Ted Gioia, in his The Honest Broker newsletter (where he has written several times about the Spotify ‘ghost artist’ kerfuffle), adds some valuable context to the aforelinked Harper’s piece from Liz Pelly:

In early 2022, I started noticing something strange in Spotify’s jazz playlists.

I listen to jazz every day, and pay close attention to new releases. But these Spotify playlists were filled with artists I’d never heard of before.

Who were they? Where did they come from? Did they even exist? […]

Many of these artists live in Sweden—where Spotify has its headquarters. According to one source, a huge amount of streaming music originates from just 20 people, who operate under 500 different names.

Some of them were generating supersized numbers. An obscure Swedish jazz musician got more plays than most of the tracks on Jon Batiste’s We Are—which had just won the Grammy for Album of the Year (not just the best jazz album, but the best album in any genre).

How was that even possible?

How indeed.

They called it payola in the 1950s. The public learned that radio deejays picked songs for airplay based on cash kickbacks, not musical merit.

Music fans got angry and demanded action. In 1959, both the US Senate and House launched investigations. Famous deejay Alan Freed got fired from WABC after refusing to sign a statement claiming that he had never taken bribes.

Transactions nowadays are handled more delicately—and seemingly in full compliance with the laws. Nobody gives Spotify execs an envelope filled with cash.

But this is better than payola[….]

By Gioia’s estimate, Spotify’s CEO Daniel Ek sold over $348 million worth of Spotify stock in 2024, and concludes:

[…] nobody in the history of music has made more money than the CEO of Spotify.

(He includes Taylor Swift in that “nobody” list, but I’m skeptical of that.)

He continues:

I need to complain about the stupid major record labels who have empowered and supported Spotify during its long history. At some junctures, they have even been shareholders.

I’ve warned repeatedly that this is a huge mistake. Spotify is their adversary, not their partner. The longer they avoid admitting this to themselves, the worse things will get.

He calls on Congress to investigate streaming companies, as they did with the payola scheme, and ends with this call to action:

And let me express a futile wish that the major record labels will find a spine. They need to create an alternative—even if it requires an antitrust exemption from Congress (much like major league sports).

Our single best hope is a cooperative streaming platform owned by labels and musicians. Let’s reclaim music from the technocrats. They have not proven themselves worthy of our trust.

I’m not sure calling on the record labels to be part of the solution is the right answer; “futile” might be a massive understatement. While it might be in their best interest to have a streaming solution they (along with musicians) control, I doubt such a service will change who makes the money. In the end, it’s the artists and musicians who may need to build a streaming service they control, and which has their interests at heart.