←back to thread

Ghost artists on Spotify

(harpers.org)
556 points greenie_beans | 1 comments | 19 Dec 24 14:12 UTC | HN request time: 0.211s | source
Show context
timoth3y ◴[19 Dec 24 23:01 UTC] No.42466636[source]▶
The entire history of the music business is one of attorneys developing ever more inventive ways of screwing over musicians.

The sad thing (for artists) is that it seems like most Spotify listeners don't care.

Most of our music consumption today seems to be as a kind of background vibe rather than an appreciation of the music itself.

replies(9): >>42466733 #>>42466747 #>>42466782 #>>42466984 #>>42467137 #>>42467214 #>>42467765 #>>42468457 #>>42470219 #
1. dylan604 ◴[20 Dec 24 00:18 UTC] No.42467137[source]▶
> The sad thing (for artists) is that it seems like most Spotify listeners don't care.

Why would/should they care? They are touted a service where you pay a monthly fee, and you get to consume anything they have. So now you're suggesting that music consumers are going to look for sustainably sourced music too?

As you've said, most people "like" music to have in the background, but are not music aficionados that look for anything other than whatever their influencer of choice says is trendy.