{"id":17979,"date":"2022-02-25T14:31:18","date_gmt":"2022-02-25T19:31:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/online.berklee.edu\/takenote\/?p=17979"},"modified":"2026-01-16T17:20:30","modified_gmt":"2026-01-16T22:20:30","slug":"spotify-boycott-what-neil-youngs-joe-rogan-beef-could-mean-for-the-music-industry","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/online.berklee.edu\/takenote\/spotify-boycott-what-neil-youngs-joe-rogan-beef-could-mean-for-the-music-industry\/","title":{"rendered":"Spotify Boycott: What Neil Young\u2019s Joe Rogan Beef Could Mean for the Music Industry"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Spotify Controversy Shows the Growing Debate Over Misinformation and Music Royalties<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

When Neil Young removed his music from Spotify in January of 2022, his chief complaint was that \u201cSpotify is spreading fake information about vaccines.\u201d He cited The Joe Rogan Experience<\/em>, a podcast that Spotify hosts exclusively on its platform (a right that the company reportedly paid the host $200 million for in 2020), as the source of said fake information. Then Neil Young gave the music streaming company an ultimatum: \u201cThey can have Rogan or Young. Not both.\u201d Spotify responded by honoring his request and pulling all of the Neil Young music that he has the rights to\u2014certain soundtrack and guest appearances remain\u2014and as a gesture of good faith to Young\u2019s original criticism about misinformation, the company added a content advisory to episodes of Joe Rogan\u2019s podcast. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the wake of Young\u2019s Rogan-related boycott of Spotify, several other artists have also removed the music that they hold the rights to. Young\u2019s off-again\/on-again bandmates in Crosby, Stills & Nash removed most of their classic work, as did Joni Mitchell and India.Arie, the latter of whom not only cited Rogan\u2019s stance on vaccines, but also his \u201clanguage around race,\u201d and produced a montage of him repeatedly using the n-word on his show. In the same Instagram story<\/a> where she posted the clips, Arie said, \u201cSpotify is built on the back of the music streaming, so they take this money that\u2019s built from streaming, and they pay this guy $100 million but they pay us .003 percent of a penny? Just take me off! I don\u2019t want to generate money that pays this.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n \"India.Arie <\/a>\n\n\n\n


At the time Arie posted this Instagram story, Rogan\u2019s Spotify deal was reported to be worth $100 million. That reported number has since doubled to $200 million, according to the <\/em><\/a>New York Times<\/a>. <\/em>
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the weeks that have followed, there has been no mass exodus of artists leaving Spotify, but that has very little to do with whether or not they agree with Spotify\u2019s endorsement of Joe Rogan or Spotify\u2019s payment model: In many cases artists haven\u2019t left Spotify, in part because they can\u2019t. If they don\u2019t own the rights to their masters, they don\u2019t have control over where their music is available. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

So what\u2019s the next chapter in this saga, for musicians, Spotify, and the music business at large? We asked several of the instructors of the Berklee Online course, Music Business Trends and Strategies<\/a><\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Course author Mike King<\/a> says it was almost inevitable that an argument that began as a stance on misinformation has come back to artist royalties, an issue that has long been at the center of streaming services\u2019 business models, but only exacerbated by the amount that Spotify reportedly paid Joe Rogan. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIt\u2019s pretty bad optics that Spotify is paying one person $200 million when they have to know that there\u2019s a whole different conversation going on around how they\u2019re not paying artists,\u201d he says. \u201cI think the truth is a little different. When I was at the labels, you\u2019d dream about an opportunity to reach millions of people. I\u2019m not saying Spotify is just an awareness vehicle, but for many artists, there wouldn\u2019t be an opportunity to reach anybody.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

King is quick to point out that it\u2019s not just Spotify who is to blame for artists not receiving fair pay for their work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cI\u2019ve said it a million times, but the labels are a little bit complicit in this,\u201d he says. \u201cFor some of the artists who have the worst experience with Spotify, it\u2019s because they have a terrible contract with their label. If Spotify is paying out 70 percent of gross revenue, if you control your masters and you\u2019re going there directly, the payouts could be higher than if you\u2019re working with a label. A lot of what you hear is because it\u2019s filtered through the labels, which are co-owners of Spotify.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Streaming: \u2018A Wildly Complicated Ecosystem\u2019 <\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Instructor Jason Feinberg<\/a> says that because streaming has caused such a dramatic shift in the music industry over the past decade, there\u2019s a lot that music fans, and even artists, don\u2019t really understand. Learning more about it is key to solving the parts that aren\u2019t working.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIt\u2019s quite easy to pick out a particular transgression as proof that streaming partners are \u2018wasting money\u2019 and \u2018don\u2019t want to pay artists,\u2019\u201d he says. \u201cThe reality is that supply and demand, coupled with marketplace dynamics create a wildly complicated ecosystem. However, as the discussion finds its way into the public eye, and decentralized distribution and marketplaces evolve, I can see a situation where momentum grows to that point that stakeholders\u2014streaming services, artists, labels, publishers, etc.\u2014will have a more transparent conversation about the future economics of the biz.\u201d
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Spotify Royalty Rates<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In a conversation that began about misinformation, it\u2019s fitting that Spotify\u2019s royalty rates are also subject to misinformation. While India.Arie may have been correct that artists sometimes receive .003 percent of a penny for every stream, that well-publicized statistic isn\u2019t quite how Spotify calculates its royalties. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Spotify Hears You, Loud&Clear<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In 2020, Spotify set up a site called Loud&Clear<\/a>, to address this very issue. Every month, in each country Spotify operates in, the company calculates streamshare by adding up how many times music owned or controlled by a particular rights holder was streamed, and then divides that number by the total number of streams in that market. Basically, if your music receives one in every 100 streams in your country on Spotify, then you would receive one of every $100 paid to rights holders in your country\u2019s royalty pool. Your country\u2019s royalty pool is based on the subscription and ad revenues in that country. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While this may sound like complex math, the Loud&Clear site breaks it down succinctly, with plenty of interactive components to help users understand. And what is quite loud and clear is that a lot of rights holders are making money from streaming on Spotify. The company paid out more than $1 billion per quarter in 2020. Here\u2019s a quick glimpse of how many rights holders hit different benchmarks in 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n