Indie Labels

Taylor Swift, Aloe Blacc and Music Streaming

Peter-getty-blacc-swift-300x182By Peter Getty on

What’s with pop stars these days? It’s as if they don’t appreciate steaming services giving their music away for free! Taylor Swift’s July editorial in the Wall Street Journal might have been easy for snarky pop media to denigrate, but the singer made some cogent points about the future of the music industry. Her experience as a multi-millionaire superstar was used against her, but it actually makes her someone whose opinions need to be considered.

The release of her new album 1989, which was the fastest selling record in its first week since The Eminem Show in 2002, turned more than a few heads in the record industry. Besides putting her in a new pantheon of record-setting musical acts, she demonstrated that pulling music from all free streaming services (Spotify wouldn’t limit her music to paid customers, and subsequently lost her entire catalogue), she could exceed all reasonable album sale expectations.

So the question is, now more than ever, is streaming hurting artists and the music industry at large?

This month, Aloe Blacc joined Swift in an editorial in Wired. The pop star explains that the value of his work as a songwriter and performer is simply too low. And he has numbers to back up the claim.

Music_streaming_header_contentfullwidthBlacc wrote Avicii’s 2013 hit single ‘Wake Me Up!’ (on which he also sings). The 13th most streamed song in Pandora’s history, 168,000,000 plays earned $12,359 total. That sum was divided between songwriters and their publishers. The track was the most streamed song in Spotify history, and yielded similarly low earnings.

“If that’s what’s now considered a streaming ‘success story,’ is it any wonder that so many songwriters are now struggling to make ends meet?”

My question is how could a new artist, or more niche artist, ever make a living in this landscape? Music has value, but the closed marketplace of music cum tech is driving the value to artificial lows. On the surface, that’s good for consumers – we get access to more music for less money.

The effects on music, however, could be disastrous. What if streaming is a diversity killer? What if it prevents real talent from ever attempting a career, lowering the standard of quality (even further)? Could the industry stand an even larger barrier to entry into even moderate success? Songwriters must be able to afford to make great music. And music fans must realize this.

How we’re going to make anything change, that I have no idea.


Share on:


  1. The “Silver Conductor” here. It all is a matter of who you ask.Spodify says it’s a great thing.Some Major Artists think differently.I say what and why do they think and see it so differently? Look at the root of the problem,MONEY, plain and simple.The percentages being paid out vs what’s being taken in by the new distribution streaming companies seems to be what’s unfair.Is the DMCA still active? we don’t really have a problem with the new delivery system that’s the way of the world now,but be fair in your compensation to the very creators you are making your fortunes off of “WE” the music content creators. MusicLuv,The SC.

  2. First of all, let’s separate fact from fiction.
    FICTION: Spotify is stealing money from artists.
    FACT: Streaming payouts are low because most people are still not paying for streaming. When streaming income rises, royalty payouts will rise.
    FICTION: Taylor’s Swift’s beef with Spotify is about proper compensation for artists.
    FACT: The Taylor Swift beef is about her label wanting out of their deal through Universal. Spotify paid $2 million to Universal for her streams. Universal paid her $496k. That means Universal took 75 percent.
    FICTION: Everybody understands Spotify.
    FACT: Spotify has done a lousy job of explaining their service, and the value. 18 million songs available for $100 a year, versus buying 100 tracks a year. The average music fan still doesn’t get it.
    FACT: Most people don’t know that with a paid subscription you can sync your favorite playlists for offline listening. I told an work colleague about that, and they said they were going to sign up for a paid plan.
    FACT: Consumers need to stop getting their music for free and start paying for access.
    FACT: Spotify and the others should start phasing out free accounts. Free trials – 3 months, 6 months – will give people a taste.
    The industry’s #1 priority should be to explain to their fans that music has value, and streaming gives them instant access – and tremendous value. Netflix has succeeded, and subscribers are still growing. Music streaming can do the same.

Comments are closed.