Musicians
Related: About this forumMusic fans and artists hit back as Spotify CEO claims "the cost of creating content" is "close to zero"
Last edited Sat Jun 1, 2024, 11:54 PM - Edit history (2)
https://www.nme.com/news/music/music-fans-and-artists-hit-back-as-spotify-ceo-claims-the-cost-of-creating-content-is-close-to-zero-3761004His comments come after the streaming giant reported profits of over 1billion
(so if distribution is worth over 1billion, and the cost of creating content is "close to zero" then people are paying Spotify billions for distributing "nothing". Is this the perfect dream of capitalism? .... Inquiring minds want to know!)
Daniel Ek, the CEO of the streaming giant, sparked backlash following the comments he made yesterday (May 29) implying that it is easier and more affordable than ever to create content thanks to modern technology.
Writing on X/Twitter, he shared an update which read: Today, with the cost of creating content being close to zero, people can share an incredible amount of content. This has sparked my curiosity about the concept of long shelf life versus short shelf life.
He continued: While much of what we see and hear quickly becomes obsolete, there are timeless ideas or even pieces of music that can remain relevant for decades or even centuries. For example, were witnessing a resurgence of Stoicism, with many of Marcus Aureliuss insights still resonating thousands of years later.
He asked "what are we creating now that will still be valued and discussed hundreds or thousands of years from today?
Music will still be valued in a hundred years. Spotify wont, one wrote in response.
MY QUESTION: WHERE DO WE FIND SUCH ASSHOLES?
Sheesh.
Blistering replies at the link.
EDIT TO ADD:
And please see reply 6 from highplainsdem - https://www.democraticunderground.com/10356999#post6 -
for information on how Spotify is using more and more music it owns to avoid paying royalties to real artists they'd have to pay.
⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆⬆
unblock
(54,150 posts)Artists have always been able to create content with minimal expenses.
But that misses the entire point.
highplainsdem
(52,322 posts)msongs
(70,170 posts)highplainsdem
(52,322 posts)Shellback Squid
(9,076 posts)The Unmitigated Gall
(4,522 posts)One day nearly a year after signing on, Spotify decided to stop getting along with my VPN. Locked out completely with no explanation for what was happening. Finally got back in with girlfriends help (shes a google ninja) and the rep told us the VPN would be a continuing problem. Found while signing back on they had deleted my playlist as well. Goodbye Spot hello alternative!
catrose
(5,236 posts)In my innocence I thought I was supporting artists by driving traffic to them. I used YouTube this last time. I don't know if that's any better and would be glad to hear about an alternative method. I may be reduced to typing the list.
highplainsdem
(52,322 posts)This was brought up by Ted Gioia in one of his Honest Broker posts in April, and he brought it up again in a video with Rick Beato last month.
https://www.honest-broker.com/p/the-rise-of-the-anonymous-music-star
The Rise of the Anonymous Music Star
Do streaming platforms view famous artists as a threat to their brands?
TED GIOIA
APR 12, 2024
How do you generate more Spotify streams than Michael Jackson or Elton John? Swedish composer Johan Röhr pulled off that impressive feat in the strangest way possible.
He hid behind 656 different pseudonyms.
Röhr isnt famous, but that hardly matters. He has generated an astonishing 15 billion streams on Spotify, and his invisibility strategy got lots of support from the platform. These pseudonymous tracks showed up on 144 official playlists with 62 million followers in aggregate.
In some instances, Röhr accounts for 40% or more of a single playlist, albeit under a variety of artist names. Sometimes this unassuming musician is known as Ralph Kaler, at other times he goes by Sherry Novak or or Jospeh Turley or Miu Hayashi or some other identity.
-snip-
Much more at the link.
With something like this going on, it's all but guaranteed that this is work for hire and Spotify owns the songs, the tracks, and pays zero royalties.
Ditto with AI music. Gioia was made aware of a lot of it being pushed on Spotify, similar tracks with different titles and under different artist names.
All of it pushing real artists with their own music - which Spotify has to pay for - off more and more playlists.
That interview with Rick Beato, from May 14, and the part concerning what he wrote about in the post quoted above starts about 8-1/2 minutes in:
highplainsdem
(52,322 posts)CaseyMoses
(1 post)This user attraction policy is really great
Response to usonian (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed