We can’t change the world if everyone just looks out for themselves and jokes about it online for a quick spark of brain chemicals because someone typed “lol” after it.
Don’t be stupid. Nikes are ace.
1 Like
You can do all those other things and fuck Spotify off
I presume you have no pension or investments involved in the stock markets?
Nothing that compares to Spotify’s funding of drone warfare and advertising for ICE and Joe Rogan, no
corporate brands (nike) vs music is a stupid argument. Nike are not selling peoples one off creations and when people buy them not paying the person who poured their soul into creating them.
Music is a gift but one where the creator should be rewarded something if people want the privelege of hearing.
Well I just checked my Wrapped. Was in the top % of Charli XCX listeners and got a video of Charli saying thanks for listening to her music. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it!
1 Like
Judged for what? Listening to music legally as far as I’m aware. It’s funny how people act like it wasn’t that long ago everyone was downloading music off Napster or LimeWire for free as the norm.
Or mostly buying used records and CDs which somehow is obviously fine.
2 Likes
My top tracks were polluted by my 4 year old listening to axel f crazy frog so god knows what the algorithm makes of me
2 Likes
I do agree that the Spotify CEO seems like a right Michael Fabricant though. But I honestly wouldn’t be able to function in the modern world if I had to only deal with massive companies that aren’t run by Michael Fabricants.
2 Likes
never done it. But I am uppity about music because generally, people care less than I do.
But we all cut corners in life and shift our moral compasses to suit so I can’t judge too harshly.
I just care alot about Music personally.
1 Like
Started something here haven’t I ha
Vive la revolution. It will not be televised, or streamed.
I’m 38, I don’t think there’s ever been an ethically 100%, musician friendly way of listening to music in my lifetime. In the early 90’s people were taping off the radio, in the late 90s people were ripping CDs, in the 00s people were torrenting entire discographies, in the 10s we were streaming…
I guess in the heyday of cd sales there was enough money going round to support even the smallest of (signed) artists, but why should the entire ethical weight of music buying fall on the shoulders of the consumer?
1 Like
This was useful:
But the conclusion is, artists do not receive much compensation from any service and all the major companies are pretty shady both in terms of their businesses practices and funding war.
Im still ripping cds. Decent phones still have sd card slots.
On a similar note. I’ve had to buy a dvd player just to get the matilda musical dvd for my daughter as its not on any streaming platforms anymore.
1 Like
I saw Brian Jones Town Massacre. Charlie XCX, Sum 41, Oasis and went to a weekend festival this year, bought merch at some of those gigs. Is that enough to get Spotify premium
Going to die on this hill:
Just get YouTube Premium. No ads, download vids so you can watch them on the plane and free YouTube music.
3 Likes
Pop music has always been commercial. So it is produced and distributed for profit. It used to require a band, a studio, a factory to make the records, radio stations to promote the music, record shops to sell the music, etc…
You could argue that it got ever easier for artists to produce commercial music with the advent of electronic instruments, samples, home production facilities etc..
The distribution side of things has moved on over the years, records died out, record stores became chains, tapes, CDs, downloads, streaming…
There’s not really any discernible right or wrong way to produce or consume music within that commercial framework, it’s just subject to change and market forces.