Madonna Goes Number 1 and ‘The New York Times’ Just Can’t Deal

Patriarchy, indeed!

No sooner did Madonna’s 14th studio album, Madame X, hit number one on the Billboard charts than “The New York Times,” in their entertainment roundup by Ben Sisario, felt the need to acknowledge the accomplishment by undercutting the world’s biggest selling female recording artist. Madame X is a thief.

Under a headline admitting Madonna has her 9th number one — oh, how that must have hurt — the subhead reads “the pop star’s new album debuted at the top of the chart with assistance from a ticket bundle.” Right there, in big bold print, above the piece, making sure every reader or casual virtual page-turner could get their “Madge Cheated” fix. Cause we know she didn’t really earn it. Or anything. Her headstone will read, “Madonna didn’t deserve this burial plot. Besides, she’s already died a thousand times.”

Yes, Madonna included copies of Madame X with concert ticket purchases, and, yes, the “Times” itself, to its credit, ran a recent piece by Sisario on the subject of album-merchandise bundling. In their business section, where scrutiny in finances is expected. And there’s nothing wrong with including a mention of the trend inside the blurb.

But this is your wakeup call, readers: In all the years I’ve been reading the Arts daily roundup, it’s been consistently just that — a short summary of what’s happening in the world of entertainment. Sure, they say if movies are disappointments, sale-wise, or if a new single faired less well than a previous one, or if a theatrical show closed because of poor ticket sales, but never have I once encountered the puff-piece section calling “fraud” on a simple Billboard placement. And swindle did they write.

“So was Madame X the most popular album of the week? Or just the most popular ticket?” Sisario writes, rhetorically, near the end of a piece that mentions ticket-bundling deals five times in a seven-paragraph blurb. If you say it enough times…

He even starts the summary off with the salacious taunt, “Madonna has a new album. Madonna has a big tour. Madonna’s album goes to №1.” We know it’s going to go downhill from there. Get that hard candy out, cause she’s in for a whipping.

Hell, if the “Times” covered Trump this hard we might actually be able to restore democracy.

Never mind that Madonna’s tour is, by previous comparisons, a small one — and, believe it or not, not everyone in the United States, including this writer, has a ticket — and never mind that in these days of rapidly declining album sales new marketing techniques are pretty much practiced by everyone, and never mind that a lot of artists simply give their albums away for higher sales, or charge, like 99 cents, and never mind that Madonna beat out the number 2 album by approximately 30 thousand units, and never mind that Madame X was massively leaked a week before its debut — if the reporter is so adamant at discovering the truth, how did he somehow miss that detail? I mean, in this day and age leaked listens should count, right? I had a good ten digital copies of the album sent to my in-box, pre-release date.

Never mind any of that because Madonna can’t win, in huge part because the runner-up is, Holy Western Water!, Bruce Springsteen. The boss. The man. The real deal. Sure, they’d let someone else beat him, and they’d even let it be a girl. Just not that girl. Madame X is a nasty woman.

Madonna’s treated here like the pop version of the run-up to Iraq: Decide who should be eviscierated then create the evidence to support your conclusion.

Sisario writes that low streams are a sure indicator that Madonna’s album didn’t do very well — only 5.4 million (“the lowest number of streams for any №1 album this year”). It does sound fishy until he mentions that Springsteen was streamed 4.4 million times — I was never much good at math but doesn’t that mean more people pressed play for her? — and that artists like Streisand have had number ones in the past few years with virtually no streams. Damn, let’s get back to that oh-so-coy marketing scheme.

Honest able Bruce didn’t offer an album with his show (he’s not touring), and his “sole merchandise bundle appears to be a T-shirt with a CD or vinyl record.” Um, hold the future phone, but doesn’t a free shirt fall under the category of “marketing”? Don’t tell me even Bruce has a hungry sales heart. Everyone wants to sell albums, and everyone who’s ever had so much as a hit single markets their work in various ways. Had Springsteen personally traversed the globe and handed out copies of his album to passersby there would have been a global celebration of his staying power and grit.

Look, “NYT,” I’m sorry Madonna didn’t much care for your recent magazine expose on her, and I’m sorry that, ever since the slanted 2003 “American Life” article, the one that falsely claimed she hadn’t had a hit in ages (she’d recently released the top ten single “Die Another Day,” and the writer, Lynette Holloway, was eventually fired for falsifying another piece), you’ve had your heart set on bringing her down, and I’m sorry Homeboy didn’t reach the top spot this week. I mean, you had such Stars in your eyes. But, at least for a week, give it up, and, more importantly, give it up for the Queen of Pop. Madame X is a winner.