• Yes, Swift fundamentally misunderstands digital platforms

    Taylor Swift and her record company are trying to take a stand against music being free to the end consumer but wrongly believe this action will support that goal. She has spoken many times about her and other artist's "difficulties" that album sales have dropped. While she is entitled to her own opinion the facts speak for themselves. 1989, her latest album, sold 750,000 copies in TWO DAYS in the USA ALONE, going on to sell over 1.3 million copies in a single week!

    By removing the ability to play her music on Spotify it is my belief that she will hurt her image, her fans and actively encourage piracy of her music in Spotify's place. The radio may be listened to by older generations but the young customers her music targets live in exclusively digital worlds. By removing the 'radio' of their era Swift will remove one of the biggest drivers of new fans and future album purchases.
    It is further my opinion that this is simply a cynical attempt to extract larger sums of money.

  • Her choice, but it subverts a positive trend towards the democratization of music and all art

    In short:

    -If an artists doesn't want their music on there, fine.
    -Spotify doesn't make artists a lot of money but 1. It's the companies that own the rights so they should be the ones the artists are fighting and 2. I'm sure Spotify will only get a better system as it gets more popular and accepted.
    -Spotify is great because it a. Allows anyone to listen to any style of music or artist, thus allowing them to become fans of music they'd never thought they'd enjoy, b. Allows artists to become popular and viral far more easily than album sales, c. Allows people to listen to more music than they usually would, opening the door for them to be more open-minded about the art just as libraries do for literature and Netflix for movies, and d. Serves as a kind of musical social network so that people can more easily share music they like with friends and stay attuned to trends.

    Regardless of the platforms, there will always been musicians, just like any kind of artist, that don't make money. This might be down to them being terrible but it could also be down to poor marketing and word-of-mouth, which is a problem with any system - it's probably less of a problem now we have Spotify. Artists can also still make money of off iTunes, the ad revenue from Spotify and YouTube, merchandising and touring. And, of course, if they don't get it from Spotify they'll just pirate it, or they won't listen at all.

  • Her choice, but one that subverts the great, democratic direction that music (and art in general) is taking.

    Spotify and other streaming services are changing the music industry (imo for the better) just as Netflix and Redbox and YouTube are changing the film/video industry. Artists do deserve to get paid, but this system does pay them. It might not be that lucrative right now as it's only starting up, but I bet in the future if it continues on the same track Spotify will be like YouTube, allowing popular musicians to make a lot of money from the service.

    The argument that free streaming music hurts smaller musicians is flawed. Less popular artists will always struggle and will need marketing to make themselves economically successful regardless if they make revenue from album sales or streaming. They can still sell their albums to loyal fans (many will gain loyal fans from the more democratic Spotify system then they will from simple word-of-mouth) and can make money from touring, merchandise, and services like iTunes. It might not be as much money as they think they deserve, but it'll be the fairest pay in proportion to their popularity.

    This is also more of a problem with the record companies than Spotify. The record companies sell the rights to the songs to streaming services and they pay the artists for said songs. So artists need to be negotiating better with their record companies.

    Hopefully streaming services will devalue record companies in favor of having artists that record and market with small teams like youtubers and indie filmmakers do. It seems Swift is all about the money in her arguments rather than trying to protect smaller artists (who don't have to put their music on Spotify if they think they won't gain money or popularity from it).

    Music is valuable, but value does not necessarily have to mean money. Obviously professional musicians deserve to make money for their hard work, but money is earned differently for art - it's based on popularity, which is based on appeal and quality and critical acclaim rather than just getting a flat fee for a day's work. Spotify and similar services allow artists to gain popularity and acclaim quicker than ever before, so they should take it as a blessing rather than a curse.

    Streaming services allow everyone, not just those who can afford it, to enjoy the benefits of the wonders of music - inspiration, excitement, calmness, and a wide range of other emotions as well as for dancing and aesthetic enjoyment - just as libraries give everyone access to a wealth of information that normally only the educated would be allowed to enjoy. They allow people who don't know certain artists to become fan of those artists, and to become more connected to their music through their easy playlist systems (Spotify's system, more specifically, is so simple with so much music to discover it has literally changed my entire perception of the scope and importance of music from around the world).

  • No, I don't think Taylor Swift was wrong.

    No, I don't think Taylor Swift was wrong for pulling her music from Spotify. It's her music, she owns it, she made it, I think she has the right to do whatever she wants with it. I think she can pull her music from wherever she wants whenever she wants since it's her music.

  • Why when some of us do it.

    So what she's taking music from Spotify. Is it hurting any one? No it isn't . We just want to find someone's weak spot and attack. But I will say that she needs to say where she got it from. But she is. So keep going Taylor Swift and don't listen to these guys!

  • Let me chime in here...

    First off, let me state that I am not a Taylor Swift fan by any stretch of the speaker, and have never used Spotify even once in my life, nor do I know of its concept. I'm certain the decision will impact her listener-base that uses the platform, but she is a well-known artist, and her music can be found on many streaming platforms, and, you can go out and buy the CD. Yes, CD's still exist people.

    Posted by: S.K
  • Artists deserve to be paid

    The artists are not currently being paid by Spotify, their record labels are. The artists should not have to renegotiate their contracts in order to get paid by Spotify or their labels but that is what has become necessary. Taylor Swift does not owe it to the world to give away her work. She certainly does not owe anything to Spotify.

  • Taylor Swift and Spotify

    Taylor Swift has announced that she will be pulling her music from Spotify. Everyone has the freedom to choose. She made her mind up and decided to make a change in the way people listen to her, and that is still legal in the US. Even though many of her fans think it is a selfish move on her behalf, she is quite open about what route she wants her fans to listen to her music.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.