这泰勒·斯威夫特混乱

On Sunday June 30, 2019, it was announced that Ithaca Holdings, led by Scooter Braun, who manages Justin Bieber, Ariana Grande, Demi Lovato, and others, acquired Scott Borchetta’s Big Machine Label Group (BMLG), meaning Scooter now owns Taylor Swift’s back catalogue – every album up to and includingreputation.

该行业已经意识到Borchetta一直试图出售大型机器。最大的问题是泰勒在出售时是否仍然是一名大机器艺术家。泰勒与BMLG的合同于11月到期 - 正如我当时写的那样，几个月来音乐行业正在等待看看她是否会与斯科特·博切塔（Scott Borchetta）重新签约，还是她带有新标签。当时，一个贴上的积分之一是她的主唱片的所有权，即BMLG资产的皇冠上的宝石。BMLG合同失效三周后，她宣布她签署了环球和共和国记录and that, as part of the deal, she’d own her masters for all new music going forward. Back then, Universal was still in play to buy BMLG so it was still possible that her new label would fold her old label into their system, making it possible for Taylor, one of their most important artists, if not their most important artist, to take full control of her entire body of work. Everyone fronted like it was an amicable situation on all sides. Until this weekend. Once the news broke that Scooter Braun bought BMLG, Taylorshared her feelings about it on Tumblr。现在每个人都站在一边。由于这发生在48小时前，如果您正在阅读此网站，则可能会赶上某些名人着陆，团队Swift或Team Scooter的地方。lol比赛视频2019Swift团队宣布的最新人是Cher。宣布团队踏板车的最新人是SIA：

In case she ends up deleting that tweet, here’s the screenshot:

几个小时后，大概在受到泰勒的粉丝骚扰之后，Sia发布了这一点：

这就是屏​​幕截图：

我之所以提到骚扰，是因为在Tumblr上，Taylor写道，她经历了“多年来在[踏板车布劳恩（Braun's）]手中经历的“不断的，操纵性的欺凌”。但是显然，她的粉丝在她的帖子后正在欺负其他人 - 这是为什么踏板车的妻子Yael Cohen在Instagram上离开，炫耀自己的歌曲创作能力的原因。她可能会成为这条线的抒情诗：

"Girl, who are you to talk about bullying? The world has watched you collect and drop friends like wilted flowers.”

耶尔·科恩（Yael Cohen）自己的权利非常紧密。因此，有一些值得注意的名人“喜欢”她的职位，包括凯lol比赛视频2019西·穆斯格雷夫（Kacey Musgraves）（从那以后“不喜欢”该帖子，但在此SH-T结束时很可能会重新“喜欢”，如果有结局），增加了这一混乱的另一个维度：最初的冲突，侧面冲突以及两个非常强大的行业参与者之间的名人生态系统中的分裂。

这是一个很棒的线程，一直在所有联盟中更新 - 向下滚动以查看它们所进入的添加：

And if you need overall catching up, Yashar Ali has also been maintaining a long thread watching this gossip asteroid as it’s been picking up debris over the last couple of days:

艺术家战斗标签在主人蜜蜂n a longstanding music industry dilemma. Michael Jackson and Paul McCartney famously fell out over The Beatles catalogue. Prince fought publicly over his masters and once said,“如果您不拥有主人，那么主人就会拥有您”。Rihanna and a handful of artists have been able to buy back their masters over the years but, for the most part, the industry still operates by the old model where labels compel artists to sign over the rights to their masters in exchange for the distribution and marketing fees associated with selling the music. Which, if you wanted to argue it, made sense… back then, especially where new artists are concerned, as they didn’t have the resources to promote their work. That’s the label’s rationale for the system. The artists’ counter to that is simple: we made this, it’s ours, it’s wrong that it doesn’t belong to us.

And, certainly, in these times, the traditional model is looking more and more archaic, particularly if you consider all the tools that artists have on their own to build their professional identities. Consider Lil Nas X, who says he spent less than $100 on “Old Town Road”, uploaded it to TikTok, and from there you know the rest. A label had little to do with the success of that record.

正如她当时所说，泰勒·斯威夫特（Taylor Swift）与环球/共和国唱片公司（Universal/Republic Records）的交易是融合了新旧的，开创性的，因为它确保了该标签可以做出明智的投资，而不会损害艺术家的权利。对于泰勒来说，这是一个很好的外观，因为她正在为未来一代艺术家设置新模板。优秀作品。

This fight with Scott Borchetta and Scooter Braun, though – is this excellent work? Does this meet her own “excellent work” standard that she has set in the past?

