Dbd189252736f78370038c006fdb98de

ASLpoet

United States

Hello all! My name is ASLpoet. I love reading Sherlock Holmes, Harry Potter, all things Rick Riordan, and Lord of the Rings. I also am a published poet, I love singing and I love to write!!!

Message from Writer

Why fit in when you were born to STAND OUT?
-Dr. Seuss

Controlling The Music

March 13, 2018

To stream or not to stream, that is the question. This is a question that music artists everywhere have been trying to answer. One big aspect of this question is whether or not the streaming services are benefiting the public or corporations at the expense of those musicians who should be able to control what is theirs.
“Music is an art, art is important and rare. Important, rare things are valuable. Valuable things should be paid for.” (Taylor Swift - Source One, Paragraph 16) According to the article, music streaming websites and apps are killing the music industry, causing artists to receive less money than they deserve. In the article, “Are Musicians Going Up a Stream Without Fair Pay?” Taylor Swift wrote a letter, stating her opinion of music streaming services. In the same year, she had not only released her latest album, but had removed all her music from the world’s largest streaming service, Spotify. In her letter she insisted that music should not be free, even though others in the music industry see streaming as their only way to increase the amount listeners and thus their potential revenue. But that is mostly untrue, and it’s certainly not their only hope. In fact, one could make 70 cents for every dollar spent on downloading music, like Taylor, or they could only gain between 0.0006 and 0.0084 cents for every individual song streamed. And Taylor must have the right idea, because the year she took her music off Spotify, she earned 64 million dollars and will keep earning more with that 70 cents per download. Which leads us to how Apple is helping, or harming this cause.
In Source Two, “Apple Bites Back at Music Streaming Services for its iTunes” Apple is pressuring major record companies to publish new music releases exclusively through its iTunes store. Making this move would basically barricade music availability on Spotify, Beats Music, and other streaming services, which ostensibly helps the musicians’ cause. Mostly, though, it seems that Apple is only looking out for Apple, attempting to create a technological monopoly which will not necessarily benefit those artists that do not already have millions of followers. This may have a negative impact on the music industry in the future.
But even though musicians controlling their own intellectual property is a good idea, the concept does have some potential issues. The industry is inevitably moving toward streaming instead of downloads and traditional record sales. According to Source Two, “Song downloads were down 12 percent through the first eight weeks of this year compared with a year earlier. Digital album sales were down 13 percent.” Streaming presents ease of access without expensive proprietary gadgets, like the iPhone, which allows a larger audience to access a greater variety of artists for free. The economic market always bends towards the cheaper, easier path.
However, this hunger for cheap music can cause a problem: if artists aren’t making money from “free” streaming to actually pay their bills, fewer artists will be able to take the long term financial risk and burden of waiting to make money in tiny increments through the streaming market.
No matter which way you look at this situation, the music industry is going through painful changes. Companies like Spotify, Apple, and Beats Music show all the signs of stepping into the void created by the decline of the big record labels. As these changes progress, artists will have to adapt to a very quickly changing market in order to follow their passions, reach their audiences, and earn a living.
Please give me feedback!

Print

See History
  • March 13, 2018 - 3:30pm (Now Viewing)

Login or Signup to provide a comment.