UPDATED: Taylor Swift Stands Up To Apple’s Streaming Service in Open Letter
UPDATE: Apple responds, agrees to pay artists through trial. See below.
Say what you want about Taylor Swift, her music, her shift away from country, or whether she was ever country in the first place—as the music industry and technology companies continue to attempt to navigate the choppy waters of digital streaming and look for a way to serve consumers affordably while still compensating songwriters, producers, performers, and labels fairly, Taylor Swift has taken the leadership her perch as the most popular music artist in all the world has bestowed, and continues to stand up for the rights of artists much smaller than herself.
Swift was the first to pull her music from Spotify in response to their paltry payouts and freemium model. Now she is taking the new Apple music to task for offering a 3 moth free trial at the expense of the artists and songwriters who created the music. And before you say this is all a publicity stunt, appreciate many independent labels are taking the same stance Swift is, they just don’t have the same economic sway or audience as as Taylor.
On Sunday morning (6-21), Taylor Swift published an open letter to Apple explaining her stance.
To Apple, Love Taylor
I write this to explain why I’ll be holding back my album, 1989, from the new streaming service, Apple Music. I feel this deserves an explanation because Apple has been and will continue to be one of my best partners in selling music and creating ways for me to connect with my fans. I respect the company and the truly ingenious minds that have created a legacy based on innovation and pushing the right boundaries.
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.
This is not about me. Thankfully I am on my fifth album and can support myself, my band, crew, and entire management team by playing live shows. This is about the new artist or band that has just released their first single and will not be paid for its success. This is about the young songwriter who just got his or her first cut and thought that the royalties from that would get them out of debt. This is about the producer who works tirelessly to innovate and create, just like the innovators and creators at Apple are pioneering in their field”¦but will not get paid for a quarter of a year’s worth of plays on his or her songs.
These are not the complaints of a spoiled, petulant child. These are the echoed sentiments of every artist, writer and producer in my social circles who are afraid to speak up publicly because we admire and respect Apple so much. We simply do not respect this particular call.
I realize that Apple is working towards a goal of paid streaming. I think that is beautiful progress. We know how astronomically successful Apple has been and we know that this incredible company has the money to pay artists, writers and producers for the 3 month trial period”¦ even if it is free for the fans trying it out.
Three months is a long time to go unpaid, and it is unfair to ask anyone to work for nothing. I say this with love, reverence, and admiration for everything else Apple has done. I hope that soon I can join them in the progression towards a streaming model that seems fair to those who create this music. I think this could be the platform that gets it right.
But I say to Apple with all due respect, it’s not too late to change this policy and change the minds of those in the music industry who will be deeply and gravely affected by this. We don’t ask you for free iPhones. Please don’t ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation.
Taylor
***UPDATE***UPDATE***UPDATE***UPDATE***
After Taylor Swift’s open letter, Apple’s senior vice president of Internet Software and Services Eddie Cue tweeted out numerous messages late Sunday evening (6-21), saying that Apple would pay artists during the three month trial period. Whether or not they were intending to do so from the beginning, or bowed to the pressure from Taylor Swift remains in question.
“Apple will always make sure that artists are paid,” said Eddie Cue. “Apple Music will pay for streaming, even during customer’s free trial period. We hear you Taylor Swift and indie artists. Love, Apple.”
Taylor Swift retweeted the news.
This now puts the ball back in Taylor Swift’s court. Will she put her most recent album 1989 on the Apple streaming service, or will she continue to hold out on the principle that streaming should never be free, even if a company is paying the artists, songwriters, and labels?
Apple will always make sure that artist are paid #iTunes #AppleMusic
Eddy Cue (@cue) June 22, 2015
#AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming, even during customer’s free trial period Eddy Cue (@cue) June 22, 2015
We hear you @taylorswift13 and indie artists. Love, Apple
Eddy Cue (@cue) June 22, 2015
June 21, 2015 @ 8:20 am
Dear Taylor,
I hate your stinking guts, and wouldn’t listen to your music, EVEN if I was compensated to do so. I sincerely hope you wind up penniless someday, and hooked on crack.
Forever Hating You,
A Country Music Fan Named Clint
June 21, 2015 @ 8:31 am
Pretty unnecessary.
June 21, 2015 @ 8:34 am
Grow up Clint
June 21, 2015 @ 2:08 pm
No thanks, Dan. The low road suits me fine.
You wouldn’t believe the amount of stress that I felt leaving my body when I hit the ‘send’ button.
An invigorating inner-peace rushed over me.
June 21, 2015 @ 1:54 pm
What’s comments ARE necessary, Alex? There’s not even very many articles that are necessary, including this one.
If you want a comment from me, that you can deem “necessary”, I’ll give you one.
The Swift heiress is a complete hypocrite with this letter. Has she already forgotten about all of the real Country singers and songwriters she put out of business when her daddy bought her a record deal in Nashville?
With a complete disregard for Country music’s culture and history, she used the “Country” music industry as a platform to fame, while simultaneously destroying the livelihoods of thousands of people.
I wish only the worst for her, and her family.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:05 pm
Hahaha, if only there was an article written by someone we all trust that systematically disproves the claim that “her daddy bought her a record deal in Nashville.”
https://www.savingcountrymusic.com/did-taylor-swifts-dad-buy-her-career
June 21, 2015 @ 2:19 pm
Well, color me misinformed on that one.
But it doesn’t change anything else I said, nor the level of hatred I feel for her.
June 21, 2015 @ 7:24 pm
Christ, Clint. Even TRIGGER apologized for that time he criticized her face for having eyes set too close together and predicted she’d deteriorate into cocaine abuse. If you’ve got that much admitted hate in your heart, seek help.
