This might be tough for Taylor Swift’s ‘Swifties’ fanbase who’ve been recording some serious minutes streaming and shouting the lyrics to ‘All Too Well (10 Minute Version) (Taylor’s Version) since its fall release. 2021, but the 33 “Long Live” singer’s extensive catalog of the year 0l was once missing from streaming services.
Swift has racked up some serious streaming service revenue over the past year, but, based on the history of the “Delicate” singer’s relationship with and perspective on streaming services and artist earnings, it It is likely that she does not devote much attention to these distinctions. .
In 2015, Swift had just managed to achieve a career milestone that many entertainers’ careers don’t survive: She made a seamless transition into pop music from her country roots.
The 1980s-inspired, synthesizer-laden “1989” rocketed her to pop radio stardom with the help of her peppy debut single, “Shake It Off,” a year before.
However, radio airplay was far from Swift’s mind, as streaming services began to have so much impact on a single’s success. There would soon be one growing factor in the music industry that Swift would struggle to shake off: artist compensation.
In Apple Music’s first year, the streaming service planned to not compensate artists in this way
This may be hard to believe, given Apple Music’s place in the industry, especially for a year and a halfbut his reputation with artists was not as positive as it is today.
Like many companies in their first year of operation, Apple Music had some major issues to deal with. The streaming service originally planned not to compensate artists or their record labels after users signed up, according to Stereogum.
Swift, understandably as one of the biggest artists on the planet, disapproved of the decision and she let Apple Music know. His open letter would soon inspire and open conversations that continue today almost a decade later.
The “Style” singer would take to her frequently active Tumblr, where she would vent her feelings about Apple’s plan, advocating for new artists and drawing attention to the difference the lack of royalties could be having on musicians in difficulty compared to those with Swift’s level of success. .
A look back at Swift’s open letter to Apple Music
Swift’s letter began with “To Apple, Love Taylor” and was six paragraphs long.
“I am writing this to explain why I will be holding back my album ‘1989’, from the new streaming service, Apple Music. I think this deserves an explanation as Apple has been and will continue to be one of my best partners for selling my 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,” she explained.
“I’m sure you know Apple Music will be offering a free three-month trial to anyone who signs up for the service. I’m not sure you know Apple Music won’t be paying writers, producers, or artists during these three months,” Swift continued. “I find it shocking, disappointing, and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company…”
“It’s not about me,” she continued, explaining. “Fortunately, I’m on my fifth album and can support myself, my band, my crew and the entire management team by playing live gigs. This is the new artist or band who just released his first single and won’t be paid for his success. He’s about the young songwriter who just got his first cut and thought the royalties from it would get him out of debt. He’s It’s about the producer who works tirelessly to innovate and create, just like Apple’s innovators and creators are pioneers in their field…but won’t get paid for a quarter of a year of listens to their songs,” said said Swift. to say.
“These are not the complaints of a spoiled, irritable child. These are the feelings of all the artists, writers and producers in my social circles who are afraid to speak out publicly because we admire and respect Apple so much. We don’t just don’t respect that particular calling.
“I realize that Apple is working towards a goal of paid streaming. I think that’s a great step forward. We know how astronomically successful Apple has been and we know that this amazing company has the money to pay artists, writers, and producers for the 3-month trial period…even though it’s free for fans to try.
Three months is a long time without getting paid, and it’s unfair to ask anyone to work for nothing. I say this with love, reverence, and admiration for everything else Apple has done. I hope to soon be able to join them in the progression towards a streaming model that seems fair to those who create this music. I think this might be the platform that does it right. (via Stereogum)
Swift’s letter would later go on to influence Apple to do the right thing and reverse its decision.