WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.200 I want you to imagine just for a second what 00:00:02.200 --> 00:00:04.919 it actually takes to manufacture a truly global 00:00:04.919 --> 00:00:07.740 pop moment in today's world. Oh, it's a massive 00:00:07.740 --> 00:00:09.480 undertaking. Right. Like if you were sitting 00:00:09.480 --> 00:00:12.199 in the war room of a major record label, what 00:00:12.199 --> 00:00:14.119 would your strategy look like? Is it just about 00:00:14.119 --> 00:00:17.039 having an undeniably catchy beat and, you know, 00:00:17.039 --> 00:00:19.480 hoping for the best? Definitely not. Or is it 00:00:19.480 --> 00:00:22.539 a multimillion dollar marketing machine working 00:00:22.539 --> 00:00:25.199 tirelessly behind the scenes to force a song 00:00:25.199 --> 00:00:28.339 into our collective consciousness? Or... And 00:00:28.339 --> 00:00:30.559 this is the really fascinating part. Is there 00:00:30.559 --> 00:00:32.979 something else at play? Something completely 00:00:32.979 --> 00:00:35.679 unpredictable and organic that ultimately decides 00:00:35.679 --> 00:00:37.840 whether a song becomes a flash in the pan or 00:00:37.840 --> 00:00:39.840 a multi -year anthem? That's the real question. 00:00:40.060 --> 00:00:42.659 Welcome to the Deep Dive. Today, we have a really 00:00:42.659 --> 00:00:45.799 unique mission for you. We are looking at a single 00:00:45.799 --> 00:00:48.479 source document. It's the Wikipedia page for 00:00:48.479 --> 00:00:51.780 a 2023 track called One of Us by the American 00:00:51.780 --> 00:00:55.310 singer -songwriter Ava Max. Honestly, it's a 00:00:55.310 --> 00:00:58.250 fantastic exercise. Yeah. Because at first glance, 00:00:58.369 --> 00:01:01.289 a Wikipedia page for a pop song might just look 00:01:01.289 --> 00:01:05.129 like a dry list of release dates, a roster of 00:01:05.129 --> 00:01:07.269 producers you've never met, and a bunch of chart 00:01:07.269 --> 00:01:08.890 numbers from countries you've never visited. 00:01:08.969 --> 00:01:11.579 Exactly. Just raw data. Right. But if you take 00:01:11.579 --> 00:01:13.599 a step back and read between the lines, you start 00:01:13.599 --> 00:01:15.780 to see the hidden machinery. This single page 00:01:15.780 --> 00:01:19.760 reveals the entire anatomy of a modern hit. It 00:01:19.760 --> 00:01:22.739 shows us how a song is built, the highly calculated 00:01:22.739 --> 00:01:25.359 way it's deployed to the public, and how it can 00:01:25.359 --> 00:01:28.239 leave a surprisingly specific, almost baffling 00:01:28.239 --> 00:01:30.519 geographical footprint. Right. And we are going 00:01:30.519 --> 00:01:33.000 to deconstruct this track piece by piece to see 00:01:33.000 --> 00:01:35.659 that machinery in action. Okay, let's unpack 00:01:35.659 --> 00:01:37.239 this by starting with the timeline. Let's do 00:01:37.239 --> 00:01:40.319 it. Because the sheer speed of the song's initial 00:01:40.319 --> 00:01:43.120 release tells us so much about the modern music 00:01:43.120 --> 00:01:45.799 industry playbook. If we look at the dates provided 00:01:45.799 --> 00:01:48.140 in the source, Ava Max officially announced One 00:01:48.140 --> 00:01:51.840 of Us on January 10th, 2023. And she did this 00:01:51.840 --> 00:01:54.019 via social media, just uploading a quick little 00:01:54.019 --> 00:01:57.180 snippet of a music video. Then, literally two 00:01:57.180 --> 00:02:01.079 days later, yes. Two days later, on January 12th, 00:02:01.079 --> 00:02:03.340 the song was fully released digitally and on 00:02:03.340 --> 00:02:05.599 streaming platforms through Atlantic Records. 