Taylor Swift covers Vanity Fair, criticizes Spotify

[Whispering 18,865]

Sure jan. If only you had receipts that could back up your claims. 

Universal Music Group is a record label, and not a record label which has published Katy's music, or a record label which Katy is signed to. How can you see details on songwriting credits and royalties of Katy's songs through a company which Katy is not even associated with, and neither is her music.

I'm not pretending anything. I'm just being realistic. 

Once again, never, not once did I state that Katy was listed with UMG publishing. I simply gave that as an example, since they show some percentage information on new releases. That's all it was...AN EXAMPLE of a random publishing company, one that is easy to find and that at least shows a few albums and artists without a password. 

This really isn't difficult to understand...Is English your second language? 

 

[JesseBabe 835]

Even if she was asked in an interview about it I'm just so over hearing about her thoughts on it. Like, we get it girl. You don't like Spotify. I'm tired of her playing the victim in every situation. I don't understand why multimillionares feel the need to make everyone else feel bad for them because they're not getting even more money than they already have. 

When I read her letter to Apple the first thing that came to my mind was "greed". I also didn't buy for a second her trying to act like she's doing the "little" artists a favor by speaking out for their sake. Like others have said, I think she is a mean girl who is very selfish and thinks she's the greatest thing since sliced bread. She really needs to get over her dislike towards streaming services because that is where it's looking like the future of music is going.

[StrawberryBlond 14,123]

yep, im pretty sure that might happen, i have a lot of friends who listen hipster music & hated 1989 so much, and they sometimes agree with critics, so it's not possible so much praise for such album, i just don't believe it

Also i noticed something like that, a few days ago when everyone was bashing her on twitter for the apple music thing, saying she were a 'fake greedy b', suddenly there was a lot of tweets about something else praising her, the funny thing is all the tweets were written exactly the same, her PR team is working so well tbh. so the 'critical aclaim' for a teeny pop album it just doesn't seem real, if you look back in time & see critics to a teen album they always destroy them, and also all about her seems just so fake, i don't buy it

Exactly, critics have always hated teen pop albums, they've always bashed them and Taylor seems to be the one exception, which is very unusual. Paloma Faith released her album last year and it was noticeably more generic than her previous efforts. She was called out on this by the critics. The reception was overwhelmingly mixed with many saying things like "upbeat but generic," "songwriting needs to be of a higher level" and "lack of originality." I agreed and thought the reviews were very accurate: decent effort but could be better. But then Taylor releases her album with selling out, no originality, her usual bland lyrics with no growth and the the critics praise her (like they always do). When I see music that's clearly on a higher level being cast aside by critics but they praise stuff that is clearly lesser quality, I can't help but be suspicious.

[Redstreak 6,653]

Exactly, critics have always hated teen pop albums, they've always bashed them and Taylor seems to be the one exception, which is very unusual. Paloma Faith released her album last year and it was noticeably more generic than her previous efforts. She was called out on this by the critics. The reception was overwhelmingly mixed with many saying things like "upbeat but generic," "songwriting needs to be of a higher level" and "lack of originality." I agreed and thought the reviews were very accurate: decent effort but could be better. But then Taylor releases her album with selling out, no originality, her usual bland lyrics with no growth and the the critics praise her (like they always do). When I see music that's clearly on a higher level being cast aside by critics but they praise stuff that is clearly lesser quality, I can't help but be suspicious.

Publications just have different tastes. Pitchfork placed 1989 at #31 on their best 50 albums of 2014 and they're certainly not the type of publication that accepts payment for good reviews.

[Epione 10,896]

Her fans should be embarrased of her. She takes one thing and drags it for too long. It's like she doesn't have anything to say or sing about since she got a stable (!) relationship with her current boyfriend. 

[Electric Phire 98]

If only money wasn't the only thing she cared about.

[Alfonso 1,414]

At least she looks beautiful

Also, can she leave Spotify for once? Looks like she uses it just to get attention, and she already said the same thing about Spotify 100 times

this  

[gagzus 14,595]

she's obviously money driven, if not her personally then her label certainly is 

[StrawberryBlond 14,123]

Publications just have different tastes. Pitchfork placed 1989 at #31 on their best 50 albums of 2014 and they're certainly not the type of publication that accepts payment for good reviews.

This is true across all publications, though. The general consenus was that the critics liked the album, so I don't know where your argument of different tastes come in - it seemed no critic disliked it. #31 is hardly anything to brag about, especially considering it's out of 50. There was a lot of bad music last year, so I don't think #31 is much of a compliment. If she was in the top 10, understandable, but I don't think #31 is celebration-worthy. I only make a top 20 list myself. My choice of comparing it to the reception given to Paloma's album is a bit difficult, however, as one only has UK critics, the other has US critics and more reviews in general, so it's hard to find a critic who reviewed both. The only one I could find was The Guardian, which was actually one of the best comparisons. 2 different reviewers, but you'd expect everyone from one outlet to share a similar outlook. They gave Paloma 3/5 and said "consistent but formulaic" and "Faith's voice is all there but her songwriting calls for added ingenuity." They gave Taylor 4/5 and said "deals in undeniable melodies and huge, perfectly tuned choruses and nagging hooks," and "why do people take Taylor Swift so much more seriously than her peers? Great songs, smart turns of phrase and a noticeable lack of the usual hollow pop platitudes all help."

I can't help but feel a bit level of inconsistency here. Paloma's lyrics are mature, Taylor's still sound like they're stuck in high school and I don't know how any adult could be impressed with them. So many times I see "clever turns of phrase" and "accomplished songwriter" applied to Taylor and I just don't see it. Her music couldn't be more ordinary. What is defined as clever songwriting anyway? Because I certainly don't define it as "rhyming stuff."

[Redstreak 6,653]

This is true across all publications, though. The general consenus was that the critics liked the album, so I don't know where your argument of different tastes come in - it seemed no critic disliked it. #31 is hardly anything to brag about, especially considering it's out of 50. There was a lot of bad music last year, so I don't think #31 is much of a compliment. If she was in the top 10, understandable, but I don't think #31 is celebration-worthy. I only make a top 20 list myself. My choice of comparing it to the reception given to Paloma's album is a bit difficult, however, as one only has UK critics, the other has US critics and more reviews in general, so it's hard to find a critic who reviewed both. The only one I could find was The Guardian, which was actually one of the best comparisons. 2 different reviewers, but you'd expect everyone from one outlet to share a similar outlook. They gave Paloma 3/5 and said "consistent but formulaic" and "Faith's voice is all there but her songwriting calls for added ingenuity." They gave Taylor 4/5 and said "deals in undeniable melodies and huge, perfectly tuned choruses and nagging hooks," and "why do people take Taylor Swift so much more seriously than her peers? Great songs, smart turns of phrase and a noticeable lack of the usual hollow pop platitudes all help."

I can't help but feel a bit level of inconsistency here. Paloma's lyrics are mature, Taylor's still sound like they're stuck in high school and I don't know how any adult could be impressed with them. So many times I see "clever turns of phrase" and "accomplished songwriter" applied to Taylor and I just don't see it. Her music couldn't be more ordinary. What is defined as clever songwriting anyway? Because I certainly don't define it as "rhyming stuff."

#31 is brag worthy when you consider who Pitchfork is. They are NOT the type to give pop music a go. You can look back at their top 50 albums list for the past decade and you'll find maybe 3 mainstream pop albums.