Spotify Removes R. Kelly Music From Playlists

[Devil Marlena Nylund]

So if I, a gay man, am walking down the street holding hands with my boyfriend, another gay man, and we get insults hurled at us, despite living in a pretty liberal city, am I playing the victim?

[jenglisbe]

May 17, 2018 17:13:17 GMT -5 Naos said:

Correlation does not imply causation.

Actually, it does. It may not prove it, but it most certainly can imply it. Particularly when there is a pattern.

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

You're right, the same thing happening over and over and over again with the exact same circumstances is clearly not a pattern of systemic problems rooted in the single common denominator....

[Naos]

May 17, 2018 17:42:09 GMT -5 jenglisbe said:

May 17, 2018 17:13:17 GMT -5 Naos said:

Correlation does not imply causation.

Actually, it does. It may not prove it, but it most certainly can imply it. Particularly when there is a pattern.

It doesn't. Many statistics can correlate. Doesn't automatically imply a causation. That is to say just because two correlate, it does not mean one causes the other.

[spooky21]

Why are you guys indulging this?

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/05/17/us/california-starbucks-racial-slur-trnd/index.html?__twitter_impression=true

Maybe the barista just misheard this latino man's name...

Or maybe the Latino man is the real racist for going to Starbucks while brown

[Fancy]

May 17, 2018 21:58:45 GMT -5 spooky21 said:

Why are you guys indulging this?

every time it happens, someone acknowledges the frequency of it... and then everyone proceeds to engage anyway.

[jenglisbe]

May 17, 2018 22:58:23 GMT -5 Fancy said:

May 17, 2018 21:58:45 GMT -5 spooky21 said:

Why are you guys indulging this?

every time it happens, someone acknowledges the frequency of it... and then everyone proceeds to engage anyway.

I personally had not encountered the specific poster before and am willing to engage in dialogue to learn. I wouldn’t do it again in another thread if it comes up, but it was new for me here.

[Caviar]

Are we even discussing R.Kelly anymore?

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

No, we've moved on to misandry and reverse racism.

[newpower]

May 18, 2018 6:18:32 GMT -5 Caviar said:

Are we even discussing R.Kelly anymore?

Poor Robert, not only his music is removed from Spotify playlists but a thread about him gets hickjacked by a russian troll.

[Gary]

One Week Into Spotify's New Conduct Policy: Penalized Artists See Streams Drop, Concerns Continue To Mount

NewsLegal and ManagementDigital and Mobile

By Dan Rys and Gail Mitchell | May 18, 2018 10:19 AM EDT


The announcement by Spotify on May 10 that it was removing R. Kelly’s music from all of its ­editorial and algorithmic ­playlists stunned the music world. The move, part of its new public hate content and ­hateful conduct policy, was because "we want our ­editorial ­decisions -- what we choose to program -- to reflect our values," the company said in a statement. "When an artist or creator does something that is especially harmful or hateful, it may affect the ways we work with or support that artist or creator."

Yet the ­implementation of the policy, which also ­de-playlisted ­controversial rappers XXXTentacion and Tay-K, left many in the industry wondering why those three artists in particular -- who have been accused but not convicted of felonies -- were singled out. Several high-ranking Spotify ­executives were blindsided by the policy themselves and upset that the teams who interface with acts and labels weren’t consulted, while concern has mounted both inside and outside the ­streaming ­service that the policy initially ­targeted artists of color.

"Spotify’s got to realize that these are innocent people by court of law," says one label executive close to a recently de-playlisted artist. "For them to be judge and jury is a very dangerous thing."

While many music industry executives say streaming services are well within their rights to curate their homepages and playlists as they see fit -- and without explanation -- it’s Spotify’s creation of an official policy nearly impossible to apply fairly that has drawn the outrage. In statements, reps for both XXXTentacion and Kelly ­questioned why other artists, many of them white, were not also ­de-playlisted despite facing similar ­accusations and, in some cases, ­convictions. Jim Gordon, the drummer for Derek & The Dominos, for example, was denied bail for a 10th time in April, having served 35 years of a life sentence for killing his mother in 1983 -- but "Layla," on which he performed and co-wrote, appears on several Spotify playlists. Shaunna Thomas, executive director of women's advocacy group Ultraviolet, publicly called for the service to also de-playlist artists like Chris Brown, Eminem, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Nelly, among others.

"How many artists on the white side [is this happening to]?" asks one major-label branding executive. "We can go down the list and note all the disgusting things that they have done but they seem to still have access."

