The shift from CDs to Streaming.

“CD’s Vs. Streaming”, 2019

It is a constant story of artists being snubbed in the profit distribution of their own music, and while the story is still very much a reality, the details of it have for sure changed. Streaming platforms like Spotify and Apple Music have changed the way that we listen to music. We no longer have to buy full albums or pay for individual songs like we did on iTunes. Instead, we are offered almost any artist's music for one monthly price, but how is this affecting the artist?

Spotify is one of the most known streaming services, making the biggest waves within the music industry. They have made it easier for artists to release their own music and for listeners to access an incredible amount of songs. However, the increase in accessibility has caused an abundant amount of artists to flood the platform, leaving as much as 20% of them without any listeners (Vonderau, 2019). While Spotify aimed to enable artists to reach a greater amount of fans, they are inevitably limiting their success in many ways. While the music industry is seeing benefits from the switch to streaming services, artists are continually left behind.

The only people who are gaining immense success due to streaming platforms are big record labels and artists who are already beyond successful (Ovide, 2021). Profits are no longer easily distributed. Previously, artists were given a percentage of each album they sold, but now they are no longer being paid directly for their music. Since streaming platforms receive a flat monthly rate per month, they had to figure out a way to divide each payment, dividing $10 among the streaming service, artists, producers, record labels, and anyone else involved in the making of the song. In the end, the artist is not left with much.

To be successful using Spotify, you have to come to the platform already having success or find income in other ways. The actual creation of music is no longer a way to gain an income, it can almost be seen as a marketing tool to get actual revenue from other avenues (Naveed, Watanabe, & Neittaanmäki, 2017). For reference, The New York Times states that the platform, "likely has around seven million artists on its platform, and Spotify’s figures show that only about 13,000 of them generated $50,000 or more in payments last year," (Ovide, 2021). So, regardless of how successful an artist may appear, they are still not receiving what they are actually worth. Even when growing a large following of listeners and gaining streams consistently, it is hard to say you will make anywhere near a livable wage on streams alone.

Many artists are taking notice of the unequal distribution, leading some to prefer other ways of distributing music, such as Bandcamp. While there has been talk for some time of a new system of distribution that better caters to the success of many artists, the model is still the same today. With little to no change, we may expect to see more artists leaving the platform, taking along many of its listeners. This has already been the case as artists like Kanye West create their own streaming services or other artists are leaning more toward Apple Music for its slightly higher payout rate. Streaming, while extremely innovative, still has a lot of changes it needs to make in order to benefit the artist like they claim to already do.

---

Citations:

Naveed, K., Watanabe, C., & Neittaanmäki, P. (2017). Co-evolution between streaming and live music leads a way to the sustainable growth of music industry–Lessons from the US experiences. Technology in Society, 50, 1-19.

Ovide, S. (2021, March 22). Streaming saved music. artists hate it. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/22/technology/streaming-music-economics.html

Vonderau, P. (2019). The Spotify Effect: Digital Distribution and Financial Growth. Television & New Media, 20(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476417741200