00:02:05.859 --> 00:02:08.919 Bam! out in the world just like that and it wasn't 00:02:08.919 --> 00:02:12.159 even until january 27th that the official visualizer 00:02:12.159 --> 00:02:13.979 dropped on youtube and for anyone who might not 00:02:13.979 --> 00:02:16.360 be familiar with that term a visualizer is usually 00:02:16.360 --> 00:02:18.800 just a looping graphic or a very simple animation 00:02:18.800 --> 00:02:22.599 it acts as a placeholder to rack up youtube streams 00:02:22.599 --> 00:02:25.219 before a high budget music video is ready which 00:02:25.219 --> 00:02:28.520 is a very standard practice right and not coincidentally 00:02:28.520 --> 00:02:31.840 january 27th was the exact same day the parent 00:02:31.840 --> 00:02:34.199 album diamonds and dance falls was released that 00:02:34.199 --> 00:02:37.930 highly compressed to day timeline is everything 00:02:37.930 --> 00:02:40.490 you need to know about the modern attention economy. 00:02:40.729 --> 00:02:42.990 Yeah. But if you look back at how things used 00:02:42.990 --> 00:02:45.189 to be done, you had these traditional months 00:02:45.189 --> 00:02:47.849 long radio campaigns. Oh, the buildup was huge. 00:02:48.229 --> 00:02:50.330 Yeah. A label would send a physical single out 00:02:50.330 --> 00:02:52.629 to radio programmers. They'd slowly build up 00:02:52.629 --> 00:02:55.250 spins over weeks, tease a music video on television, 00:02:55.370 --> 00:02:57.849 and then eventually, maybe two months later, 00:02:57.969 --> 00:03:00.030 you could actually go buy the single. Today, 00:03:00.330 --> 00:03:03.949 that strategy is completely inverted. The mechanism 00:03:03.949 --> 00:03:06.949 now is a quick social media tease to gauge and 00:03:06.949 --> 00:03:10.110 build immediate hype, followed by an almost instantaneous 00:03:10.110 --> 00:03:13.879 drop. The reality is you have to capitalize on 00:03:13.879 --> 00:03:16.080 that viral momentum before the audience gets 00:03:16.080 --> 00:03:18.139 distracted by the next shiny object on their 00:03:18.139 --> 00:03:20.939 feed. It feels incredibly intense. To me, it 00:03:20.939 --> 00:03:22.879 really reminds me of someone hiding in your living 00:03:22.879 --> 00:03:25.460 room, jumping out, shouting surprise, and then 00:03:25.460 --> 00:03:27.219 immediately throwing the cake directly at your 00:03:27.219 --> 00:03:29.800 face. That is a very visceral analogy, but it's 00:03:29.800 --> 00:03:32.939 not wrong. There is absolutely zero time to process 00:03:32.939 --> 00:03:34.800 the anticipation. You just get the whole thing 00:03:34.800 --> 00:03:37.039 all at once. But looking closer at the release 00:03:37.039 --> 00:03:40.099 history section, there is this bizarre outlier 00:03:40.099 --> 00:03:41.819 that seems... seems to contradict that whole 00:03:41.819 --> 00:03:44.319 need for speed approach. Ooh, the Italian radio 00:03:44.319 --> 00:03:47.560 push. Yes. So the digital drop happens instantly 00:03:47.560 --> 00:03:50.259 on January 12th for the whole world. But then 00:03:50.259 --> 00:03:52.360 the song was sent to Italian contemporary hit 00:03:52.360 --> 00:03:55.610 radio via Warner three entire months later. on 00:03:55.610 --> 00:03:58.930 April 14th, 2023. And contemporary hit radio 00:03:58.930 --> 00:04:02.050 is just the industry term for standard top 40 00:04:02.050 --> 00:04:06.310 FM radio. So why the massive delay? If the goal 00:04:06.310 --> 00:04:09.310 is immediate consumption, what is going on with 00:04:09.310 --> 00:04:12.610 the three -month lag for Italian radio? You're 00:04:12.610 --> 00:04:15.110 looking at the hybrid strategy in action. And 00:04:15.110 --> 00:04:17.490 it's actually a brilliant piece of logistical 00:04:17.490 --> 00:04:19.990 maneuvering. We tend to assume the whole world 00:04:19.990 --> 00:04:22.550 gets music at the exact same second now. And 00:04:22.550 --> 00:04:25.899 digitally, they do. But traditional radio operates 00:04:25.899 --> 00:04:27.839 on a completely different timeline. Especially 00:04:27.839 --> 00:04:29.639 internationally, right? Especially internationally. 