A publishing executive at a major record company noted that "R. Kelly and Chris Brown are among those black artists who have amassed certain power through their writing and publishing, and that’s always been my observation: the more content or ownership you have, the more dangerous you become as a black artist."

Spotify says it worked with ­advocacy groups including the Southern Poverty Law Center, the Anti-Defamation League, Color of Change and GLAAD to develop the standards. In a statement to Billboard, Rashid Shabazz, Color of Change chief marketing and storytelling officer, said, "Spotify is a trendsetter. We are encouraged and hopeful that the new policy will encourage others in the digital music industry to follow their example."

Kenyette Barnes, co-founder and national organizer of the #MuteRKelly campaign that launched in April following fresh accusations of sexual misconduct the singer has denied, believes the initial targeting of black artists is "more coincidence than anything else," she tells Billboard. "Does the Spotify net need to be widened? Absolutely. It is imperative, for continuity, that other artists whose music violates this policy should also be subjected to the same scrutiny. But I don’t think Spotify’s policy is racially biased. And I’m speaking as someone who works in civil rights and social justice, where racial bias is always a chief concern."

Artists Spotify deems guilty of "hateful conduct" won’t have their music removed from the service altogether, but between 20 and 30 percent of Spotify’s streams -- and as much as half of new-music streams -- come from its playlists, industry sources tell Billboard, ­resulting in greater fallout for new acts.

In the six days since XXXTentacion’s "SAD!" was removed from Spotify’s playlists including RapCaviar, where it held prominent placement, the track’s streams dropped 17 percent per day in the United States on average. That continued rate of decline, Billboard estimates, could cost the rapper as much as $60,000 in revenue in a year from -- roughly ­equivalent to the United States’ median household income -- from one song on one service in the U.S. alone. In the four days after "SAD!" was removed from Spotify's playlists (May 10-13), its on-demand audio streams dropped 9 percent across all streaming services in the U.S. compared to the four days prior (May 6-9), according to Nielsen Music. Radio play for "SAD!" also began declining after its Spotify ­de-playlisting, although no stations appear to have removed the track from rotation altogether.

"If you’re accused of something that you haven’t done and public opinion is that you’ve done it, your livelihood can be taken away from you," says the publishing executive. "Even if you’ve paid the cost for your actions, you can’t make a living because people are still coming after you. And that’s not right."

While the new guidelines are Spotify's first public stance on the issue, the service has maintained internal policies surrounding hate content for years, and last August removed an array of white supremacist bands from its service following public criticism. Spotify is not alone: Pandora confirmed it has a policy "to not actively promote artists with certain demonstrable behavioral, ethical or criminal issues," though it declined to comment on any action taken pertaining to specific artists.

Apple Music declined to comment and doesn’t have a conduct policy, but it has also made conduct-related calls of its own, multiple sources say: Soon after the release of Chris Brown’s ­latest album last October, initial ­promotion was scaled back at least in part due to concerns about Brown’s past. Apple also removed R. Kelly from some top playlists in recent months. But because such moves at Apple haven’t driven by a broader official policy, the company hasn’t faced pressure to explain these editorial decisions, which are typically influenced by a range of factors.

Acts can fight back. After Spotify removed Tay-K’s "The Race" and "After You" from playlists on May 10, he launched his own, called Tay-K, which has gathered about 2,000 ­followers.

For Spotify, the world's largest streaming service with 71 million paid subscribers and 160 million monthly users globally, the policy is unlikely to make a dent in its momentum among users. "For the vast majority of listeners on a particular service, it has little to no impact, if they're even aware of this at all," says Russ Crupnick, managing partner at research and consultancy firm MusicWatch. "Despite how passionate we are about our particular streaming services, to some extent it's a utility -- I flip the switch and I want the lights to come on."

There are outstanding questions -- such as whether the ban would apply to producers, writers or songs where the featured artist has been de-playlisted -- which Spotify has declined to answer. (Aaliyah's top five hit "Back & Forth," produced by Kelly, is still available on Spotify playlists, for example.)

But while some details remain murky, some industry figures are already wondering about the potential longterm effects. Asks one major-label executive: "Will this change the practice of who’s signed? And what will those decisions then be based on? And who becomes the judge for that?"

[Naos]

May 18, 2018 7:23:07 GMT -5 YourFaveIsAFlop said:

No, we've moved on to misandry and reverse racism.

No such thing as reverse racism. Just called racism.

May 18, 2018 8:05:56 GMT -5 newpower said:

May 18, 2018 6:18:32 GMT -5 Caviar said:

Are we even discussing R.Kelly anymore?

Poor Robert, not only his music is removed from Spotify playlists but a thread about him gets hickjacked by a russian troll.

Or you know... There's all the SJWs. But since all you can use is ad hominem, you likely have no argument whatsoever.

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

No denial of being a Russian troll though...

[Naos]

Why deny worthless attempts to insult on the internet?

No denial of being an crazy SJW though...

[Devil Marlena Nylund]

So if I, a gay man, am walking down the street holding hands with my boyfriend, another gay man, and we get insults hurled at us, despite living in a pretty liberal city, am I playing the victim?

[jenglisbe]

A lady I know posted on facebook about Ben E King performing “Stand By Me” at the wedding today. WTH? I informed her not only is King dead, but there is more than 1 black man who can sing. She is of course someone who denies race is much of an issue anymore. GTFO!

[jenglisbe]

May 17, 2018 14:44:24 GMT -5 Naos said:

I never said racism "barely exists" though. Like the alt-right, they are a small minority that doesn't have much in the way of power. It doesn't mean they don't exist. Hate crimes has actually increased for two years straight in 2016 and 2017. As I said before, the biggest increases went towards Muslims and whites. People need to stop acting like they're chattel slaves in America in the 1800s though. Or hell, they don't even have it anywhere near as bad as before the Civil Rights Movement. Unlike then, that behaviour isn't really tolerated by society. Nor should it be. Class explains most, and you'll see that a rich black man is closer to a rich white man than he is to black people who live in the projects.

"Potentially racist" doesn't mean it is. And honestly, I'd rather not get into Black Lives Matter. I dislike them not for their principles, but for other reasons (though their anti-police ideology is something I don't really care for), and let's leave it at that.

No, this sh*t is on the daily:
www.washingtonpost.com/news/education/wp/2018/05/18/high-school-tennis-team-posed-with-white-bags-over-their-heads-school-called-it-highly-offensive/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.8746a2d66312

[SHOOTER]

R. Kelly Streaming Numbers Remain Intact Despite Spotify Removal

Streaming numbers for R. Kelly have remained intact a week after Spotify announced it had removed the R&B singer’s music from its playlists, citing its new policy on hate content and hateful conduct.

Spotify made the bold declaration on May 10, but R. Kelly’s streaming numbers are relatively the same with some small growth: Before the announcement, he averaged 6,584,000 weekly streams for the year. But from May 10 to May 16 he garnered 6,676,000 streams for the week, according to Nielsen Music.

R. Kelly’s streams have grown steadily in the last two years: His music averaged 4,709,000 weekly streams in 2016 and 5,666,000 weekly streams in 2017. So far for 2018, he is averaging 6,674,000 weekly streams. While R. Kelly’s streaming has grown, his numbers are small in comparison to Drake, 2017′s most streamed artist: He averaged 112,735,000 weekly streams last year.

Nielsen Music’s numbers are based on audio streams from Spotify, Apple Music, Pandora and other music platforms.

The embattled entertainer has been accused of sexual abuse of women though he faces no criminal charges. Spotify removed his music from their promoted playlists and algorithms following a campaign from #MuteRKelly and others to sanction R. Kelly. News outlets have reported that Apple and Pandora are also not promoting the singer’s music, though both companies haven’t officially made announcements like Spotify.

Shaunna Thomas, the co-founder and executive director of the women’s advocacy group UltraViolet, said the point is not to stop people from listening to his music, but for companies to stop promoting him.

“Frankly it’s not important in this context whether people are listening to his music or not, what’s important is that Spotify is holding itself to the standard that they themselves established and they live up to it,” Thomas said in an interview Monday.

Thomas wrote a letter to Spotify last week, commending the company for its new policy but also demanded that Spotify remove Chris Brown, Eminem, the Red Hot Chili Peppers and others from its playlists.

“This is really just about stepping into the role of champion, stepping into the role of setting the higher standard that I think they’ve put themselves on the track to do, and hopefully they’ll do the right thing,” Thomas said.

The Time’s Up campaign took aim at R. Kelly late last month over allegations that he has sexually abused women. The organization urged further investigation into the singer’s behavior, which has come under closer scrutiny over the last year in wake of the #MeToo movement, as women have come forward to accuse him of everything from sexual coercion to physical abuse.

Kelly has denied such charges.

