Worst in 30 years: What Hottest 100 says about the state of Aussie music
Triple J has defended the lack of Australian representation in its Hottest 100 after this year’s countdown saw just 29 local artists included, down from 52 the previous year.
American artist Chappell Roan took out the top spot with Good Luck, Babe, edging out Sydney band Royel Otis, who came in second with their Like A Version cover of English singer Sophie Ellis Bextor’s 2001 track Murder on the Dancefloor.
This year’s poll is the third-lowest-ever showing for local talent, behind the first two in 1993 and ’94 (and equal to 1996). And it reignites a conversation about how to safeguard the future of Australian music in the era of globalised streaming.
Lachlan Macara, head of Triple J, suggests there were both cyclical and structural factors at play in the result.
“It’s the first time in a long while that Australian artist representation in the countdown has dipped below 50 per cent,” he says, attributing the result to “a confluence of events. There were some massive international releases – namely Billie Eilish, Charli XCX and Kendrick Lamar – that the listeners loved, and we’ve seen that reflected in the votes.”
However, he also concedes, “there’s no doubt we need to have a bigger conversation about Australian music discoverability across the entire media landscape in this country”.
The under-representation of Australian artists in the Hottest 100, alongside the fact that just five Australian songs finished in ARIA’s top 100 for 2024, speaks to a broader issue facing the local music scene: visibility and discoverability in the streaming era.
Triple J has a mandate to play 40 per cent Australian music, a target that music director Nick Findlay claims it regularly exceeds. “We consistently play well over 50 per cent of Australian music weekly,” he recently told The Guardian.
But according to Tim Kelly, a UTS researcher and former executive with Sony and Universal, the ABC’s youth network could play Australian music all day, every day, and it still wouldn’t move the needle.
“The Australian music industry is highly concentrated; over half the revenue derived from recorded music in Australia comes through Spotify, while Universal Music is the dominant record label,” says Kelly.
“Along with Sony and Warner, these three labels were responsible for more than 95 per cent of the Australian top 100 single and album charts. We are becoming a one-shop town with a dominant supplier, which doesn’t leave room for diversity.”
Australians are streaming music in record numbers – according to a 2024 report from US-based research company Luminate, we registered a 10.2 per cent growth in streaming numbers in 2023. But Australian acts make up just 9.2 per cent of what’s streamed here.
Streaming via platforms such as Spotify and Apple Music has been the dominant format for Australian recorded music since 2017, and it has led to consumption habits being dictated by algorithms rather than radio station programmers.
“Algorithmic curation is very centrist,” says Kelly. “It doubles down on what’s successful at the expense of those on the margins. In our case, that means Australian acts.
Foreign artists have always dominated the Australian charts, Kelly notes, “but the algorithm is doubling down. They used to occupy 50 per cent of chart space; now they’re closer to 75 per cent”.
Just as the film and TV industries have sought to counter the impact of streaming through local quotas (which are yet to be introduced), federal Arts Minister Tony Burke has suggested music streamers could be forced to change their algorithms to ensure Australian artists and songs are more prominent.
In 2023, during an address to the National Press Club, Burke hinted that Music Australia, a new body created to support and invest in the Australian contemporary music industry, could tackle the issue.
“Getting inside those algorithms and getting a better deal for Australian music will make a huge difference for Australian artists,” Burke said. “But I need the expertise and the advice of Music Australia for us to take that next step.”
In response to questions from this masthead for this story, Burke said: “A lot needs to be done to put the local music industry on stronger foundations. That’s why we established Music Australia and have been funding festivals and venues through Revive Live. I want our own music to be the soundtrack to life in Australia.”
But Kelly argues that’s easier said than done. “If you’re Spotify and Australia is less than 5 per cent of your market, do you care? There’s no real incentive for them to make a change.”
Compounding the agony is a business model that sees big bucks being made off back catalogues. “Old music is more profitable than new music,” says Kelly. “Whether you stream Fleetwood Mac or the new Dom Dolla, it’s a stream, but for the company, the Fleetwood Mac stream is worth more because royalties are higher now than they were back in the day.”
Kelly believes this creates a flow-on effect that sees labels investing less in new artists, especially if they are Australian, because companies aren’t getting the return.
Rather than relying on global streamers tinkering with their algorithms, Kelly says the key to helping Australian artists come in from the cold (and get back into the Hottest 100) is investing in our cultural differences.
“In 2023, the government paid Coldplay $8 million to play in Perth, but that should go to Australian companies supporting our local scene. The instinct is to fund what’s most popular, but new and successful music comes out of marginal scenes. Look at the history of hip hop and punk, fringe movements from disadvantaged communities that become success stories.”
Kelly points to the overseas success of artists like Rufus du Soul, King Gizzard & the Lizard Wizard and Amyl and the Sniffers as proof of the local scene’s viability.
“The streaming behemoth is already out of the gate,” he says. “But by resisting the centrist approach and targeting niche areas, we can work our way back.”