June 21, 2015 @ 9:58 pm
You make some solid points Clint . Taylor WAS/IS bad news for songwriting and especially her influence on the country genre , in my opinion . But as much as I detest her part in the breakdown of the genre and the demographic shift because of her involvement that has resulted in inferior music across the board , I don’t wish her harm or economic hardship . There are a lot of people pulling the strings of the Taylor show so I don’t want to put it all on her . She was a naive but marketable product targeted for a naive demographic and it worked …at least $$$$-wise . And that’s what the industry is about , commercially speaking .
June 21, 2015 @ 10:18 pm
The biggest mistake Taylor’s enemies have made is underestimating her and thinking that she’s “naïve”. She has always played much more of a leadership role in her career than the vast majority of famous singers, and she has enjoyed essentially full control over the sausage-making process of her albums in part due to the fact that she wisely chose to sign to a then new, non-corporate label rather than going along with the “development deal” that RCA had offered her.
June 22, 2015 @ 8:47 am
Cline, seek professional help.
June 21, 2015 @ 8:51 am
Charming.
June 21, 2015 @ 10:39 am
I’m not a fan of Taylor’s music, in fact I think she’s partly responsible for pop music taking over country. BUT: over the years I’ve seen her take a stand on issues, including speaking out, in her own way, against the bros who flat out pass pop as country, and now this. I may not respect her music, but I can respect her as an individual, and who knows? If she asked me to work with her in the future, I might just say yes.
June 21, 2015 @ 12:07 pm
Once again, Clint puts his foot in his mouth
Clint, I believe you have up syndrome
Which means you have a stick up your butt
You might need to get that checked out cause that could cause organ damage
June 21, 2015 @ 2:23 pm
That’s impossible.
My anus is EXIT-ONLY.
June 23, 2015 @ 4:45 am
Well maybe you are something thats tore up your guts and that’s why your in a bad mood
How bout you stay away from the Mexican chili for awhile, eh?
June 21, 2015 @ 1:02 pm
That is really low class, dude. As a musician who makes nothing for his work at all, I’m glad to see her standing up for the little guy. She didn’t have to do this.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:22 pm
Clint,
You need to learn how to separate your personal feelings toward an artist from your feelings toward music. Wishing ill on Taylor’s family, especially at a time when her mother is fighting cancer, is just sad.
June 21, 2015 @ 3:27 pm
Ever since I first heard her mother had cancer, I’ve been holding in a comment that goes something like this: “We know her mother has a cancer, she named it Taylor.” I haven’t posted it anywhere because it seemed too below the belt, even for me. I feel comfortable enough making a comment about said comment here, though. And honestly, since Vince Gill, Allison Krauss, and Edgar Meyer all respected her enough to play behind her, I’ve been rescinding a lot of my distaste for her.
June 21, 2015 @ 5:54 pm
Fuzzmeister,
To me, that is an example of Vince selling out. Another example of Vince selling out, was when he seemed overjoyed to be inducting Rascal Craps into the Grand Ole Opry.
June 21, 2015 @ 6:25 pm
Clint: first time responding to me in a while. I’ve been wondering if you stopped respecting me since I let it slip that I was 20. I guess I would define selling out as having to do with compromising someone’s integrity as an artist for material gain. So far as I know, Vince Gill’s career and artistry have not benefited, been buoyed, or been compromised by playing guitar behind Taylor for a performance of “Red.” or buy inducting the third stooge from FGl, Gary Levox, into the Opry. As a matter of fact, He’s also done material with Steve Martin. I had the pleasure of seeing him with the Time Jumpers recently. Class act show all around.
June 21, 2015 @ 8:16 pm
Fuzzmeister,
Whether he benefited or not, Vince was giving his approval her, and that’s enough for me to consider him a sellout.
I don’t have a ton of time to leave comments on here, as much as I wish I did. Some days I have more time than others. I tend to respond to people who aggravate me, more than to people I agree with, and since I agree with you most of the time, I don’t have much to say. Your age has absolutely nothing to do with it. In fact, it’s good to know there’s 20 year olds who do more than masturbate and play video games.
By thy way, you and your band ought to take a trip down to Mountain View, Arkansas, next spring for the Folk(folk in the hillbilly sense, not the hippie sense) Festival.
June 21, 2015 @ 5:39 pm
Eric,
My personal feelings toward her, are a direct result of my feelings toward music. I take my Country music very seriously, and she had a large hand in destroying it.
I’m pasting a letter that I wrote last year, to help you better understand where I’m coming from. It’s not an attempt to change minds. I just don’t want to be misunderstood. And I certainly don’t wish cancer on anybody…..except every member of ISIS. When I wish ill on Taylor’s family, it’s more along the lines of financial ruin, not death.
Here’s the letter:
….”Dear Taylor,
I’d like to cordially invite you to go screw yourself. I”™ve hated you from the very first moment I saw your arrogant face on TV some years ago. I hate your crappy, generic voice. I hate your crap-eating smile. And I hate every piece of crap excuse for a song you”™ve ever written.
I guess being a spoiled little rich girl living a charmed life wasn”™t good enough for you, so you bought your way into the “country” music business, probably because it currently takes very little talent to get into. Then, instead of showing reverence to it, you proceeded to take it to new bastardized lows that the world has never heard before. I know helping to destroy an entire culture doesn”™t mean much to you. And why should it? You”™re living the best fantasy that your family”™s money could buy.
So your leaving “country” music huh? Good riddance. As abhorrent as “country” music was before you arrived, you just made it worse. I”™ve seriously pondered it, and I guess I wouldn”™t endure one of your shows for a penny less than $10,000. And that”™s only if the booze and transportation were free. Without earplugs, my fee would go to $50,000.