00:04:30.879 --> 00:04:33.420 Labels have to balance the instant global streaming 00:04:33.420 --> 00:04:36.439 drop with delayed, highly targeted regional radio 00:04:36.439 --> 00:04:39.980 pushes. Why Italy in April? Well, they were likely 00:04:39.980 --> 00:04:42.420 looking at internal streaming data that indicated 00:04:42.420 --> 00:04:44.240 the song was starting to naturally catch fire 00:04:44.240 --> 00:04:46.920 in southern Europe. Oh, interesting. Or, perhaps 00:04:46.920 --> 00:04:49.000 more strategically, they were prepping for the 00:04:49.000 --> 00:04:51.790 European summer club season. By holding back 00:04:51.790 --> 00:04:54.389 that traditional radio push until April, they 00:04:54.389 --> 00:04:56.750 ensured the song was fresh on the airwaves right 00:04:56.750 --> 00:04:58.529 as people were heading out for the summer. So 00:04:58.529 --> 00:05:00.829 they're timing the physical environment. Exactly. 00:05:00.829 --> 00:05:03.329 It's hyper -local micromanagement running entirely 00:05:03.329 --> 00:05:05.860 parallel to a global free -for -all. So they're 00:05:05.860 --> 00:05:07.980 essentially hedging their bets. They give the 00:05:07.980 --> 00:05:10.660 internet what it demands instantly, but they 00:05:10.660 --> 00:05:12.879 still play the long game with traditional media 00:05:12.879 --> 00:05:15.199 where it makes geographical sense. Precisely. 00:05:15.199 --> 00:05:17.100 It requires two entirely different marketing 00:05:17.100 --> 00:05:19.560 brains operating simultaneously. Here's where 00:05:19.560 --> 00:05:21.920 it gets really interesting. Because the way this 00:05:21.920 --> 00:05:24.980 song was deployed is only half the story. The 00:05:24.980 --> 00:05:28.060 other half is the actual DNA of the track itself. 00:05:28.699 --> 00:05:31.120 If we look at the song's vital statistics, it 00:05:31.120 --> 00:05:35.220 clocks in at a very brisk 2 minutes and 58 seconds. 00:05:35.480 --> 00:05:37.839 Very standard for the streaming era. Yeah, and 00:05:37.839 --> 00:05:40.680 the genre is firmly and definitively listed as 00:05:40.680 --> 00:05:43.660 disco and dance. It's an upbeat, get -on -the 00:05:43.660 --> 00:05:46.279 -floor track. However, if you read the critical 00:05:46.279 --> 00:05:48.620 reception section of the source, the reviewers 00:05:48.620 --> 00:05:51.620 specifically praised its ballad influences. Yes, 00:05:51.680 --> 00:05:53.879 alongside her vocal performance and the lyricism. 00:05:53.959 --> 00:05:55.879 Right, so we have a sub -three -minute disco 00:05:55.879 --> 00:05:58.000 dance track that critics are openly referring 00:05:58.000 --> 00:06:01.339 to. to as a ballad how does a track carry that 00:06:01.339 --> 00:06:03.579 kind of weight when it's built for a club what's 00:06:03.579 --> 00:06:05.980 fascinating here is that intentional contradiction 00:06:05.980 --> 00:06:09.660 how do you fit the emotional weight of a ballad 00:06:09.660 --> 00:06:12.579 and the rhythmic driving tempo of a disco track 00:06:12.579 --> 00:06:14.839 into less than three minutes it sounds impossible 00:06:14.839 --> 00:06:18.100 it does but this blending of high energy tempo 00:06:18.100 --> 00:06:22.000 with heavy emotional ballad -like lyrical content 00:06:22.000 --> 00:06:25.540 is practically a cornerstone of modern pop perfection 00:06:25.540 --> 00:06:28.759 think of it