Streaming cheat: "Re-realizes the issue of Spotify's stinginess"

With some luck, the revelations about how easy it is to manipulate streaming numbers on Spotify can lead to something good: that we stop staring blindly at the numbers. There is so much else to talk about. Like: How does the music sound? And: What does the artist want to say? And other old boring 1900s talk topics.

Joking aside: An artist's popularity will never be unimportant. Whatever you think of it, the number of streams greatly influences which bands and artists receive gigs, but also which media chooses to interview, highlight and maybe review. And if any new artist suddenly rises like a rocket on the charts, it is the job of music journalists to find out who it is, and the band books' job to book.

Thus, it is possible to manipulate streams on Spotify risking to skew the entire music industry. Still, Spotify has so far refused to post any interview on the issue. Instead, they send out so-called statements that no one is allowed to ask follow-up questions. And the fact that Spotify, which of course has known about the problem for several years, still fails to address the problem speaks its clear language: The stress level is equal to zero.

That in turn puts their finger on another old shame, namely that the compensation they pay to artists is low. Had the fake streams cost Spotify more money in payouts, they probably would have put on both one and two coals to prevent the so-called stream doping.

Now, of course, this is not just a question for Spotify - anyone who thinks it's both lazy and naive. The next step will be to investigate music services such as Apple music, Tidal and Youtube. And when you're up and running, why not Instagram and other social media? Even the number of followers on that type of platform is used as an argument for bookings for various events, even though everyone knows how easy it is to buy more followers.

But the most important question of all is and remains: How can the sites that sell fake streams remain legal? This is another case where the legislation has not been involved in the development, but which should be addressed faster than Mange Schmidt can say glassy.