You see Taylor, to you “country” music was merely a vessel for your little fairytale. It was the most convenient way for you to achieve your goal of singing pop songs to 13 year olds and calling yourself an “artist”. To people like me, Country music was heritage. It was part of a culture. It was even a religion. It was one of the few beautiful things in an otherwise stressful life. It was the voice of the poor and middle class. People could go to their crappy jobs, where they make less in a year than you make at one concert, and they could live their mundane lives, but Country music was always there to tell their stories, and ease the stress, even occasionally, to give a little hope. And it was always done in a familiar way that they could relate to. You wouldn”™t know about that I guess.
Yes I know. I”™m taking the low road. But as far as I can see, that”™s the only road left to take. The high road won”™t lead anywhere, because it”™s way too late to undo the damage that you and your kind have done. So all that”™s really left is just to speak our minds; if nothing else, to relieve a little stress.
One last thing Taylor, a lot of people who don”™t like your music will say things like: “but, at least she”™s hot”. But I don”™t even find you physically attractive. So please Taylor, go screw yourself; cause I wouldn”™t with a 10 foot pole and John Mayer pushing.”….
June 21, 2015 @ 6:27 pm
“And John Mayer pushing…” I was really proud of myself for coming up with an image of Sammy Hagar and Uncle Kracker swimming in cheetos for a comment on the most recent Jon Hensley article, but you, Clint. have taken the cake. That is a lark. Well done.
June 21, 2015 @ 8:52 pm
My view on Taylor Swift is similar to the view a Country Universe commenter had on Brad Paisley. They may have a face of an angel, but underneath that exterior lurks a devil’s personality. I never purchased her sweet, innocent act. It is like the nice jock or benevolent cheerleader in high school, the teachers buy it, don’t you fall for it yourself or you will pay in humiliation.
June 25, 2015 @ 1:27 pm
How exactly is Brad Paisley a devil? Much less in the vein of Taylor Swift? George Jones once said that he didn’t know what type of music Swift made, but that it wasn’t country. On the other hand, he appeared several times on Paisley’s records as a guest.
June 21, 2015 @ 10:30 pm
At the end of the day, music is music and there is no good reason to personally dislike someone over tastes.
Yes, the core of country music was always about serving as the voice for the poor and middle-class, but long before Taylor came into the fray, the genre had become a forum for more general storytelling that appealed across economic lines, with a focus on songs about love and family.* Taylor just expanded the focus of these relationship stories to a young version rather than a middle-aged one. Up through “Speak Now”, her songwriting remained well within the country tradition of heartfelt stories told to soothing, melodic music.
Ultimately, bro-country is to blame for the downfall of mainstream country, not Taylor Swift.
*By the way, the irony of you taking a more left-wing position than me regarding country music is not lost on me.
June 21, 2015 @ 3:38 pm
Really? How stupid are you? I am impress.
June 21, 2015 @ 6:28 pm
Might want to spell “Impressed” properly before you call people stupid.
June 21, 2015 @ 7:04 pm
Fuzzy two shirts, I was actually talking to Clint.. But wait, are you Clint? Not being able to spell doesn’t make me an idiot. Being mean without provocation, that’s an idiot. This girl is trying to use her star power to do something kind. What do you do… My god I’m not a fan of hers either but if you can’t give credit where credit is due, then what you have to say carries no weight.
June 22, 2015 @ 6:41 am
I wasn’t being mean, it was some friendly advice. But feel free to overreact, and while you’re at it: Twoshirts is one word not two, elipses need three periods, not two, “Idiot. being mean” in your comment needs a semicolon. What do you do is a question and needs a question mark.
June 22, 2015 @ 11:14 am
I rest my case.
June 21, 2015 @ 8:34 am
Good for her for being the voice of those that don’t have her level of success, and for doing it in a very classy way.
June 21, 2015 @ 8:50 am
Good for her. Apple is just perpetuating the notion that music should be “free.” It’s getting to the point that most people under the age of 30 now think they should be able to download and share an artist’s creativity without paying for it at all. The devaluing of art and music is a growing problem, so I applaud anyone who will stand up for artists. Even Taylor Swift.
June 21, 2015 @ 8:53 am
It’s especially important that she’s doing it, because she’s one of the few artists out there who can actually “vote with their wallet,” so to speak, and have it matter.
June 21, 2015 @ 9:23 am
Still will NEVER EVER make me a fan no matter what she conjures up
June 21, 2015 @ 10:14 am
This is sick! Somebody works their entire life to have a hit song and just when they finally get one, they don’t get paid for it because it happened to be in the wrong time period! I’m getting more and more fed up with this crap!
As for all this Taylor Swift hate; at least she finally admitted she’s not country and went to pop. I never considered her to be anywhere near as repulsive as Luke Bryan and them. At least her music, while not country, was written by her and was somewhat intelligent. The bros just release whatever unintelligible garbage somebody gives them.
Taylor Swift>Bro-Country/Metro-Politan
June 21, 2015 @ 9:39 pm
She didn’t admit to not being country she just went pop she gave no apologies for her previous heresies. I applaud her taking a stand but she does pick and choose WHO she stands up too. I’d have greater respect if she pulled all her music like Garth or Prince. Sure it would be a bad career move but I’d have more respect.
June 21, 2015 @ 10:26 pm
She gave the speech about painting a wall green and calling blue. That’s basically admitting she was playing pop and calling it country. I believe she was also calling out bro-country and all of the uncountry things that Scotty B and them are calling country. I think Taylor actually wanted to be more country but Scotty B saw more $ in making her a pop star.
June 21, 2015 @ 10:37 pm
“I think Taylor actually wanted to be more country but Scotty B saw more $ in making her a pop star.”
It’s likely the other way around. I think that the years she spent in New York City with her new set of celebrity friends permanently shifted her musical tastes. Borchetta wanted her to continue straddling the line between country and pop in order to keep both audiences happy, but Taylor insisted on a full pop album:
https://www.savingcountrymusic.com/scott-borchetta-tried-to-convince-taylor-swift-to-stay-country
June 21, 2015 @ 10:22 am
I couldn’t agree more with her! I love when she says “we don’t ask you for free iphones, don’t ask us for free music”
June 21, 2015 @ 11:02 am
‘zactly the quote I was gonna cut-n-paste~ Fan or no, she’s on target and as a scrambling songwriter myself, maybe her clout will be will help those of us trying to get a little clout of our own~
June 22, 2015 @ 1:41 am
Well if she wanted to be pop she should’ve just done that- oh wait… or if she wanted to be country she should’ve just done that and given the finger to whoever was telling her what to do thus killing her career and the go make the record she wanted to make like Caitlin Rose, Elizabeth Cook etc. I personally more and more feel like she is a watered down Madonna… She is a business first and musician second at this point. I never seen somebody chase pop trends harder than what she did on 1989 after all this talk about a throwback sound. But I think she really wanted to throw it back but the label wouldn’t let her. Labels ONLY want trendy, with very few exceptions.
I dance to her songs a club but otherwise I find her very meh- but shit I’m jaded it comes with age and listening to WAY to much music.
June 26, 2015 @ 1:46 am
You’ll love even more THE WHOLE THING WAS A PR STUNT. Taylor and Apple both get in the news, Taylor is tough and Apple plays sweet. So sad the majority of people swallow any news without thinking for themselves, the regurgitate it as truth…yep, world we live in, sad.
June 21, 2015 @ 10:54 am
So, she’s telling up and coming artists to forgo possible years of (small) income for 3 months of not getting paid? If an artists only revenue is Apple streaming music, they need to rethink their strategy. Apple music would represent a small income to these artists, along with an opportunity to gain new fans through recommendations. No one lived off of radio plays back in the day. It was a means to an end. In an oversaturated music scene, you need to use every means possible to get in front of people.
June 21, 2015 @ 11:16 am
To note, Taylor is simply latching onto an argument that was already being waged by the “little guys.” She’s not telling them to fight back; she’s joining them in their complaint. They had already expressed disapproval due to a few different things:
1) It’s categorically unfair to not pay them 2) Apple’s promotional focus will be Apple Music, which will hurt performance at the regular store 3) Apple Music will cannibalize sales 4) New music released within that window will particularly suffer, since the majority of its streams will be unpaid.
I don’t think she’s necessarily telling them to protest – I think she’s saying that she is in position to protest and will do so on their behalf.
June 21, 2015 @ 11:36 am
I recommend to every independent artist to get their music into as many outlets as possible and not allow access be the reason they don’t find new fans, and I would include the new Apple Music in that recommendation, regardless of what Apple does for the first three months. However, that doesn’t make it right that a massive corporation is expecting artists big and small to pay for their grand relaunch. Like Taylor said, we don’t expect free iPhones. If Apple wants to give something away for free, then they should pay for it, not the artists just because Apple is all powerful and an artist feels obligated to participate or be left in the dust.
June 21, 2015 @ 10:05 pm
Seems the BIG mistake was Apple not discussing this plan of action with the content providers ( artists ) in the first place .
June 21, 2015 @ 4:53 pm
No. The thing we should all be doing is simply not putting our music on Apple Music FOR 3 months. Let them sit a few months without music – then add your catalog after the first 3 months.
There’s still the 3 month trial everyone gets after that – but in the beginning it’s just a totally dry period. There’s no reason to participate in that. There’s no gain in it to anyone EXCEPT for Apple – and fuck those guys. They’re still heroes compared to Spotify – but who isn’t? But, for now – fuck ’em.
Why would you want to do something that has zero gain? It’s not like if you don’t opt in now, you never can. You just opt in later. Better yet – support the people opting out, and I GUARANTEE Apple will change their minds and eat the payments themselves.
June 21, 2015 @ 11:20 am
— So here’s my question: if the only reason she’s objecting to Apple Music is the three-month royalty freeze, then why isn’t her album on Rhapsody, Google, etc?
Like Apple Music (but unlike Spotify), those are premium-only services. Unlike Apple Music, I’m pretty sure they do pay you during their free trial periods.
June 21, 2015 @ 11:35 am
The main benefit artists receive for offering their music on free services is marketing and discovery. I don’t think that is a compelling value proposition for someone in Taylor’s position. Discovery isn’t her problem. Anyone who wants to discover her (and millions of others who don’t want to hear her music) has discovered her by now. There is no economic reason to give content away for free to cult followers who can easily pay.
June 21, 2015 @ 11:38 am
So I’m not debating whether Taylor should or should not place her music on free streaming services.
I’m asking what makes Apple Music fundamentally different from the other *premium-only* streaming services, like Rhapsody and Google. If she’d be willing to put 1989 on Apple as long as it paid her during the trial period, why wouldn’t she put it on the premium-only sites that already DO pay her during the trial period?
June 21, 2015 @ 11:48 am
Taylor Swift’s catalog is on numerous streaming services. It’s just not on Spotify. I know for a fact it was on the Beats streaming service before it started its merger with Apple, and I believe it’s on others as well. Her litmus test appears to be if at any point, consumers are receiving music without having to pay for it then she’s out. She and others believe this is a slippery slope that devalues music and could resort in people believing they are entitled to free music.
Until Swift started making these moves, I believed that eventually artists were going to have to PAY consumers to listen, and I would be surprised if we eventually get there.
I wrote a whole article on that, but can’t seem to find it at the moment.
June 21, 2015 @ 1:52 pm
Taylor Swift’s back catalog is on multiple services. Including Apple Music, by the way.
1989, to my knowledge, is not on anything. That’s what we’re discussing here – her newest music.
