The Spotify Debacle: Is Streaming Music Really Hurting Artists?

In what we have sentimentally deemed the “Spotify Streaming Debacle”, there is even more resistance growing against the music app. The music streaming device's newest opponent is the record label, Universal. Rather than allowing users to utilize the free streaming aspect of the application, they are pushing Spotify to capsize the free ideal and make consumers pay.

Consumers have rallied around the Spotify app since being allowed to preview new music without purchasing the songs or album. However, there are certain stipulations with the free aspect of the app. You are not allowed to choose songs from the CD track list in the order you wish to play them. When attempted, the all too familiar banner is presented to you requesting that you buy the premium version of Spotify to access this musical privilege.

The record label is simply echoing the same apprehensions of other musical artists. The concerns all come down to the love of money, with the label hypothesizing that artists would receive more money from the streaming app if everyone was regulated to the premium choice. They seem to be following in Taylor Swift’s steps. She decided to remove her whole collection of songs from Spotify. Swift believed that artists were having their art “undervalued” by allowing it to be streamed for free even though they receive a great portion of the proceeds from Spotify.

Spotify is standing by its premium and free model. They claim that the system is effective for all involved, especially the consumers that they service. Spotify representatives stated, “We’re one of the greenest shoots of growth in the industry. We don’t want to destabilize that. We think that this model works.”

---