From the second I started paying to stream music, it was Spotify for me. Not only was the ability to instantly stream songs to someone who had spent years on the tortuous streets of peer-to-peer music piracy, but Spotify was the only game in town. It was an easy decision: risk downloading a weapons-grade porn or pay a reasonable price for an on-demand, god-grade catalog of instantly accessible music?
That was a long time ago, though, and a lot has changed in the world of broadcasting—not all for the better. While the choice to throw money at Spotify wasn’t unusual back then, simple things have a bad habit of becoming difficult, and let’s put it this way: Spotify subscriptions aren’t easy.
Remember that “reasonable amount” I mentioned? Yes, for the first time since Spotify Premium was introduced to US customers in 2011, that price has started to balloon. In 2023, subscription fees increased from $9.99 to $10.99, and in 2024 from $10.99 to $11.99. Today, Spotify announced that it is bringing that price down from $11.99 to $12.99. Don’t get me wrong; on a good subscription travel program like leech, it could be worse (when I watch it, Netflix), but that temperature is something rise, and it may be at a worse time.
As prices drop, Spotify finds itself at the center of a different conversation, and it’s about everyone’s favorite buzzword (or technically buzz phrase)—AI slop. Like YouTube and our other favorite platforms, Spotify is at the crossroads of AI production, and has not included itself in this conversation by choice. The short of it is: Spotify is playing host to AI-generated music, and customers are not happy about it. How can I not be happy? Well, just scan this Reddit thread to get an idea.
As it turns out, people don’t like AI slop mixed in with the art they love, which may be obvious to most normal people but seems strange to the companies that sell it. Google, for example, markets its Veo video production model as an “AI filmmaker,” while Suno, a music production platform, saw its CEO briefly announce that “it’s not fun to make music now” last January. Whatever you say, bud.
Spotify, on the other hand, hasn’t taken much of a position on the topic of AI-generated music on its platform. While the company introduced new policies for AI music that impersonates artists or is completely immersive, it did not give any indication of a specific ban. In a recent statement to TechRadar, Spotify appeared confused on the idea of what constitutes AI-generated music, saying that “it’s not always possible to draw a simple line between ‘AI’ and ‘non-AI’ music.”
And even if it’s Spotify he did want to take steps to flag or remove AI music from its platform, there is evidence that the company may not be able to identify which music to take down in the first place. Take the recent controversy surrounding (most likely) AI singer Sienna Rose, for example. The self-proclaimed “unknown” neo-soul singer recently became the talk of the town after being outed by real-life pop singer Selena Gomez in an Instagram post. I’ll save you the rabbit hole, but Rolling Stone did some digging, and I think the case is cut and dry: Sienna Rose is AI slop, and as of now, she (or she) has 2.9 million listeners on Spotify. Gomez, for the record, has pulled the plug on her (probably) AI singer.
Spotify’s lack of headlines is not surprising given the lax policies that many platforms have had in relation to AI slop (mainly because the companies that run those platforms are the cheapest), but they are very different from competitors in the space. Bandcamp, for example, recently announced that it will ban music created “in whole or in large part” by AI.
It’s also worth noting that competitors like Apple Music don’t seem to share the same problem as Spotify, and that difference could be very important. As I said before, things have changed in the last 15 years of Spotify’s rise in the US, and one of those things is the number and influence of competitors. While Spotify is still far from a major presence in the music streaming space, Apple Music has gained a significant foothold.
Combine Apple Music’s continued rise in price and general dissatisfaction with Spotify’s platform, and you’ve got yourself a recipe for “ruh-roh,” at least if your income depends on selling Spotify subscriptions. What I’m trying to say is that Spotify, more than ever, is treading on treacherous territory.
While similar streaming services like Netflix or Hulu enjoy a certain level of impunity if you suddenly hike, I’m not sure Spotify will get the same forgiveness. For one, Netflix and Hulu have options, which keep customers locked in. Spotify? Not so much. The platform has been boasting customers with a comprehensive music catalog, but Apple Music has relative parity right now, with both platforms boasting over 100 million songs.
In terms of value, Apple Music is breathing down Spotify’s neck, which could make the switch easier than ever. For the record, that’s great for consumers who might be fed up with AI slop or just want the best bang for their buck (Apple Music is only two dollars cheaper than Spotify, but still). And as long as Spotify rules, nothing in the tech world is set in stone; just ask Blackberry or Skype. It’s safe to say that, more than ever, Spotify is playing with fire. It just so happens, this time, that fire is starting to smell like AI slop.