June 21, 2015 @ 1:58 pm
1989 is not on Google Play Music, which has no free tier. It has a one month free trial, which is industry standard, but the artist/label still gets paid for streams during the trial, unlike with Apple Music. As far as I know, she hasn’t stated why she has passed on the Google service, but been so public about Spotify and Apple.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:07 pm
Well, she pulled all of her music from Spotify. That’s a much bigger deal than not putting your brand-new album on a service.
June 21, 2015 @ 4:57 pm
Yea, 1989 isn’t streaming anywhere. The rest of her catalog still is, on other services – Rhapsody, etc… She must be holding on to 1989 – just waiting to see where this whole shit hole industry is headed. Best case scenario, everyone pulls their music off digital and goes back to LPs, Cassettes, and 8-tracks.
…and while I’m half joking about that… the tech industry is, and always is going to be a huge enemy to music – no matter what – will not change. It’s just another hand in an empty pot. Actually they’re sticking 4 hands in and pushing our one finger out of the way. They know nothing about music and care nothing about music. Even the worst of the record execs that fucked us in the old days, actually cared about music. Didn’t stop them from fucking us, but they DID love and care about music. We don’t have that with these phone staring, silicone valley douche nozzles. The only thing that can really help us is to pull them from the occasion – which will never happen because people eat up too much of the bullshit propaganda they shit out there. Bon Appetit!
June 21, 2015 @ 5:23 pm
At one point, 1989 was streaming on certain outlets. Where Swift’s albums are streaming is not something I catalog on a daily basis because I’m kind of tied up with other things, but I can tell you it was streaming at certain points, and I specifically know it was streaming on the Beats service because there’s articles pontificating on why she decided to single out Spotify. What happened after that, I do not know.
June 21, 2015 @ 5:03 pm
…pull them from the EQUATION…not occasion… Ha! 😀
June 22, 2015 @ 8:15 am
1989 was never streaming anywhere. Shake it Off was for a brief period (a few weeks after it came out on iTunes), but that’s it.
The Billboard 200 sales reports leak occasionally, and the Streaming Equivalent Albums portion is always blank for 1989.
The “singling out Spotify” was more of a media creation than something she actually did – her real focus was services with a free tier. Essentially, she wasn’t giving you 1989, but if you were premium-only, you could get her other music.
June 21, 2015 @ 11:49 am
Edit: Nevermind.
What Trigger said.
June 22, 2015 @ 1:45 am
I wonder why she even really cares she’s outsold just about everybody. So why pick on Apple or Spotify why not remove your music from ALL streaming to send a much bigger message?
June 22, 2015 @ 12:45 pm
Because she doesn’t object to streaming as such, just free streaming. She’s fine with Tidal, Rhapsody and Beats, because they don’t make music free.
June 21, 2015 @ 11:24 am
I think her music stinks, and I am happy that she left country music. But I gotta say she has guts. The girl is tough as nails. A few years ago she had freaked out the feminists with her sweet little girl act, and now she is showing them that she’s tougher than they are. On the one hand it may seem Machiavellian, but as a business person myself I think there’s something to be said for flawlessly executed strategy.
On a different note, I would like to see some of our leaders like Boehner and McConnell take a page from her playbook and grow a backbone.
June 22, 2015 @ 1:17 am
I have always been impressed with her. She was offered songwriting contract at RCA, and turned it down, she thought she was ready to record then and there. Three years later she’s a household name. She’s got balls. Dare I say, that was Badass moment. And now she is sticking up for the little guys, Kudos to her.
June 22, 2015 @ 1:14 pm
Yeah, whatever you think of her music (although I do consider Speak Now to be pretty much the pinnacle of what lightweight pop-country should aspire to), she’s just cool. She’s damn smart, both in terms of her underrated lyrics and her frankly incredible control of her image and public persona.
She shouldn’t be a role model because she’s a “good girl.” She’s a role model because she’s incredibly, preternaturally smart and business-savvy.
And it’s all the more impressive if you don’t think she’s particularly talented!
June 21, 2015 @ 12:06 pm
Swifts music is okay but its all individual taste. But she is right the music should be free at the expense of artists. Apple makes a real big load , let it pay for its marketing, not artists.
June 21, 2015 @ 1:57 pm
Refusing to pay artists anything for 3 months of using their music is pretty screwed up, especially for one of the most (if not the most) profitable company in the world. This is a beautifully composed letter that finally explicitly states that the whole idea of what Taylor is doing here is essentially a boycott, not a scheme to boost her own revenues. If there is one exception I would take to the letter, it would be this line:
“I find it to be shocking, disappointing, and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company.”
This is the same company that outsourced their entire manufacturing operation to a contractor in China that makes their employees work 60 hours a week for less than $1.50 an hour, under conditions so hideous that the factories have gained infamy for suicides. Apple, much like the rest of the high-tech industry, has turned profiteering off of the backs of working people into a fine art form. Generous and economically progressive it ain’t.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:25 pm
I agree. “Apple” is hip, not progressive, but their marketing has gone great lengths to make sure people believe their money is going to a good cause when they purchase Apple products, when in reality it’s going to a company that wants artists to pay for its massive relaunch. Steve Jobs was a genius, don’t get me wrong. But Apple lost its compass years ago, and have been burning through their street cred and good graces ever since.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:30 pm
I think the Apple not paying artists for 3 months thing sucks. If you are an artist like Jason Isbell who has a record coming out during that time you could be missing out on a sizeable junk of income. Apple is mega rich, they should be fronting the cost of the three month trial, not asking artists and record labels to do so.
I agree with you Trigger in regards to Apple. I think it’s really funny that Apple has made a big deal about security and trying to be seen as a “good” corporation in contrast to Google, yet they pull crap like this.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:30 pm
Especially because they don’t have Jobs to convince us this stuff is a good idea, anymore.