as the Crying on the dance floor 00:06:28.759 --> 00:06:31.220 phenomenon. Oh, I love that phrase, crying on 00:06:31.220 --> 00:06:33.240 the dance floor. The tempo gets your body moving, 00:06:33.339 --> 00:06:35.439 which makes the track universally accessible 00:06:35.439 --> 00:06:38.240 and incredibly playlist friendly for streaming 00:06:38.240 --> 00:06:41.079 algorithms. But the ballad -like vulnerability 00:06:41.079 --> 00:06:43.720 in the lyrics is what actually connects with 00:06:43.720 --> 00:06:45.879 the listener on a human level. It makes the song 00:06:45.879 --> 00:06:47.740 stick in your head, in your heart, not just your 00:06:47.740 --> 00:06:50.139 feet. That makes sense conceptually, but practically, 00:06:50.300 --> 00:06:52.300 building something that complex and perfectly 00:06:52.300 --> 00:06:55.180 engineered doesn't happen by accident. The source 00:06:55.180 --> 00:06:57.600 lists the starting lineup required to build this 00:06:57.600 --> 00:07:00.480 track, and it is a massive team. It takes a village. 00:07:00.759 --> 00:07:03.139 Literally. It was written by five people. Amanda 00:07:03.139 --> 00:07:06.350 Ava Kochi, which is Ava Max herself. Brett McLaughlin, 00:07:06.389 --> 00:07:09.069 who goes by Leland, Caroline Allen, Henry Walter, 00:07:09.209 --> 00:07:11.970 known as Circuit, and Matthew Burns. And then 00:07:11.970 --> 00:07:13.949 it was produced by Circuit and Burns. So that's 00:07:13.949 --> 00:07:15.889 five writers and two heavy -hitting producers, 00:07:16.149 --> 00:07:18.910 all meticulously crafting every single second. 00:07:19.110 --> 00:07:22.230 But doesn't that risk turning the song into a 00:07:22.230 --> 00:07:26.819 Too Many Cooks in the Kitchen? How does a track 00:07:26.819 --> 00:07:29.259 like One of Us avoid sounding like a chaotic 00:07:29.259 --> 00:07:31.420 mess with that many people involved? It's a fair 00:07:31.420 --> 00:07:34.480 question. But in modern pop music, having a large 00:07:34.480 --> 00:07:37.379 team is less about a power struggle and more 00:07:37.379 --> 00:07:40.459 about hyper -specialization. It's a highly collaborative, 00:07:40.680 --> 00:07:43.439 iterative process, often born out of what the 00:07:43.439 --> 00:07:45.579 industry calls writing camps. Writing camps, 00:07:45.759 --> 00:07:47.920 right. In a team of five writers and two producers, 00:07:48.139 --> 00:07:50.519 you rarely have everyone shouting over each other. 00:07:50.660 --> 00:07:52.939 Instead, you might have one person whose soul 00:07:52.939 --> 00:07:55.949 -obsessive focus is the baseline groove. Another 00:07:55.949 --> 00:07:58.410 person might be an absolute master at crafting 00:07:58.410 --> 00:08:00.509 the mathematical phrasing of the lyrical hook 00:08:00.509 --> 00:08:03.550 so it perfectly fits the tempo. Someone else 00:08:03.550 --> 00:08:05.430 figures out the emotional arc of the melody, 00:08:05.569 --> 00:08:08.269 while the artist themselves ensures the narrative 00:08:08.269 --> 00:08:11.110 feels authentic to their voice. It's a literal 00:08:11.110 --> 00:08:14.470 architectural feat to pack all of that into under 00:08:14.470 --> 00:08:16.790 three minutes without it sounding cluttered. 00:08:17.120 --> 00:08:19.360 So it's more like an assembly line of specialists 00:08:19.360 --> 00:08:22.300 rather than a garage band jamming it out. Exactly. 00:08:22.399 --> 00:08:25.339 And the result is a track that functions on multiple 00:08:25.339 --> 00:08:28.000 levels. I'd actually encourage you, the listener, 00:08:28.160 --> 00:08:30.600 to do an experiment later today. Oh, I like homework. 