to the Depression and the hardship it imposed on average Americans, Bonnie & Clyde represented the survival instincts that many people identified with. Due to the extensive newspaper and radio coverage, they became folk heroes of sorts, equal in many ways to movie stars and popular singers. The unusual combination of a man and woman crime duo-with it’s romantic implications-made the two cult figures long before their death. Nevermind the fact that they murdered many in cold blood, often police officers trying to capture them alive.

It appears that Clyde’s love of Fords may have caused him to hang onto one particular car a bit too long. Clyde even wrote something of a fan letter to Henry Ford regarding his product:

“Dear Sir,
While I still have breath in my lungs, I will tell you what a dandy car you make. I have drove (sic) Fords exclusively when I could get away with one. For sustained speed and freedom from trouble the Ford has got every other car skinned and even if my business hasn’t been strictly legal it don’t hurt to tell you what a fine car you got in the V8”

We’ll never know if Ford ever considered using that letter for promotional reasons, but he certainly did not incorporate it into the company’s advertising.

After their ambush killing by police, the car-originally stolen of course, was returned to the original owner following a court battle with police, who were making money off its notoriety. It was on this date that the bullet-riddled 1934 sedan sold for $175,000 to Peter Simon of Jean, Nevada. It has been bought and sold several times.

Below is rare footage of the so-called “Bonnie & Clyde death car”-filmed shortly after the police ambush that took their lives:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNfhef240-g&feature=related

Watch the interesting story of the Bonnie & Clyde Ford V-8 below:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=CEoG65Y-vbM

If you’d like my blog in your e-mail daily, just let me know! Tim.moore@citcomm.com

Birth Of The Electric Guitar

You could say that today is the “birthday” of the electric guitar—as the first patent for such an instrument was awarded on this date in 1937.

The Electro String Corporation received patent # 2,089—the device was known as the Rickenbacker Frying Pan.

Of course, no one at the time knew how this invention would eventually transform music.

The development of the electric guitar came out of a need to make the acoustic guitar heard in an ensemble. On its own, it did just fine, thank you. Add brass, percussion and woodwinds—and the acoustic guitar was lost. Something needed to be done to make the guitar stand out.

Taking the vibration of a guitar string and transforming it into an electrical signal that could be amplified was the goal—and G.D. Beauchamp got it done.

The electric guitar revolutionized jazz, blues and country music—and made rock & roll possible.

A couple of videos today—one a quick musical history of the electric guitar—and the other, the first of a five-part series on the historic evolution of this now indispensable instrument! (if you like Part 1, feel free to click on the You Tube segments for Parts 2-5!)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPRDPWQ7etY



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1wDEmPWM2g


Hard to imagine music without the electric guitar-thanks, G.D. Beauchamp, no doubt strumming the electric harp a bit north of where we are now!


If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

Government Spending: Really The Issue?

As I write this blog, the stock market is in free fall, reeling from last week’s S&P downgrade of America’s credit rating from AAA to AA+. Today, another punch to the gut as Standard & Poor’s has added Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the downgrade list.

What does it all mean?

The S&P claimed their decision was based more on the political bickering that preceded the raising of the debt limit than on the deficit itself. The rationale was that this current political climate-extreme polarization—leads to the feeling that our system is dysfunctional (anyone disagree?) and that depressing reality simply overshadowed the numbers themselves.

The crux of the argument is based on two assumptions:

1) President Obama and the Democrats believe in more government and, conversely,
2) Republicans believe in less government.

It could be that this oversimplification is unjustified.

Since everyone hates taxes and feels (perhaps justifiably so) that politicians of any party tend to squander our tax dollars, the fewer taxes we send to Uncle Sam, the better. Plus, an ailing economy requires less taxation in order to stimulate the consumer spending that we equate with a robust economy.

All of this makes sense, which is why ( I think) the Tea Party has gained so much traction in our political discourse. Rep. Ron Paul has openly said that maybe a complete default is the medicine we need to provide the necessary “correction”. He may indeed be right, but no one wants to experience the pain, havoc and social upheaval that a default would promise.

When I ask conservatives exactly WHAT was it that pulled America out of the Great Depression, I get one definitive answer:

“World War II.”

When I probe deeper and ask what EXACTLY about World War II caused the United States to rebound from the Depression, again I get a similar response:

“The war put America back to work, building planes and tanks and implements of war”

I then set the trap. Exactly WHO paid for all of this?

Oops.

The U.S. Government.

So, “World War II was essentially a very costly government stimulus program, no?”—I ask them.

Crickets.

There is no “less government is better” response that doesn’t paint them into a hypocritical corner.

