Why the Apple Music / Taylor Swift Spectacle is so Important

After sparking a firestorm of streaming-service criticism by pulling her entire catalogue from Spotify earlier this year, Taylor Swift has more or less become the unofficial spokeswomen for underpaid musicians and artists. Yesterday, Swift published an open letter to Apple, explaining why she would be pulling her new album 1989 from the new Apple Music service. Apple initially announced the new service would include a three-month free trial for customers, during which artists would not be paid royalties for their songs, which Apple "justified" by claiming they would pay higher royalties than similar streaming services once the money started flowing in. This is exactly what Taylor Swift addressed, stating:

We don’t ask you for free iPhones. Please don’t ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation.

Now they've changed their tune. Apple announced earlier today they would pay artists during the trial period.

While Swift wasn't the only one to complain about Apple's business model, a series of tweets from Apple Senior Vice President of Internet Software & Services Eddy Cue confirmed she directly influenced Apple's decision:

Apple will always make sure that artist are paid...#AppleMusic will pay for artist streaming, even during customer's free trial period...We hear you @taylorswift13 and indie artists. Love, Apple.

Many are under the impression that Apple had a change of heart, but what this entire story boils down to is who really has the power when it comes to the music industry.

Apple is defined by their reputation. They have a reputation for creating beautiful, intuitive products that work well together. They have a reputation for quality, innovation, and creating value. They have a reputation for transforming the music industry, with iTunes and iPod. The last thing Apple wants is for Apple Music to spoil their incredible reputation. By quickly announcing the change to the Apple Music royalties policy, Apple came out on top, riding the "white horse" as the service that gives back and listens to consumers. In the long run, this will increase the number of people who subscribe to the service and improve Apple's overall reputation, which is well-worth the cost of operating at a loss for a few months. Apple has over $178 Billion cash on hand (though changes to their dividends may decrease this number), which means they can easily afford it to create a name for themselves in the streaming industry.

Initially, I believe Apple didn't think consumers would really care about the behind-the-scenes of it all. Sure, a few reports came out about Apple "bullying" artists into including their music on the new streaming service by threatening to pull their music from iTunes entirely, but all in all consumers were just excited to get all the music they wanted for $10/month.

What Taylor Swift did was made consumers care.

When consumers care about something, they have an enormous amount of power. They have the power to create change. Apple realized this, and quickly reacted. This is huge for the music industry, and it's creating a much needed conversation about money and music. Consumers will now understand that they have the power to reverse injustices, especially towards artists, producers, engineers and managers. If anything, this whole Apple Music - Taylor Swift controversy will make fans care about the artists who create the music they love, which will hopefully lead to increased streaming revenue, merchandise sales, and ticket sales.

At the end of it all, Apple's in a better place now than if they would have just paid artists during the trial period in the first place. While I don't think they intended for everything to happen exactly the way it did, it worked out in almost everyone's favor. Apple gets their reputation, artists get their royalties, and consumers get peace of mind knowing they aren't cheating artists out of what they deserve by using Apple Music, as well as knowing they have the ability to improve market conditions and ultimately influence even the biggest corporations.

Written by

Austin Carney