Other companies used to have a “Steve Jobs Rule,” where they wouldn’t sign any agreement until looking it over when Jobs was not in the room, because he kept convincing them to make bad deals that benefited Apple.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:38 pm
Jobs also kept the focus streamlined which was a MASSIVE advantage for Apple. Under Jobs, you always felt like everyone at Apple was working towards the same thing and the same goals. Their latest news conference highlighted that that really isnt the case anymore. You had TIm Cook and all the other Apple heads going on and on about how they have new algorithms inside iOS 9 that will make you life super easy and then Jimmy Iovine comes on stage and craps all over algorithms in music and how real people, not a computer should be making playlists for your music service.
It was really quite funny.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:45 pm
One of the most widespread tricks used by modern profiteering corporations is in presenting a “hip” image and spouting platitudes about “sustainability”. These serve as great covers for underpaying workers/outsourcing jobs (e.g. Apple) or overcharging consumers (e.g. Whole Foods, Starbucks, condo/apartment companies here in the Bay Area).
June 21, 2015 @ 3:41 pm
Ugh. I hate the entire idea of Whole Paycheck.
June 22, 2015 @ 1:50 am
UGH. Whole foods is a joke in this area but we bought into the whole oraganic joke hook line and sinker. Not that it isn’t great but people… the loopholes are laughable and what you can label what? Just pick up a Marion Mestle book and laugh and rage at the same time.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:17 pm
I think the “not pay artist for three month” thing is less about stiffing the artists and more about converting these listeners to paying customers at $10/month of which 70% gets paid to the record companies. According to spotify the bulk of its now 20m paid subscribers start as free subscribers. Whether it will pan out I’ve no idea but that is the theory and it seems plausible.
Personally I think the issue is that there is only one pricing tier. Unlike say Netflix where you only get a fraction of content for $8 month I could see a $10,20 and $30 option. One maybe gives you 60 hours a month one 150 hours and one unlimited. Or some smarter marketing guy than me could figure it out. I’d happily pay more than the $10 I pay to spotify each month.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:28 pm
I don’t think the three months free is meant to hurt artists. It’s a bait and switch. It’s Time Warner telling you that you can get the service for $19/mo. with all the premium channels, and a year later locking you into a contract where it costs you $189.00/ mo. for a limited package. The fear is Apple won’t hook consumers on Apple Music, they’ll hook consumers on the idea of not having to pay anything for their music.
June 21, 2015 @ 2:25 pm
Like you said in a previous commentary here, Trigger……………….she may be entertainment’s equivalent of a small business blossoming into a full-blown corporate entity, and watching this unfold is bittersweet…………….but that doesn’t mean that corporate entities can’t show or are incapable of expressing humanity and good will.
Swift definitely has made the right call here.
June 21, 2015 @ 5:34 pm
irespectmusic.org
This is a bit off topic but I would like to know everyone’s opinion on this issue, including you Trigger.
I personally believe that an artist should be payed for radio play.
June 21, 2015 @ 9:58 pm
I agree. They should be paid for Pandora, Spotify etc. play as well. That is where the big money is, isn’t it?
And I know this is mean but if artists didn’t get paid squat by these various outlets maybe we’d lose Sam Hunt & Luke Byran & FGL. The acts I care about seem to make their living from touring so I would think not too many would get really hurt from this.
June 21, 2015 @ 11:38 pm
This may be a radical viewpoint ….but ‘ loss leaders’ have been successful marketing strategy for a long long time . Given a choice , would you prefer 100% of NO airplay …or three months uncompensated airplay to establish your ‘ brand’ and compensation on everything that free airplay generates afterwards ….mechanicals , royalties , concert attendance and future products . In the end , that free airplay will cost you a LOT less than going in the hole to mount a tour and a marketing campaign and all of the people THAT would involve and likely do you an invaluable service . Sure , I can understand the heavyweights not going for that because they don’t NEED that initial exposure .But an up and coming artist/band most definitely DOES .
June 22, 2015 @ 2:55 pm
Excuse me if I’m wrong, but your response seems to have nothing to do with what I was asking.
The issue I was covering is artist getting paid for radio play. The United States is currently the only democratic nation to not pay an artist for radio air play. That’s why the petition was created.
For more information I encourage you to check out the site, irespectmusic.org
June 21, 2015 @ 8:30 pm
Maybe she can write “Teardrops on My Mac” as a protest/breakup song.
June 21, 2015 @ 8:34 pm
“We don’t ask for free IPhones.”
Yeah, right. There exists a movement for Wi-Fi. I’m sure there are plenty of people out there who believe phones should be free, too.
June 21, 2015 @ 9:49 pm
LOL! I feel like clothing companies should be paying ME the $30 for their shirt if I’m going to be a walking billboard NOT the other way around. The amount of free advertising people do astounds me. I wanna get paid for my work advertising Abercrombie plastered on my chest. I even have a hard time wearing band tees for a similar reason. LOL! Though admittedly I just find most band & tour tees are UGLY.
June 21, 2015 @ 8:43 pm
I have the courage to admit, that I agree with many of Clint’s sentiments, (obviously not the radical ones e.g. family health etc.). Swift reminds me of that teenage girl who uses hashtags on Twitter to show her support for a worldwide cause then otherwise ignores it, whileonly claiming daddy is the most oppressive force since Hitler. (Since, she wouldn’t know any other dictators.)
I just have a hard time buying her as the selfless crusader for the little guy. I see this move as a way of her making sure she gets every honor she believes she is due. It is like the head cheerleader talking to the chess team just to ensure their votes for prom queen. Maybe I’m wrong, but that is my perspective.
June 21, 2015 @ 9:14 pm
Where did I say ANYTHING about “family health”?
