I know this is not the right place to say this, but I'll do it. Many years ago since I began to be a music lover, I always downloaded music from web sites like kickass. Torrents. Ares. Youtube. I spend a lot of time with that and finding the album covers. But this year I found out what is a streaming music service and I knew Spotify, the first time it was amazing it has all the music I love, then I was sick and tired of the free subscription! I couldn't listen to one song, that's why a decided to became premium three months ago, and I love it. I had never paid for music in my life and with Spotify I'm conscious about we must paid for it. Spotify teached me that. Now that I see the Taylor's issue, I just have to say she's totally wrong, she needs to use Spotify at least one month with both free and premium services to know that those ads are paying all of that. If she doesn't want to share her music tp free subscribers, why is her music on YouTube totally free to listen and to be download (with some apps)?
Shes selfish...? really? She goes to work to make hard cash just like the rest of us do, just though she makes considerably more than any of us. Why wouldnt she maximise her income? I sure do when I have the opportunity. Id guess youtube hits doesnt even compare to potential downloads on music streaming sites and ultimately joe average artist wants hard sales from the likes of itunes or CD sales to maximise revenue income which I cant argue with. Their music output is their product. Whos going to minimise their income just to make it cheaper or free for the consumer? No one with any sense id argue. Either way what does a CD cost...£8 from tescos ...peanuts. If anyone misses an artist so much go and buy their CD or download and support them.
Let me make things clear before getting to my point. First, I am not an expert in ecomonics. Second, I do not like Taylor Swift at all because she is a talentless Pop star who grew into fame due to having hundreds and thousands of dollars in advance from her parents. But.......
Part of the reason why she boycotted Spotify is the main reason why I boycotted driving for Uber, and refuse to sign with a record label. My point is the big corporations which work as middleman, control how much you earn, and don't pay the worker enough. Musicians are not workers, musicians should be paid for having their music heard. Unfortunately the digital music revolution has destroyed the chance for a musician to make millions of an album. Streaming services like Spotify underpays the musicians and keep most of the money, just like Uber, and just like record labels.
So I personally understand where Taylor Swift is coming from. Do I think it is right with what she did? She is a famous musician, so no. With her boycotting Spotify, she is actually losing exposure of her songs, by making them proprietary. She is still going to make millions whether her songs are stolen or not. She did not gain any money from restricting her content for free. You could still illegally download her 1989 album for free using bittorrent and even through Google. So she made a very dumb selfish move. What she should have done is if she really cared about musicians making money, she should have made a deal with Spotify and convince them to change their business model, or create a competing streaming service which is much better than the Spotify business model, not boycott Spotify altogether.
Fast Forwarding to today (2018), we know that last year, she came back to Spotify, and put cheap photos of her on the website, along with her discography. Many people would argue with me that she came back becuase she made her money, but I think she came back because she made a huge mistake leaving it. I think she only did this to create controversy and to make money, just like every greedy corporation.
@FruitMeisterTaylor Swift does not go to work. She makes one album, and then makes millions. Sure she may not be net worth 300 million dollars (like the media says so) but the 2 million dollars she has in her pocket is more than enough for her to not work for the rest of her life, assuming she knows how to manage her money which she probably does already.