[All Platforms][Other] Bring back artist bios by critics/press, not the artists themselves

Recently Spotify switched its artist Bios from those collected and published via music critics and the music press, to those that are posted by the bands/artists themselves.  Most of these new bios read like excerpts from artists' PR flacks; they are long on hype and short on actual biographical and discography information. Please consider bringing back the old style of artist bios which were excerpts from articles and reviews written by actual music critics and experts. I used to learn so much about a band's history and impact through these bios, and now I just get a paragraph of overly promotional fluff that tells me nothing.

Updated on 2020-02-21

Marked as new idea.

Comments
Rock Star 23
Rock Star 23
Status changed to: New Idea

Updated on 2020-02-21

Marked as new idea.

Music Fan

Endorsed!

 

Many bands or their agents simply write a short promotional text about how great or active on the scene they are. Obviously this is USELESS since nobody would candidly write that they suck, so all "Abouts" read the same.

 

The usefulness of the "About" section is to learn something about the band's history i.e. who they are, how the personnel changed, maybe even how their style or genre changed through they years. It is OK if the section doesn't include critical comments, historical notes alone would be fine, but promotional text is garbage.