This past weekend, Taylor Swift announced that she was withholding “1989” from Apple Music due to the streaming service’s free trial policy. Insofar as she disapproved of the store’s decision not to pay artists during the free trial period, she opted not to stream her newest album on the service.
When Apple Music famously changed its policy and agreed to compensate artists during the free trial window, it eliminated Swift’s cause for hesitation. Logically, Swift had no reason for continuing to withhold her album.
In a Thursday morning Twitter post, Swift declared that her music will stream on the service.
“After the events of this week, I’ve decided to put 1989 on Apple Music…and happily so,” wrote Swift.
Interesting about the Swift-Apple Music situation is the fact that the singer-songwriter had also been withholding “1989” from premium-only services like Rhapsody. These services do compensate artists during the free trial period and thus presented no obvious reason for Swift’s objection.
If Swift were willing to put her music on Apple, why not on a service like Rhapsody? Neither devalues music (in Swift’s definition) by offering a free option, and both seemingly comply with her compensation standard.
Swift did not outright confirm her intention to release “1989” on all premium streaming services, but she did declare that her streaming relationship with Apple is not an exclusive one.
“In case you’re wondering if this is some exclusive deal like you’ve seen Apple do with other artists, it’s not,” wrote Swift. “This is simply the first time it’s felt right in my gut to stream my album. Thank you, Apple, for your change of heart.”
Apple Music launches next week.
