I recently downloaded Apple Music, and let me tell you, I feel like Ryan Seacrest. For nine bucks a month, I can bump Drizzy while I’m runnin’ through the six and croak along to The Weeknd until I can’t feel my face (I’m proud of that joke, let me have it).
I know this isn’t really news to anyone else. Apple Music and other streaming services have been available for some time now. However, until a few weeks ago, I was the loser that paid over a dollar for every song I cared to purchase on iTunes.
No, that wasn’t a poorly done cover-up for how I actually pirate music. I really did pay for every song in my music library. It is not because I am technologically challenged. I know just as well as the next college student that downloading music for free is easier than making it to an 8 a.m. class. But I have always preferred to purchase my music, so the new Apple Music program was a deal too hot to pass up. The biggest sell? The first three months with Apple Music are completely free.
However, no innovation comes without opposition. This past summer, the queen of all teens, Taylor Swift, released a statement via Twitter that she would not share her music with Apple Music. She made some fairly harsh accusations, arguing that it was wrong not to compensate artists during the free three-month trial period. According to E! Online, Swift claimed it was “shocking, disappointing and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company.” The whole dispute ended up in favor of Swift, as Apple Music agreed to pay artists royalties during the trial period.
I am not usually the first person to blindly follow every word that escapes out of Taylor Swift’s absurdly perfect mouth. As brutal as this is, I generally would prefer to listen to nothing than to 1989. But I do respect her as a performer, and I absolutely agree with her controversial and very public stunt.
Critics accused Swift of being selfish and money hungry, seeing as the insanely wealthy star has nearly no premise for bartering over the couple extra thousand dollars she may earn during the trial period (which, to Swift, is honestly pocket change). But these critics do not see the authentic reason behind the pop star’s outburst.
It is no secret that Swift is the unofficial ruler of this country. She captivates the attention of a staggering population of teens, tweens and the like, and her influence is overwhelmingly powerful. This, however, is not true for the lesser-known, up-and-coming indie artist that releases their music for streaming to Apple. They, like Swift, have chosen a career in the music industry. A career. Their means to make an income and a livelihood. These are the artists that do not sell out the Staples Center five nights in a row, nor do they have millions of devoted followers waiting until midnight just to break album record sales.
Swift has the voice that these artists do not have. She literally possesses power over Apple. Yes, she has earned this place and power and I commend her for her unconditional humility and respect for those chasing the same dreams that she once did. It is her duty as a star this influential to look out for her industry, and her claim created a better, fairer environment for the little guys and the up-and-comers.
So yeah, while she can’t sell me an album to save her soul, Taylor Swift is right. There are few artists out there that make music as a hobby and allow free public access to their work. However, if music is their full-time job it is not right to refuse them compensation in exchange for their labor. So think about the next time you download your music off YouTube. Don’t cheat the people that are scraping the bottom of the barrel to make their dreams come true. It’s worth the nine bucks.
Marisa is a sophomore majoring in journalism. Do you agree with Taylor Swift on her indictment of Apple Music or is it a publicity stunt? Please send all questions and comments to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