June 22, 2015 @ 1:54 am
Well that’s what I was smelling the head cheerleader… I don’t if that’s right but I do agree something always feels very calculated and in authentic about her moves because for the praise she gets she went and made one of the most in the moment trendy album of all time. It sold big but it was text book trendwhore and I guess I thought she was going to led the way not not take a moment to look around and copy the cool kids in pop.
June 22, 2015 @ 5:12 am
My apologizes, Clint. I misread the skirmish at the top. I shouldn’t post late at night. 🙂
June 21, 2015 @ 10:57 pm
CountryKnight, you echoed my thoughts exactly. The message that she’s fighting for the little guy just seems too calculated. It’s the kind of thing I would expect a politician to say.
June 22, 2015 @ 1:22 am
Damn her, damn her to hell, trying to help others, where does she get off?
June 21, 2015 @ 9:46 pm
It still kinda feels like a look at how great I am love me stint for her own ends not those of other acts. But what do I know.
I remember when Metallic shit a brick over Napster and Bono basically said in response, “I’m more rich than I’ll ever be so what do I care at this point.” And neither of them were talking about helping lesser known acts make it just their own personal paychecks.
So if Ms. Swift is really in it for the underdog and not just for show… then I applaud her. I don’t like her music (sorry, I’m jaded at this stage in my life I’ve heard too much great music to give her’s a pass) but if her ethics are genuine GREAT!
June 22, 2015 @ 5:14 am
Those are pretty much my thoughts on the matter.
Hopefully, she is genuine, but the image of all those teenage girls going bandwagon crazy over that KONY video reverberates through my head.
June 22, 2015 @ 2:34 pm
Ogh god.. that REEKS of slacktivism. Anything involving viral videos and a #hashtag annoy the hell out of. Get off the chair and do something. Maybe they are but it just feels so smug like I can be involved just by basically doing nothing. And now I have the image of naive teenage girls in my head.
June 21, 2015 @ 9:47 pm
I knew that reversal wouldn’t be far off – even BEFORE Swift’s letter – although the big power push definitely sent it over the edge, I’m sure. I’m no fan of Apple, but they’re not the big blatant dicks that Spotify, Pandora, etc are. They were already under a ton of pressure over this and I had no doubt they’d cave. We’re STILL better off going back to LPs, cassettes, and 8-tacks though. Seriously.
June 21, 2015 @ 9:49 pm
Oh wow, what’s next for little Ms Perfect? Sainthood?
June 21, 2015 @ 10:00 pm
President.
Elvis Costello already nominated her. I saw it on Twitter.
June 22, 2015 @ 5:04 am
She would make a good President. She already has mastered the trick of leveraging the wants of the masses into support for the desires of the 1%-ers.
“$20,000 for that cancer drug? The big pharmaceutical companies set the prices so high because they need that revenue for R&D. And we can’t let Medicare have the right to negotiate that price, now can we? Anyway, you want grammaw to live another 6 months, doncha?”
Maybe she can get us all band instruments, too.
June 22, 2015 @ 9:21 am
Charlie, when she wrote about fighting for the little guys in the music business, I thought it sounded like Bill Clinton saying that he feels your pain. Just sayin’. I think she’s much more gifted in politics than in music.
Now if a celebrity wanted to get into Democratic politics, changing genres from country to pop makes a lot of sense. Moving from country to pop broadens your base. You need a majority to win an election, and country music fans are not a majority, especially on the Democrat side.
June 22, 2015 @ 5:16 am
Catherine of Siena has nothing on the greatness of Taylor Swift. All she needs to do is marry a Kennedy and she is in the Oval Office.
June 21, 2015 @ 9:54 pm
Sort of OT but it does concern payment to artists.
I was wondering what people thought about record companies still making money of dead artists. For example Cole Poter’s lyrics or say releasing Jimi Hendrix albums from the vault etc. Or the neverending greatest hits packages for Waylon and Janis Joplin and the like…
I’ve always felt like this was kind of crass and that the music should be public domain in some respect, though I know session guys and all that should be paid but… I mean Cole Porter lyrics NOBODY should own the rights to those (well maybe his family) at this point…
June 21, 2015 @ 11:43 pm
There’s a reason this was an OPEN letter when it could have been a private correspondence between the Swift camp and the Apple camp . Most of T.S’s altruistic activities are made public because that is GREAT press and marketing . Not saying her camp isn’t doing good things in terms of charitable deeds , TS showing up at Birthday parties , helping families in need ..etc. But MANY entertainers do that completely under the radar ( Johnny Carson ) while TS and her camp always let us know they are doing this stuff . Its just GOOD marketing and its all about $$$ and career longevity isn’t it ?
June 22, 2015 @ 12:10 am
The reason why this was an open letter was to put extra pressure on Apple, which eventually resulted in Apple caving.
As for her showing up to meet fans who are sick or in need: virtually all of the time, the families of those who request Taylor’s presence are the ones who inform the media and send photos, not Taylor or her camp.
June 22, 2015 @ 1:38 pm
It’s a combination of both. I’m pretty sure Taylor made and distributed her *own* video documenting the various gifts she sent to fans over Christmas. The reason she did it may have been more about getting fans excited than selling herself as a saint, but it’s not like she concealed it. She wants you to know when she does good.
(And I don’t think that’s a bad thing – it’s just a fact)
However, even if there is a PR incentive, she still does things that no other artists do. Her playbook is open, yet none of the artists wants to seize it. Virtually no one invites fans to their homes for listening parties. No one finds fans on Tumblr to invite to concerts and send gifts. There’s something to be said about her – whether it’s actually her or her team – actually doing these nice tings.
Hell, I heard one major artist’s PR person – and I kid you not – say, “What sucks about getting letters from sick kids is that they always want something – tickets or pictures or autographs. It’s so much nicer when people just write in.”