00:08:30.920 --> 00:08:33.879 Think about your own favorite upbeat, high -energy 00:08:33.879 --> 00:08:37.259 pop songs. Put on some headphones and listen 00:08:37.259 --> 00:08:39.720 closely to just the lyrics and the vocal delivery. 00:08:40.500 --> 00:08:43.539 Ignore the bass and the drums. You might be surprised 00:08:43.539 --> 00:08:45.940 to find how many of your absolute favorite party 00:08:45.940 --> 00:08:48.759 anthems are actually secretly sad ballads in 00:08:48.759 --> 00:08:51.220 disguise. Engineered by a team of specialists 00:08:51.220 --> 00:08:53.539 to make you dance through the heartbreak. Precisely. 00:08:53.580 --> 00:08:55.179 I am definitely going to do that. So we have 00:08:55.179 --> 00:08:57.919 this perfectly engineered disco ballad assembled 00:08:57.919 --> 00:09:00.639 by a team of specialists and pushed out with 00:09:00.639 --> 00:09:03.940 a cutting edge hybrid release strategy. But where 00:09:03.940 --> 00:09:06.860 does it actually land? This is where the Wikipedia 00:09:06.860 --> 00:09:09.759 page starts to read like a slightly surreal geography 00:09:09.759 --> 00:09:12.549 lesson. The global reach is wild. Let's look 00:09:12.549 --> 00:09:14.570 at the scattered global chart performance because 00:09:14.570 --> 00:09:17.029 it is all over the map. The source notes this 00:09:17.029 --> 00:09:19.889 song hit number four on the Austria Airplay chart. 00:09:20.210 --> 00:09:23.009 It went to number 13 on the U .S. Hot Dance Electronic 00:09:23.009 --> 00:09:26.009 Billboard chart. Over in New Zealand, it hit 00:09:26.009 --> 00:09:29.269 number 32 on their Hot Singles chart. Oh, the 00:09:29.269 --> 00:09:31.889 South Korea one. Yes, it pops up at number 92 00:09:31.889 --> 00:09:35.070 on the South Korea BGM Circle chart. And we should 00:09:35.070 --> 00:09:37.029 clarify what that specific chart is because it's 00:09:37.029 --> 00:09:39.909 fascinating. BGM stands for background music. 00:09:40.070 --> 00:09:42.870 It tracks the songs that users in South Korea 00:09:42.870 --> 00:09:45.490 are purchasing to use as background music for 00:09:45.490 --> 00:09:48.250 their social media profiles and blogs. Wow. It's 00:09:48.250 --> 00:09:50.549 a very distinct metric of cultural resonance 00:09:50.549 --> 00:09:52.990 that goes beyond just passive radio listening. 00:09:53.340 --> 00:09:55.960 That adds such a cool layer to it. People are 00:09:55.960 --> 00:09:58.200 actually choosing this song to represent their 00:09:58.200 --> 00:10:01.019 online identity in South Korea. And the global 00:10:01.019 --> 00:10:04.240 reach doesn't stop there. The source also highlights 00:10:04.240 --> 00:10:07.419 a massive targeted presence on the Monitor Latino 00:10:07.419 --> 00:10:10.120 Angle charts. Right, which specifically track 00:10:10.120 --> 00:10:12.379 the performance of English language music on 00:10:12.379 --> 00:10:15.360 Latin American radio stations. Exactly. And one 00:10:15.360 --> 00:10:17.980 of us hit number eight in Bolivia, number 14 00:10:17.980 --> 00:10:21.610 in Uruguay, and number 16 in El Salvador. Those 00:10:21.610 --> 00:10:23.970 data points are incredibly revealing because 00:10:23.970 --> 00:10:27.169 they completely dismantle the old idea of how 00:10:27.169 --> 00:10:30.190 a hit song travels. Decades ago, a song usually 00:10:30.190 --> 00:10:32.830 broke out in one primary country, say the U .S. 00:10:32.830 --> 00:10:35.450 or the U .K., and then slowly rolled across the 00:10:35.450 --> 00:10:38.149 globe like a monolithic ways, country by country. 