A2IM, the independent label community and Music Managers Forum-US (representing its membership of artist managers and self-managed artists), fully support the concerns about Spotify’s Discovery Mode program expressed by the Artists Rights Alliance and so many of the artists we work with.
Spotify is marketing Discovery Mode as a tool that allows artists and labels to choose specific tracks to be algorithmically served to listeners. What is important to note about this program is that access to this tool is available only to artists who are willing to accept a reduction in royalty payment for the track’s inclusion in the program. Listeners will be presented with songs based on the acceptance of a much lower payment to artists. This will move significant amounts of money away from artists who so badly need it, and it represents a dangerous fundamental change to the value of music. Many artists have already said that they are not making enough from streaming to survive on, yet this program will create the conditions for a race to the bottom, reducing the overall royalties paid to artists.
At the moment, Spotify says Discovery Mode will only apply to the radio and autoplay playlists (the tracks you hear when the playlist or album you were listening to ends). Make no mistake, Spotify is explicitly clear that they intend to expand this “pay for play” program to other “personalized” areas of the service.
More opportunities to connect with new listeners and innovative tools are always appreciated, but Discovery Mode brings into question the credibility of Spotify’s recommendation engine. From its beginning Spotify proudly stated that it would be a good partner and maintain a democratized service that would never allow the proverbial “thumb on the scale.” Again, and again, we were assured that all artists would have a fair and impartial chance of success. We were promised that the quality of the music and the preferences of listeners would determine success -- not money. "Discovery Mode" breaks that promise. Discovery Mode allows money to be a deciding factor as to which music is surfaced to listeners. Discovery Mode tilts what had been a level playing field for artists. Discovery Mode misleads listeners who believe they are being presented with music based exclusively on their established preferences.
Spotify began as a revolutionary champion of artists and rights holders that promised to save the recorded music industry from piracy and payola. For 13 years, Spotify, recording artists, and rights holders have worked symbiotically towards a shared vision, to build an equitable global music streaming economy. Now, having supplanted the previous gatekeepers, we urge Spotify not to abandon its founding values and intentions.
We respectfully request that Spotify guards itself against the impulses that every previous dominant gatekeeper in our industry has surrendered to. We humbly ask Spotify to consider the well-being of each and every hard-working artist and rights holder, and the tens of thousands of people who work to support them. There has never been a more important moment to honor the integrity of the system that Spotify has built, than during this unprecedentedly challenging time when other revenue streams such as touring have been eliminated. We beg you to put the long-term health of our shared industry ahead of the pursuit of increased margin. Please work with us to create growth opportunities that are in line with your founding values and intentions. We want to continue our collaboration as great partners.
A2IM is a 501(c)(6) not-for-profit trade organization headquartered in New York City that exists to support and strengthen the independent recorded music sector. Membership currently includes a broad coalition of nearly 700 independently-owned American music labels. A2IM represents these independently owned small and medium-sized enterprises' (SMEs) interests in the marketplace, in the media, on Capitol Hill, and as part of the global music community. In doing so, it supports a key segment of America's creative class that represents America's diverse musical cultural heritage. Billboard Magazine identified the Independent music label sector as 37.32 percent of the music industry's U.S. recorded music sales market in 2016 based on copyright ownership, making Independent labels collectively the largest music industry sector.
NEWS
No matter what you thought of the Kendrick Lamar and Drake battle, there was only one undisputed winner by the end of it all: the reaction community in the worlds of streaming and YouTube. Your favorite content creators broke down the bars, reacted to all the most shocking moments, and helped this showdown become one of hip-hop's most culturally significant and resonant moments in a long time... For better or worse. See, the battle's technically not over yet, but only because the 6ix God's idea of victory is clearly quite different. In his federal defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group – his label – for releasing K.Dot's "Not Like Us," he named various content creators who allegedly helped boost the track's widespread popularity and, as a result, its supposedly defamatory nature.
Furthermore, the specific allegation that Drake brings up in this highly controversial lawsuit is that UMG "whitelisted" copyright claims for YouTubers, streamers, etc. concerning "Not Like Us." This means that they would be able to monetize their content without facing a copyright claim from UMG over "Not Like Us," and this isn't really an allegation because various creators have backed this up. But a few important (alleged) caveats that people are talking about online need to be clear. First, "whitelisting" supposedly happens on behalf of a record label behind a song like the West Coast banger, and UMG is instead the distributor of that track. Secondly, as rapper and online personality ScruFaceJean brings up as seen in the post below, tracks like "Push Ups" were also "whitelisted" by its team.
Along with Jean, many other of your favorite content creators spoke out against this Drake lawsuit. Zias! and B.Lou, for example, spoke with their lawyer about the possibility of countersuing for emotional distress, as they found the Toronto superstar's accusations and his implication of them very disturbing and misguided. NoLifeShaq also dragged The Boy through the mud, calling him "soft" and positing that, whether "whitelisting" happened or not, they would react to "Not Like Us" accordingly as they did to his own tracks.
In addition, it's important to bring up that many others fans have pointed to how Drake excitedly used streamers to generate hype and reaction clips for his own diss tracks against Kendrick Lamar. The most direct example is with Kai Cenat, whom he texted to "stay on stream" before dropping "Family Matters." Ironically, the Twitch giant appears in this clowned-upon defamation lawsuit as an example of what the OVO mogul's accusations and implications are. And one more thing: there is no direct link between monetization and algorithmic boosting on sites like YouTube. With all this in mind, content creators seem to feel almost insulted at the idea that they only reacted to the two biggest rappers in the world beefing with each other because one of them would allow them to make money. If Drizzy knew the first thing about the reaction community, maybe he wouldn't have included this...
