Summary: she hates the free trial period for apple music, and spotify's ad-supported model. Who will win in the long run? Taylor Swift calls Apple Music free trial 'shocking, disappointing' in open letter I’m sure you are aware that Apple Music will be offering a free 3 month trial to anyone who signs up for the service. I’m not sure you know that Apple Music will not be paying writers, producers, or artists for those three months. I find it to be shocking, disappointing, and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company.
She's the only pop artist in music that can do this. Her fan base will buy her albums. Smart gal even though she may have aspergers.
letter penned by the record money. artists get their money from live shows anyway. i've read that evenb a band like jamiroquai makes 10M/yr from touring. streaming is the new radio. radio air time = advertisements for their shows.
Taylor Swift is free to say and do as she pleases but this won't affect the success of Apple Music. I would think she and her advisers realize this. What are they trying to accomplish? Haven't followed it closely, but am I wrong in assuming Apple Music will hit the market like a freight train?
She's gotta be the most successful American Idol winner. You never even hear about Kelly Clarkson anymore or fat Reuben.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">We hear you <a href="https://twitter.com/taylorswift13">@taylorswift13</a> and indie artists. Love, Apple</p>— Eddy Cue (@cue) <a href="https://twitter.com/cue/status/612824947342229504">June 22, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AppleMusic?src=hash">#AppleMusic</a> will pay artist for streaming, even during customer’s free trial period</p>— Eddy Cue (@cue) <a href="https://twitter.com/cue/status/612824775220555776">June 22, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
It's not going to change the market that much. Unless of course the iTune store faithfuls have never heard of spotify...or have been holding out for Apple's offering instead. I moved on to streaming a few years back and haven't looked back since.
She has some clout. She got Apple to pay. The 150 billion in cash. It is kind of ****ty when a company with so much power decides to not pay people.
She wash't fighting for the artists that make money touring. She was fighting for the independent artists that don't have touring money streams or companies to bankroll them.
What a stupid, entitled artist. Music in the 21st century is supposed to be free. This isn't 1989 anymore.
I think I'm pretty insulated from this, I use Xbox Music and I hate Taylor Swift. I'm just gonna grab some popcorn and watch...
My life's dream is to make a living in the music industry. But this Taylor Swift vs Spotify/Apple and Jay-Z's whole Tidal fiasco is really rubbing me the wrong way. Idk, I guess it's tough when you work really hard at your craft and you feel like you aren't being fully compensated... But honestly, nobody cares. Especially the average music fan who already pays Spotify and others $10+ a month. Not to mention the even larger group that downloads bootlegs for free. The artists are just giving the bootleggers more justification to continue to steal, and incentive for paying customers to say "screw it" and go rogue. Just seems a little tone deaf (pun intended) to openly complain about your multi-million dollar royalties to an audience of people who'll, most of which, never earn a fraction of what you make.
I predict you would be wrong. Most everyone I know listens to Spotify, Pandora, Google Play Music, Rhapsody, Plug.DJ, Amazon Prime and even Songza and Rdio. Plus iTunes is complete crap. Good luck to 'em though. I'm sticking with Spotify.
Except that's not what she did - she openly said it didn't really affect her. This is part of her larger fight to stop people from viewing music as some kind of free inherent right that they shouldn't have to pay for. With one blog post and in 24 hours, she just got a whole bunch of money to all the smaller musicians out there at zero cost to the public. I don't know about her music, but it's great to see someone with power and influence actually use that influence to make a small difference for the "little people".
yes, except that the little people in this case are probably the record companies, and not the smaller musicians you're referring to, since they don't really make their music from album sales, and thus probably not from streaming sales either. might vary by artist/contract, but I'm guessing the notion that they make their money from their performances and not their recordings is still in place for the most part, for any artist who has been promoted by a label.