00:10:38.269 --> 00:10:41.110 Like a slow infection. Exactly. Now, because 00:10:41.110 --> 00:10:42.990 of streaming and a hyper -fragmented Internet 00:10:42.990 --> 00:10:45.570 culture, you have an English -language disco 00:10:45.570 --> 00:10:48.210 track dominating specific Anglo charts across 00:10:48.210 --> 00:10:50.950 South America while simultaneously getting radio 00:10:50.950 --> 00:10:53.490 play in Austria and being used as profile music 00:10:53.490 --> 00:10:55.330 in South Korea. It's everywhere all at once. 00:10:55.509 --> 00:10:58.090 It proves that modern pop music doesn't just 00:10:58.090 --> 00:11:15.600 come... But looking at all this regional data, 00:11:15.700 --> 00:11:17.860 there is one anomaly here that I found genuinely 00:11:17.860 --> 00:11:21.250 puzzling. Of all the global markets, this song 00:11:21.250 --> 00:11:23.850 didn't just chart in Hungary. It basically took 00:11:23.850 --> 00:11:25.909 up permanent residence there. The Hungary numbers 00:11:25.909 --> 00:11:27.750 are incredible. And I don't just mean it had 00:11:27.750 --> 00:11:29.690 a good week. I mean, it became an institution. 00:11:30.429 --> 00:11:32.370 Let's walk through these Hungarian numbers from 00:11:32.370 --> 00:11:35.110 the source because they tell a wild story. In 00:11:35.110 --> 00:11:37.610 2023, the year of the release, it hit number 00:11:37.610 --> 00:11:40.149 eight on their dance top 40, number seven on 00:11:40.149 --> 00:11:42.789 the radio's top 40, and number eight on the single 00:11:42.789 --> 00:11:45.950 top 40. That is a solid, successful launch. Right. 00:11:46.399 --> 00:11:48.700 And on the year -end charts for 2023, it was 00:11:48.700 --> 00:11:51.779 a respectable number 67 on the dance chart and 00:11:51.779 --> 00:11:54.480 number 16 on the radio chart. a very healthy 00:11:54.480 --> 00:11:57.139 lifespan for a modern pop single usually that's 00:11:57.139 --> 00:11:59.580 where the story ends the label moves on the algorithm 00:11:59.580 --> 00:12:02.340 moves on right but that's not what happened if 00:12:02.340 --> 00:12:06.059 we look at the 2024 year -end charts the song 00:12:06.059 --> 00:12:09.159 actually climbed it went up a year after its 00:12:09.159 --> 00:12:11.799 release it went up to number 32 on the year -end 00:12:11.799 --> 00:12:14.279 dance chart and number 38 on the year -end radio 00:12:14.279 --> 00:12:18.539 chart and by 2025 which keep in mind is two full 00:12:18.539 --> 00:12:20.919 years after the song was initially released with 00:12:20.919 --> 00:12:23.610 that two -day social media hype cycle It was 00:12:23.610 --> 00:12:25.669 still charting on the year -end Hungarian Dance 00:12:25.669 --> 00:12:28.429 Top 40 at number 43. That kind of longevity is 00:12:28.429 --> 00:12:31.269 just staggering. In an era where, as we discussed 00:12:31.269 --> 00:12:33.669 earlier, songs are mathematically designed to 00:12:33.669 --> 00:12:35.789 capture attention for a few weeks to feed the 00:12:35.789 --> 00:12:38.870 content machine. One of us. somehow became a 00:12:38.870 --> 00:12:41.789 multi -year staple in hungarian dance clubs it 00:12:41.789 --> 00:12:44.110 defied the gravity of the attention economy it 00:12:44.110 --> 00:12:46.629 completely did and this highlights a really beautiful 00:12:46.629 --> 00:12:48.629 truth about the mechanics of the music industry 00:12:48.629 --> 00:12:51.470 the massive marketing budget the carefully coordinated 00:12:51.470 --> 00:12:54.289 january release strategy the delayed italian 00:12:54.289 --> 00:12:56.269 radio put all of that is just infrastructure 00:12:56.269 --> 00:12:59.389 it starts the song's journey and pushes the boat 00:12:59.389 --> 00:13:01.730 away from the dock but the cultural resonance 00:13:02.399 --> 00:13:05.120 in a specific region. The fact that a track just 00:13:05.120 --> 00:13:07.539 clicks perfectly with the vibe of the clubs in 00:13:07.539 --> 