Taylor Swift has become the first artist in music history to
release three albums with first week sales of a million or more copies. (The
Backstreet Boys, Eminem, and N’Sync, each did it twice.) Her new album, 1989 [Big Machine Records], sold 1,287,000 units in that time span. (And that’s only counting full price
sales and not discounted copies, such as those purchased via a promotion
sponsored by Microsoft.) At a time when album sales continue to decline quite
rapidly, this is no small feat. Actually, it was a big deal back when album
sales were significant: only 18 other releases have managed to sell a million
plus copies in its first seven days.
But this historic feat has been practically overshadowed by
Swift’s decision to remove her music from Spotify. A betrayal of her fans; a
savvy marketing ploy; cluelessness; greed; a show of solidarity for fellow
artists; the move from the popular music streaming subscription service has been called all those and more. What it isn’t—to anyone
who’s been paying attention, anyway—is a surprise: Swift has made her thoughts
on the subject of streaming quite well known, to the point of penning a Wall Street Journal op-ed in that regard earlier this year. Right before the release of 1989, Swift further explained
her views, stating she was “not willing to contribute my life’s work to an
experiment that I don’t feel fairly compensates the writers, producers,
artists, and creators of this music. And I just don’t agree with perpetuating
the perception that music has no value and should be free.”
One of the most noticeable aspects of the debate over the
removal of the Swift catalog from Spotify is how the vast majority of those
opining know very little about how the business works. Swift has been accused
of being greedy because she wants cold hard sales revenue in lieu of lesser, but still profitable, amounts she would earn from streaming services. Well, we’d
like to know what definition of profit describes a songwriter earning about
$100 for a million streams. (Yes, you read right— a c-note for 1,000,000 streams.) And of
course there’s that old chestnut “You’re rich, you should let us have it for
free or close enough”, an argument that would never work for those seeking
products from Chevrolet or Whole Foods, but seems to be good enough to demand of
artists. And then things took a turn for the humorous and perhaps a tad surreal when, in a page seemingly taken out of Swift's songbook, Spotify publicly begged her to come back, which she declined. Ha!
Never thought we’d find ourselves siding with Taylor Swift
on any matter. But stranger things have happened and so…