The Grammy-winning singer-songwriter-producer was acquitted in 2008 of child pornography after a video circulated appearing to show him having sex with a teenage girl. Despite that, he continued to score hits and sell out arenas.

His career is not as white-hot as it once was: It’s been five years since any of his songs have charted on the Billboard Hot 100 chart: His last hit there was his guest appearance on Lady Gaga’s “Do What U Want,” which peaked at No. 13 in 2013; his last leading hit was in 2007 with “Same Girl,” which reached No. 20 and co-starred Usher.

Thomas said though R. Kelly’s streaming numbers haven’t changed much, it’s still too early to say that his music won’t be affected by the campaigns against him.

“To argue that these numbers reflect the common consensus about whether people want to be paying for his music and helping him profit off the type of music he creates and the type of person he is, I think it’s very early in the game to suggest that,” she said.

www.billboard.com/articles/news/8457166/r-kelly-streaming-numbers-remain-intact-despite-spotify-removal    

[jenglisbe]

^ We know stans of artists don’t give a f*ck if their fave rapes, abuses, grabs by the pus*y, colludes with Russia, etc. That isn’t even the point of what Spotify did.

[Naos]

I'm not surprised R. Kelly is fine. I want to see what happens to an artist who is big right now like XXXTENTACION. But he doesn't seem affected either, since "Sad!" rose, and "Moonlight" re-entered the Hot 100.

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

May 17, 2018 5:19:14 GMT -5 Naos said:

Why is my nationality relevant?

So you live in Japan (allegedly), a country with a 98.5% ethnic Japanese population. Which explains a lot about why you don't understand race issues in America/Canada/UK

[Gary]

Spotify to Move Back on XXXTentacion Policy After Outcry: Report
News
By Rob Arcand, Spin | May 25, 2018 4:30 AM EDT


Spotify might be moving back on its decision to remove artists from its playlists. After instituting a new policy for handling “hate content” and “hateful conduct” earlier this month, the company removed artists like R. Kelly and XXXTentacion from its editorial and algorithmically-determined playlists, leading to public outcry from the music industry.

Now, Spotify is telling industry executives that it will eventually restore songs by XXXTentacion to playlists, as Bloomberg reports. Spotify executives are currently speaking with both the music industry and civil-rights activists to determine the best course of action in the circumstances. According to Bloomberg, the policy changes are still being determined and final decisions have yet to be made. There are also no plans to further promote R. Kelly on the platform.

The issue has also sparked an internal backlash at Spotify, with the company’s head of artist relations Troy Carter announcing plans to potentially leave the company. “It is virtually impossible to police millions of songs, lyrics, contributors and artists,” said Vickie Nauman, an industry consultant who has worked with Spotify in the past.

“Where and how do you draw the line?,” Nauman continued. “I support taking a stand and not willingly sponsoring a known violent artist, but it’s quite unclear to me how you can consistently monitor and apply any sort of similar editorial/social/cultural standards across art on any scale.”

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

I think the issue is they announced this as a broadbased policy instead of some sort of punitive action against a particular artist for a particular thing, which would have most likely alleviated a lot of the issues. Honestly, I don't see this as any different from stores refusing to stock albums from certain artists for whatever reason. I imagine they can't remove artists entirely from Spotify due to contracts with the labels, but that doesn't mean they have to actively promote certain individuals that they feel don't align with the values of Spotify.

[Gary]

I get the R. Kelly thing but the outcry looks like it is due to the broadbased policy being a form of censorship.

Spotify of course can turn their product into whatever they want but exclude one artist or another because they do not meet certain behavior guidelines or some sort of values of decency is censorship.

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

It's no more censorship than Walmart refusing to stock certain CDs because of content or album artwork. Nobody is saying R Kelly et al can't make music. They're saying they won't be an avenue for making him money

[Gary]

Not that Walmart stock CDs much anymore

Anyway, the backlash at Spotify appears to be where do you draw the line? and who decides where that line is? And why do a select few get that much power?

[filthy]

''After Kendrick Lamar reportedly threatened to pull his music, Spotify is putting XXXTentacion back on their playlists.''

[Glove Slap]

Spotify Plans to Change XXXTentacion Policy After Outcry
By Lucas Shaw
May 24, 2018, 5:56 PM EDT Updated on May 25, 2018, 8:35 AM EDT

Streaming service plans to restore XXXTentacion to playlists
Company had stopped promoting the artist, as well as R. Kelly

Facing a rebellion among artists and even some of its own employees, Spotify Technology SA will partially walk back a move to punish musicians for their personal misconduct.