00:13:10.440 Budapest year after year, that is what gives 00:13:10.440 --> 00:13:13.320 the song immortality. You can engineer the launch, 00:13:13.519 --> 00:13:16.299 but you cannot engineer that kind of long -term 00:13:16.299 --> 00:13:18.809 love. The audience just decides. It's a great 00:13:18.809 --> 00:13:21.049 reminder that despite all the data and algorithms, 00:13:21.269 --> 00:13:24.169 the audience always gets the final say. But even 00:13:24.169 --> 00:13:26.450 knowing that an audience might unexpectedly adopt 00:13:26.450 --> 00:13:29.370 a song for three years, the label and the artists 00:13:29.370 --> 00:13:31.750 still have to build a broader framework for these 00:13:31.750 --> 00:13:33.409 songs to live in. They can't just drop singles 00:13:33.409 --> 00:13:35.590 into the void. You need a plan. And that brings 00:13:35.590 --> 00:13:38.330 us to where One of Us fits into Ava Max's broader 00:13:38.330 --> 00:13:41.090 career arc. If we look at the timeline of her 00:13:41.090 --> 00:13:43.509 studio albums in the source, she released Heaven 00:13:43.509 --> 00:13:46.110 and Hell in 2020, then Diamonds and Dance Floors 00:13:46.110 --> 00:13:48.690 in 2023, and her recent album Don't Click Play 00:13:48.690 --> 00:13:51.610 in 2025. One of Us wasn't just a random song. 00:13:51.789 --> 00:13:54.690 It was very specifically the fifth single from 00:13:54.690 --> 00:13:57.250 Diamonds and Dance Floors. It was sandwiched 00:13:57.250 --> 00:13:59.110 in a chronology right between a track called 00:13:59.110 --> 00:14:02.509 Dancing's Done from late 2022 and a track called 00:14:02.509 --> 00:14:06.750 Ghost later in 2023. But why push a fifth single? 00:14:07.370 --> 00:14:10.029 By early 2023, the album was already out. Why 00:14:10.029 --> 00:14:11.750 not just move on to the next project? Because 00:14:11.750 --> 00:14:14.590 of a concept called era building. Era building. 00:14:14.710 --> 00:14:17.720 Yes. When an artist at this level... releases 00:14:17.720 --> 00:14:19.960 an album they aren't just releasing a collection 00:14:19.960 --> 00:14:23.259 of 12 or 14 songs they are establishing an era 00:14:23.259 --> 00:14:25.940 this includes a specific visual look a specific 00:14:25.940 --> 00:14:28.580 sonic profile and a cohesive narrative it's an 00:14:28.580 --> 00:14:30.980 entire world by the time you get to a fifth single 00:14:30.980 --> 00:14:33.460 from one album the artist and the label are working 00:14:33.460 --> 00:14:35.960 to squeeze every single drop of value out of 00:14:35.960 --> 00:14:38.179 that album cycle and a massive part of that value 00:14:38.179 --> 00:14:41.039 is touring ah so releasing a new single gives 00:14:41.039 --> 00:14:43.120 them an excuse to keep the tour going exactly 00:14:43.610 --> 00:14:45.850 Touring is where the actual financial backbone 00:14:45.850 --> 00:14:48.559 of the industry lies today. By stretching an 00:14:48.559 --> 00:14:51.139 album cycle to a fifth single, like One of Us, 00:14:51.299 --> 00:14:53.740 the label justifies keeping the artist on the 00:14:53.740 --> 00:14:56.399 road, adding another leg to a tour, or booking 00:14:56.399 --> 00:14:58.340 another string of festival dates. That makes 00:14:58.340 --> 00:15:00.740 total sense. You aren't just selling a song. 00:15:00.899 --> 00:15:02.899 You're selling the aesthetic of the Diamonds 00:15:02.899 --> 00:15:04.879 and Dance Floors era for an extra six months. 00:15:05.220 --> 00:15:07.500 It keeps the artist in the cultural conversation, 00:15:07.860 --> 00:15:10.240 satisfies the streaming algorithms that demand 00:15:10.240 --> 00:15:12.879 constant new pushes, and gives the album multiple 00:15:12.879 --> 00:15:15.879 chances to find different audiences. One of us 00:15:15.879 --> 00:15:18.299 served as the perfect mid -era anchor to keep 00:15:18.299 --> 00:15:20.440 that momentum going strong before they eventually 00:15:20.440 --> 00:15:22.639 transitioned to the don't -click -play era in 00:15:22.639 --> 00:15:25.740 2025. It really is like watching a masterclass 00:15:25.740 --> 00:15:28.500 in modern pop architecture. We started with what 00:15:28.500 --> 00:15:31.679 seemed, on paper, like a simple, upbeat, 2 minute 00:15:31.679 --> 00:15:34.159 and 58 second track. But when you break down 00:15:34.159 --> 00:15:36.559 this single Wikipedia page, you realize it's 00:15:36.559 --> 00:15:38.679 actually a meticulously crafted disco ballad. 00:15:38.700 --> 00:15:41.480 It really is. It required a team of five highly 00:15:41.480 --> 00:15:44.559 specialized writers and two producers to perfect 00:15:44.559 --> 00:15:46.480 the tension between the lyrics and the beat. 00:15:47.049 --> 00:15:50.049 It required a hyper calculated two day social 00:15:50.049 --> 00:15:52.929 media drop, carefully balanced with the delayed 00:15:52.929 --> 00:15:56.309 targeted European radio strategy. It required 00:15:56.309 --> 00:15:59.149 a global net that somehow capture audiences in 00:15:59.149 --> 00:16:01.929 places as diverge as El Salvador, Austria and 00:16:01.929 --> 00:16:04.649 South Korean social media profiles, ultimately 00:16:04.649 --> 00:16:06.850 taking on a life entirely of its own to become 00:16:06.850 --> 00:16:10.389 a multi -year indestructible dance anthem in 00:16:10.389 --> 00:16:13.190 Hungary. A global puzzle. So what does this all 00:16:13.190 --> 00:16:15.350 mean? If we connect this to the bigger picture. 00:16:15.789 --> 00:16:18.450 It forces us to reconsider how we define success 00:16:18.450 --> 00:16:21.389 in the music industry today. We place so much 00:16:21.389 --> 00:16:23.509 emphasis on the first 48 hours of a release. 00:16:23.649 --> 00:16:26.009 True. We obsess over the viral social media tease, 00:16:26.070 --> 00:16:28.190 the immediate streaming numbers and that hyper 00:16:28.190 --> 00:16:30.649 compressed hype cycle. But this source material 00:16:30.649 --> 00:16:32.690 raises a really important question for you to 00:16:32.690 --> 00:16:35.450 consider. If a song's ultimate, most enduring 00:16:35.450 --> 00:16:38.169 success can quietly thrive in a specific country's 00:16:38.169 --> 00:16:40.529 dance clubs for years after its initial release, 00:16:40.830 --> 00:16:43.710 how much of a song's hit status is actually determined 00:16:43.710 --> 00:16:46.429 by that highly engineered initial launch? And 00:16:46.429 --> 00:16:49.149 how much of it is simply about the music organically 00:16:49.149 --> 00:16:52.570 finding its perfect, unexpected home? The machine 00:16:52.570 --> 00:16:54.590 can definitely make you listen to a song once, 00:16:54.710 --> 00:16:57.269 but only the music itself can make you dance 00:16:57.269 --> 00:17:00.490 to it two years later. The machine starts the 00:17:00.490 --> 00:17:02.789 fire, but the audience decides how long it burns. 00:17:03.070 --> 00:17:05.210 Thank you so much for joining us on this deep 00:17:05.210 --> 00:17:07.609 dive. Hopefully you'll never look at a Wikipedia 00:17:07.609 --> 00:17:10.930 page for a pop song the same way again. And seriously, 00:17:11.150 --> 00:17:13.390 next time you're out somewhere and a massive 00:17:13.390 --> 00:17:15.630 dance track comes on, take a second to focus 00:17:15.630 --> 00:17:17.529 on the lyrics. Look for that ballad hiding inside. 00:17:17.769 --> 00:17:20.410 You might just find one. Until next time, keep 00:17:20.410 --> 00:17:20.890 exploring.