Last year, Spotify announced it would give artists and record labels "a boost in promotion" only if they accepted a lower royalty rate — and those rates to be honest are abysmally low. Between fights over compensating artists and the massive revenues raked in by Spotify and it's stakeholders, it’s clear that the world of digital streaming music has "class conflict at its heart". Spotify's P.R. put out a statement saying "In this new experiment, artists and labels can identify music that’s a priority for them, and our system will add that signal to the algorithm that determines personalized listening sessions.… This allows our algorithms to account for what’s important to the artist." With all such 'P.R. speak' and corporate propaganda, one thing is clear - that euphemisms are heavy and reality is counter to what is being hyped. “What’s important to the artist” is better understood as “what the artist can afford” By no means Spotify and it's advanced algorithms favor any equal opportunity (democracy) in music. The following essay explains how Spotify endangers the music ecosystem. How the company violates it's own terms and conditions. The 'black-market' that exists between Spotify and those with deep pockets!

CEO of Spotify Daniel Ek, said in 2016 he wants “to soundtrack every moment of your life,” and boy! he meant it. Sounds close to what the messianic CEO of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg said about "Facebook, the new international democracy. The 5th Estate". Spotify has created an "official playlist" for every conceivable occasion. However, a vast majority of the artists who's music makes up all such "soundtracks" receive pittance, as value of their labour or creativity. Less than a cent per stream to be precise. Yet on close listen, the playlists are plain genre based cluster of songs - sometimes picked by the 150+ tastemakers who work for Spotify or generated by code & algorithms. The credibility or value of all such playlists is not worth getting into. 

 

In 2018, we published 'Death Of The Album' - a probe into the rise of playlist culture and it's effect on artists and fans. Can 3000+ playlists define (and capture) our imagination and taste in music? Not really, and it's not even important, since one can always listen to new music without (outside) Spotify. Currently Spotify offers about 72million songs - approximately 15% of all recorded published music (archived by Gracenote).

Spotify is continuously finding new ways (and legal tropes) to mooch the artist, by paying less and less, consequently accruing millions of dollars more for it's shareholders. And the public is loving it! Very similar to Uber and the average taxi driver - the case of "gig economy". A recent article by Jacobin Magazine states "Spotify is constantly taking artists to court, seeking ways to pay even less in royalties than they already do". Last year, the Union of Musicians and Allied Workers launched 'Justice at Spotify campaign' - a collective mobilisation, made of artists and public challenging Spotify's global exploitation and domination, in terms of payouts, royalties and lack of transparency. Three of it's principle demands - "At least one cent per play, and an end to the streamer’s pay-to-play arrangements. 2nd, make all closed-door contracts public information. 3rd, list credits for all those involved in recording and production" UMAW's initial call to action grew from roughly 1000 pledges to more than 26,000 in a span of 6 months. Read and Sign Up Here!

Recently we asked a select group of musicians and DJs if they consider the creation of music at par with labor, in terms of effort and compensation (call it royalty, payout, fair-share etc). An overwhelming majority said no. The same set of people also use Spotify on a daily basis. There lies the problem, with artists who sign-up for exploitation by design. Is the 'music ecosystem' in jeopardy then? Clearly so. To explain it simply - a song which is not recognized as 'labor' is less able to provide for a meaningful connection. Bereft of authenticity. Yet as a commodity, the same tune, becomes more forgettable, more disposable. "A sad accompaniment to alienation". So much for the millions of tunes that Spotify swallows into oblivion, and the thousands of dwindling artists who willingly swear loyalty to unfair practices. Add further servitude, by placing the Spotify logo across the lookalike soundalike propaganda on Instagram.  

Spotify in essence, is an institution which mirrors the old Hegelian "Master / Slave" relationship. Hence, are we (artists) consciously enslaved yet? In August 2020, Daniel Ek, who Forbes estimates to be worth $4.5 billion, suggested that artists complaining about streaming revenue were simply not trying hard enough, and merely needed to continually churn out new music. Reminds us of the words by the father of neoliberal economics, Milton Friedman, who said "The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests. The great achievements of civilization have come from self-serving interests and production..." Less we forget the legal threats and bullying organised by Spotify over the last 3 years, targeting dozens of popular singers and songwriters.

"The dirty little secret of playlists, particularly user-generated ones, is that acts are paying to be included" says undefeated.com. The article is an expose into how Hip-Hop and Rap artists on the top of Spotify's playlists are products of heavy payouts or backdoor compensation deals. So much for the '(c)Rap Caviar' with 13million followers. “Typically, it’s digital marketing departments [at record labels] who have budgets and handle pay-for-placement drivers such as playlist placements,” states Michelle McDevitt, owner of Audible Treats, a leading hip-hop publicity agency. All three of the largest music monopolies, Sony, Warner and Universal, have thousands of 'backdoor deals' with Spotify. Industry estimates show earnings of approximately $11 million a day, off Spotify streams (Source Mashable) — A tiny part of the revenue barely passed on to artists themselves, with companies taking up to 85% in some cases. The reason Taylor Swift earns thrice as much compared to the average singer on Spotify, in spite of the 'penny per stream' for all, is a condition that Spotify willy nilly violates.  Spotify is what Payola could never imagine! Hence, this billion dollar business would not exist without artists, and not the other way around.  

Our argument, based on public dissent, that Spotify robs and destroys our collective ability and opportunity. It further bankrupts our ability to imagine and control our relationship to art, labor, creativity and each other. Boycott and Divest Spotify. After all, we (artists and public) don't really need it - rather it needs us.