The music-streaming giant has told artists, managers and record-label executives that it will eventually restore songs by XXXTentacion to playlists, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The company’s top executives are talking to the music industry and civil-rights activists about how and when to adjust its rules in a manner suitable to both sides.

The uproar followed Spotify’s May 10 announcement that it would root out hate speech and punish artists for misconduct. The company singled out R. Kelly, the R&B singer who has been dogged by accusations of statutory rape, as well as XXXTentacion, a rapper charged with battering a pregnant woman.

The policy changes are still being hammered out and no final decisions have been made, according to the people. There also are no plans to begin promoting R. Kelly again.

Spotify stopped including the artists in its playlists, though customers can still find the music on their own.

Though the move drew praise, it also infuriated the music industry, forcing Spotify -- just two months out from its stock-market debut -- to repair a fissure with artists. Representatives for several acts, including rapper Kendrick Lamar, called Spotify Chief Executive Officer Daniel Ek and head of artist relations Troy Carter to express their frustration. They also threatened to pull their music if the company maintained its current policy.

Internal Rift
There’s also been internal dissent. Carter, the former artist manager hired two years ago as Spotify’s liaison to the music industry, told several associates that he planned to leave Spotify following the incident, three of the people said. He has since said he plans to stay, thanks to assurances from Ek that the policy will be changed.

Spotify needs the music industry’s support now more than ever, as it contends with a growing threat from rivals Apple, Amazon and Alphabet. The company, Carter, Lamar and the three major record labels all declined to comment on the ongoing negotiations.

“It is virtually impossible to police millions of songs, lyrics, contributors and artists,” said Vickie Nauman, a media consultant who has worked with Spotify and all three major record labels.

#MeToo Reaction
Jonathan Prince, who joined Spotify in 2014 as its head of communications, began devising the policy for hate speech and hateful conduct months ago -- just as fresh allegations of sexual harassment by powerful men were surfacing every day. The idea was to adapt to the new realities of the #MeToo era.

Though Spotify’s intentions were lauded, many have questioned its moral authority to punish acts for conduct in their privates lives. A spokeswoman for XXXTentacion declined to comment, but she previously responded to a query from the New York Times with a list of more than a dozen other musicians who have been accused of misconduct and haven’t been punished.

Prince was the company’s chief spokesman during its feud with Taylor Swift in 2014, the last time Spotify openly antagonized a major artist. The streaming service already had a rocky relationship with musicians, many of whom believed Spotify wasn’t paying them enough. They viewed the Swedish startup as just the latest rapacious technology company looking to get rich off their work.

Censorship Complaints
The conduct policy has been especially unpopular among artists and executives who work in hip-hop, the best-selling genre in the U.S. music industry. Executives have privately wondered why the two acts singled out are black, while plenty of white men with histories of violence were unscathed.

The abrupt way Spotify instituted the policy also sparked complaints. Record labels, music publishers, artists and managers were blindsided, and left to respond in public. “Whoa. Are they censoring the music? That’s dangerous,” Punch, the president of Top Dawg Entertainment, posted on Twitter. Top Dawg releases the music of rappers Lamar and Schoolboy Q.

Scrubbing Playlists
The approach also opened the door to misinterpretation. Some in the music industry first believed Spotify removed the work of R. Kelly and XXXTentacion altogether. But Spotify had just scrubbed their work from playlists, a popular tool for music discovery akin to Top 40 radio.

The controversy has brought increased scrutiny to Spotify at a time when it’s adjusting to life as a public company. It began trading in April after a direct listing -- a move that let it skip the traditional initial public offering. The shares were little changed in early trading on Friday.

There appears to be no easy solution for Spotify as it grapples with the misconduct issue. One one hand, it wants to firm up its support among artists. But it doesn’t want to give the appearance of supporting alleged criminals -- and alienate the activists who have rushed to the company’s defense.

“Where and how do you draw the line?” said Nauman, the media consultant. “I support taking a stand and not willingly sponsoring a known violent artist, but it’s quite unclear to me how you can consistently monitor and apply any sort of similar editorial/social/cultural standards across art on any scale.”

www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-24/spotify-said-to-plan-to-restore-xxxtentacion-music-after-outcry

[YourFaveIsAFlop]

Radio stations blacklist songs & artists all the time. I don't see people threatening to quit their jobs at the radio station because the PDs won't play the Dixie Chicks.