Although you’ll never hear this from a Republican leader heading into an election year, experts from both parties and throughout the economic sector have agreed in the past that there is very little the President (any President) can do to turn an economy around.

Until the recent debt crisis, the stock market was flourishing---does Obama deserve some credit for that? Probably not. But then, he cannot bear the blame when, in an economy that's producing record profits, those companies seeing the windfall have decided not to hire additional workers and expand.

Why is that?

Credit/short term paper for businesses has never been cheaper. Expand, grow and reap ever greater revenues. Why not? But that’s not happening. What’s a Chief Executive to do?

While Ben Bernanke has many critics, it should be duly noted that, despite his policies’ attachment to the Obama Administration,

1) He was Bush’s man, not Obama’s and
2) His management of the Fed is not based on politics.

The best politics for any party is economic health and vitality. Whatever it takes to get there will be the course taken, regardless of who is in office. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is not a raging liberal. He’s a Wall Street guy. The same for the departed Larry Summers. Their heads are wrapped around performance and stability, not who is projected to be re-elected.

Bernanke is well regarded as a student of and an expert on the Great Depression. There is considerable evidence to suggest that massive government spending in the SHORT TERM (and this is key-short term) can help avoid the severe downturns. In fact, Bernanke will state that the Great Depression was easing because of FDR’s programs until political opposition created an environment where further stimulus became politically impossible (sound familiar?)

As a result, the country, instead of recovering, plunged into a deeper hole-a true Depression—until the unavoidable government stimulus (WWII) gave us the sustained boost that created a generation of unprecedented growth and affluence.

The emergence of the middle class was key to this success. Today, the middle class is evaporating—as more people fall either below the poverty line—or, conversely, they rise to the ultra-rich stratosphere, where the Bush tax cuts can protect them further.

We, as a nation, are INSANE.

We need to scrap the U.S. tax code and start from scratch. Since the political landscape cannot allow Congress to be in charge of overseeing this gargantuan task, I think that we should sequester the very best economic brains in an effort to come up with a plan for the future.

Economic Marshall Law, if you will. Bretton Woods, 2011. Give the lawmakers political cover by agreeing to the legislative equivalent of mediation. A “disinterested” third party (this blue-ribbon commission of the best and brightest economic minds) would return to Congress a comprehensive blueprint.

Congress would then be compelled to vote on it—up or down, no amendments, no revisions and zero arm-twisting by special interests.

A fair tax system—personal income tax, corporate income tax and all other forms of revenue—need to be administered fairly and across all spectrums of income.

We need the revenue to run the government. We need government investment, especially in the area of energy—to be able to lead the world in this century as we have in the last. The interstate highway system---in the Republican Eisenhower Administration—was a HUGE government program—but it created massive employment and spurred the transportation of goods that we still benefit from today.

I don’t trust the politicians to solve our problems. A narrow ideological agenda (like that of the Tea Party) leads to a belief that growth comes only from lowering taxes. The Bush tax cuts were designed to boost the economy by leading to investment and spending.

OK, we tried it.

Let’s move on and develop a new system that gives the government the revenue it needs-but let’s make a system where fairness and equitable shared burden is the hallmark.

That’s not the case now.


If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

The Billboard Hot 100

We Americans are obsessed with numbers—and we do love our trivia too.

So here’s a question that you can stump your friends with:

“What was the very first #1 song on the very first Billboard Hot 100 Singles Chart?”

We’ll have the answer—and the video---right after a word from our sponsor…me!

It was on this date in 1958 (when I was a mere 11 days old) that Billboard Magazine introduced the “Hot 100 Singles Chart”. Of course, there were charts before, but they measured different stuff.

There was the “Best Sellers In Stores” tracking actual sales, the “Most Played By Jockeys”, those songs that radio DJ’s were spinning the most (presumably from requests) and “Most Played On Jukeboxes”. This last one was discontinued in 1957 as the popularity of jukeboxes faded.

Originally a blend of sales and airplay, the chart nowadays is based on monitored (certified) radio exposure of songs. Billboard instantly became the standard back in the late 50’s—and the name is synonymous with “the chart”.

OK, now for the answer to our trivia question:

“Poor Little Fool” by Ricky Nelson, the very first #1 song on the Billboard Hot 100 Singles Chart. Here it is:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R12H8QWnwvE


Since that very first chart-topper, there have been 1,005 #1 songs on the Billboard Chart, the most current being “Party Rock Anthem” by LMFAO (as of the August 13th issue). Trust me, that tune sounds NOTHING like Ricky Nelson!

The method for deciding how each song is evaluated has changed many times over the years, but as musicologist Joel Whitburn quoted DJ Don Imus as saying, “It’s not #1 until it’s #1 in Billboard!”

If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know!
Tim.moore@citcomm.com