Taylor Swift has 'Bad Blood' with Apple Music

Taylor Swift's latest album will not be available on Apple Music, due to the company's decision not to pay artists during its free trial period.

Chris Pizzello/AP/File
Taylor Swift accepts the chart achievement award at the Billboard Music Awards at the MGM Grand Garden Arena on May 17, 2015, in Las Vegas. The artist recently announced she would be withholding her latest album from streaming service Apple Music until Apple agreed to pay labels for music streamed during users' free trial period.

Taylor Swift recently became the most prominent artist to denounce Apple Music’s free three-month trial.

She announced via blog post on her Tumblr page that her album 1989 would not be available for streaming, in protest of Apple’s “shocking” and “disappointing” decision not to pay artists or producers for song plays during the trial period.

“I realize that Apple is working towards a goal of paid streaming,” Ms. Swift said. “I think that is beautiful progress. We know how astronomically successful Apple has been and we know that this incredible company has the money to pay artists, writers and producers for the 3 month trial period … even if it is free for the fans trying it out.”

Though she declared that “three months is a long time to go unpaid, and it is unfair to ask anyone to work for free,” the seven-time Grammy-winning hit writer acknowledged that, personally, she could absorb the loss in revenues – rather, she was speaking on behalf of the new and lesser-known artists and producers that would not be able to afford the loss.

“These are not the complaints of a spoiled, petulant child,” Swift said. “These are the echoed sentiments of every artist, writer and producer in my social circles who are afraid to speak up publicly because we admire and respect Apple so much. We simply do not respect this particular call.”

Anton Newcombe, frontman of the band Brian Jonestown Massacre, expressed similar outrage in a series of Twitter posts. He claimed he had been given the option either to let Apple Music stream his songs for free during the trial period, or to have his music removed from iTunes completely.

An Apple spokesperson told Rolling Stone this was untrue: “[Their music] will not be taken off."

Andy Heath, chairman of a British music industry lobby group, told the Telegraph that he did not know of any independent labels that had agreed to Apple’s terms, saying they would “literally put people out of business.”

“Apple is sitting there with this massive pile of cash and saying to us, ‘You help us start a new business.’ Well I just don’t think it is going to happen on these terms,” Mr. Heath said.

Apple Music is set to launch June 30. Once a user’s free trial period expires, the service will cost $9.99 a month. After the free window closes, Apple will start paying labels per song play, the way other streaming services like Spotify do.

Swift, who also famously pulled her music from Spotify last year out of similar concern for low royalty payments, says she will reverse her decision if Apple changes its policy and recognizes the value of the music they are streaming.

“We don’t ask you for free iPhones," she wrote. "Please don’t ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.