Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Taylor Swift's Apple Music Letter Surprised Her Record Label, but Pushed Talks 'Over the Edge'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Don't hate her, not a fan of her stuff either, but admire her for this, and for doing a lot of nice stunts for her fans , publicity or not who cares it ended with a good result. Also, ummm Apple Music at least for me features a lot of music besides hip-hop even Beats 1 has different programes, you have to check the schedule. Certainly the "NEw" and "For You" curated playlists include a lot of rock, indie, world, classical and jazz. But then that's what dominates my library.
Yes, before the album 1989 came out. So, this statement is true.
All we need to do is ask a simple question: which path would give Apple Music more play (heh) in the media between announcement and launch?
Originally announcing it as it now stands?
OR
Announcing it with the terms they did initially, stirring up controversy, getting an open letter from TS, and capitulating to her and tens of thousands of indie label demands?
Clearly, the latter path kept Apple Music FAR more front burner in the media than would the former.
"A spokesman for Apple said that “1989” would be available during the trial periods of Apple Music, and she will also add her older albums to the service. In the past Ms. Swift has objected to her music being placed on the free levels of streaming music services, and until now she has not allowed “1989” to be on any streaming outlet. Apple Music will be free for customers to try for the first 90 days, and thereafter will cost $10 a month."
As I said, the statement is false.
"A spokesman for Apple said that “1989” would be available during the trial periods of Apple Music, and she will also add her older albums to the service. In the past Ms. Swift has objected to her music being placed on the free levels of streaming music services, and until now she has not allowed “1989” to be on any streaming outlet. Apple Music will be free for customers to try for the first 90 days, and thereafter will cost $10 a month." This statement is false.
Here's how it is. Taylor Swift's 1989 album has NEVER been available on ANY streaming service until it became available on Apple Music. Period. End of story.
Exactly. Doubt if she'll sing at any of her school reunions. Anyone who has know great success coming from humble backgrounds knows all too well that few from the childhood neighborhood will be happy for you.
True. But do you hire a publicists to get a few million YouTube hits to show off the event? My fav TS move was her showIng up at a wedding shower of one of her fan club presidents. You could see the collective jaws drop when she walked into the banquet hall.
My fav conspiracy theorist rant is all entertainment professionals that hit the big time are Illuminati members. A lot of this is from the old "they won't let me" rant to compensate for one's shortcomings to justify their failures.
Know this one guitarist who has gone on and on how "they" won't let him in a group that ends up getting signed and touring. This one cannot look in the mirror and see his character assassination monologues, band fights and degrading social habits have kept him out of many a good scene.
Last edited:
Apple is the first and only to offer Tailor Swift new album?!? And since when is that a good thing????
Sigh, the only service to offer it on streaming. I'm sure you can purchase it for download on Amazon, Google Play or get the actual CD from wherever. No one is forcing you to listen to it, there are literally millions of other songs to listen too.
Oh okay. My question really pertained to her latest album though and whether it had been on Spotify at all, or just very briefly after first being released.