That’s the attitude many non-Taylor Swift people have. Even if hers is, “I bet the media will likely me more if I buy my fans gifts,” it’s still more admirable.
June 22, 2015 @ 5:32 am
I don’t have an opinion on Taylor’s music one way or the other. I am camp meh on it. She seems like an intelligent business woman and I can respect that. My only complaint is the horrendous awards show dancing she subjects me to. However I find it odd that a champion for others would make photographers for her shows sign a contract that states they can use photographs of her once then all rights go to her. Seems a little hypocritical to me. I can see there being stipulations on how the image might be used, but to take ownership of the rights seems a little heavy handed.
June 22, 2015 @ 7:07 am
Wow! All of the childish comments here. There are a lot of no talent ass clowns who are full of hate. I don’t see anyone on this page who has made $100 million dollars off of anything. She started a career as a child who wrote her own music, and most people have really liked it, including my daughter (also a HUGE Cash fan). If you want to bitch about the influence of pop music in country, blame Shania Twain. She sucks 1000x worse than Swift. She is a HUGE artist who has made it big in two genres, like it or not, and will continue to put out music that the masses will buy. She will end up being one of the biggest pop stars of all times.
Not only does she put out music that sells well, she also takes time to get to know her fans, spending time shopping for Christmas gifts and even hand delivering some. As of last week, she donated $15k to a firefighter’s family after she read a story on Reddit. When is the last time a jerkoff like Clint has taken some of his hard earned money and bought dozens of gifts or donated to complete strangers. As far as her character is concerned, I would say that it is better than just about anyone’s in show business.
As far as this article and so much other click-bait that SCM puts out…why all the negativity? Why call the site “Saving Country Music” when it should be “Bashing All Music We Don’t Like” or “Nashville Country, Pop, Hip-Hop/Rap, Nu Metal, et.al. Suck So Lets Bitch About It?” The only positive content I see on here promoting traditional/outlaw/Texas/Red Dirt/etc. are album reviews. Meanwhile artists are pounding the pavement every week putting out great country music and putting on great shows that none of us hear about. This weekend Uncle Lucius put on two AMAZING shows for packed houses to promote their new record, The Light, and it won’t be talked about here. No one here cares that bands like UL are kicking ass and taking names in the barrooms. Everyone waits salivating for that next article to appear so they can bash whatever artist they think sucks. When there is so much good going on in country music, why must the focus almost always be to the negative? Even in this story, idiots cannot see the good that a GIANT artist did for a band like Uncle Lucius who will now be able to make money off of their newly minted record. So many people don’t know what it takes to cut an album…the time and cost associated with it. Artists who work day jobs just so they can record and play shows. I praise Taylor no only for building her career own her own songs, but also for sticking it to the man and standing up for the artists who grind out a living to make the music that I love.
June 22, 2015 @ 7:40 am
What the hell are you talking about? There was absolutely nothing hateful towards Taylor Swift in this article whatsoever. In fact it’s quite the contrary. And even the isolated and minimal hate for Swift in the comments was strongly rebuked by other commenters. And what about this is “click-bait”? Pretty much every music website is running this story.
I feel like you’re leaving this comment on the wrong story.
June 22, 2015 @ 8:10 am
Good for Apple to do this, they should have done this from the start. I’m not Taylor Swift fan and I definately think she had/has her own selfish reasons she railed against this so hard, but at the end of the day it worked and there is no doubt it could help some smaller indie artists as well as her own bank roll.
June 22, 2015 @ 8:26 am
There’s a lot of conspiracy theories swirling this morning, and I’m not sure how I feel about any of them. If you’re going to pull a publicity stunt, Father’s Day is probably a bad day to do so. Taylor Swift would have never written her letter unless she knew it would ultimately be successful.
June 22, 2015 @ 8:12 am
I think this was a real failure on someone’s end at Apple as well. Apple has continually marketed itself as a “friend” of artists. Say what you will about Google, Spotify, Rdio, but none of those other companies have been so outspoken with their claims of being artists “friends” or on the side of the musician. The fact that someone at Apple thought they might be able to sneak this through or not get press about it shows someone in Cupertino is/was a moron.
June 22, 2015 @ 9:03 am
Ah, but did you see this Trig? An open letter response to Taylor’s stance re Apple streaming. Don’t know how reliable this is, but here it is:
http://junction10.wordpress.com/2015/06/21/those-in-glass-houses-shouldn't-throw-stones/
June 22, 2015 @ 9:32 am
Taken down. Launch even more conspiracy theories.
June 22, 2015 @ 2:48 pm
Well I googled “taylor swift those in glass houses” and the got the article it is about concert photographers and how she uses THEIR work freely and pays for it once and due to the contract the photographer can no longer use their work to earn money even if that work goes used by the artist.
Feels more like a take down out bitterness and dislike for her period than a real open letter. Especially since the internet is AWASH with photos NOBODY has paid for being used basically as public domain without the wait period.
https://junction10.wordpress.com/2015/06/21/those-in-glass-houses-shouldnt-throw-stones/
June 23, 2015 @ 8:15 am
Though it’s probably an unpopular opinion here (and I really don’t care if it is), good on Taylor Swift. She presents a very levelled and reasonable argument here, and makes excellent points about the inequity of the current streaming system.
It’s ironic that an artist that’s considered as someone who is a lightweight in terms of material and song depth has essentially gone very deep with her seemingly earnest and sincere wish for artists to be compensated. Obviously, this is beneficial for her work, but in the whole scheme of things, it’s equally as beneficial for everyone else as well. She’s at least willing to put her money where her mouth is, and how many other artists have done that? Only a handful that I can think of. Bravo to her for this.
Swift’s music is ok, but I’m not a huge fan. I AM a huge fan of a streaming system that is fair for everyone. Let’s hope this is a step in the right direction.