我认为，大多数人都支持拥有主人的艺术家。我支持泰勒·斯威夫特（Taylor Swift）拥有她的主人。我特别支持这位曾经是该业务领导者的年轻女子，这是娱乐中最有影响力的女性之一，能够控制她的艺术以及如何获得许可和商业化。因为从一开始，这种力量就属于少数人，而少数人总是是男人。

但这不是目前的辩论。我们不只是 *谈论主人的所有权。我们还在谈论名人仇恨和旧的怨恨。我们谈论的是谁在做谁。它的复仇者联盟：内战。因为在宣传她对自己无法控制自己的工作的失望时，泰勒并没有说明这是唯一的问题。她将自己的牛肉与金·卡戴珊（Kim Kardashian）和坎耶·韦斯特（Kanye West）的失望联系在一起，后者是十年中最大的八卦故事之一。lol赛事中心她声称自己已经过去了。她的整个SH-T现在是她的新专辑的即将发行的情人，是她全都是关于蝴蝶的，而不再是蛇了。So breathing life back into that conflict, connecting Scooter Braun to it, as an explanation for why she’s so upset that he’s the one who now owns her work, only revives the conversation about what part she played in that dispute, which is where Yael Cohen’s line about “friends like wilted flowers” comes in. Taylor Swift knows her way around a dispute. Every month, it seems, the internet is revisiting her disputes.

因此，我们没有就艺术家权利和所有权进行重点对话，这就是真正的意义，我们现在回到了关于她所知道的以及她何时知道的对话中。就像Kim和Kanye和收据日，当她声称自己不知道这首歌时，金发布了泰勒和坎耶之间电话的录音。斯科特·博切塔（Scott Borchetta）说，他给了泰勒（Taylor）。其他人则指出，她的父亲斯科特·斯威夫特（Scott Swift）是最大的机器股东之一，他会知道与踏板车布劳恩（Braun）的交易。泰勒（Taylor）的代表声称她的父亲将自己从这些会议上撤离，以避免利益冲突。所有这一切都在辩论之上，关于泰勒是否应该攻击踏板车的角色，这首先是关于音乐和艺术主张的业务。

正如我多次说过的那样，泰勒是我最喜欢的泰勒。当她做老板动作时，我喜欢它。我不确定这是老板的举动。我不确定没有配件就不会做到这一点。我对她公开没有任何问题。泰勒（Taylor）成为她品牌的一部分，倡导艺术家应有权获得的资格 - 并发布一份现有的声明，召集了一个行业标准，使艺术家不利的举动并不是一个不好的举动。然而，用小sh-t稀释这是一种冒险的策略 - 我们已经看到，这种风险及其后果实时造成了。

为什么不对主人拥有的直接问题保持陈述？像这样：

“The music came from me. This is my art. I should own it, all of it. This is why I signed with my new label. This has been my priority as I’ve built my career, from a teenager first starting in this business to this point, and after all I’ve learned and the experience I’ve gained, I have made it my goal to defend the creator’s right. With the acquisition of BMLG by Ithaca Holdings and Scooter Braun, I still do not have ownership of my masters for my previous seven albums. It continues to be a profound disappointment to me, as an artist and entrepreneur, even after all I’ve accomplished, that I still do not have complete claim over my work. I will continue to advocate for fair artistic entitlement.”

那就足够了。全世界都会做其余的。她的粉丝本来可以完成其余的。They would have connected the dots – she KNOWS they could have connected the dots, since she’s always leaving eggs for them to follow all the way to whatever surprise she’s cooked up for them – leaving everyone else to amplify the main issue she’s claiming to be addressing. But the way she’s gone about it, it does the issue, the ownership of masters, a disservice when it’s diluted by pettiness from the past. Because this is not just about her. As she has tried in the past to point out, this is about an archaic industry model that undermines the creative. She’s not the first artist to be vulnerable to it, this is not unique to Taylor Swift – and none of the others, Paul McCartney, Prince, all the boy bands etc, the list is endless, had anything to do with Kim and Kanye and Justin Bieber and Scooter f-cking Braun. You take Kim and Kanye and JB and Scooter out of the equation and you’re still left with the fact that artists are still made to sign contracts that require them to give away the rights to their work and THAT is the thing she has been saying she’s trying to solve. So why even involve them here at all?! Why… give them that power?

前几天，玛丽亚给我发了关于这种情况的发短信，并取得了最好的 - 有趣的是。她写了，“Taylor has an affliction that even when she’s right, she’s wrong. It’s a classic Real Housewives trait: she takes a good point and makes a bad argument”.

Will she see it this way? Or will she remain self-righteous both about her original (and accurate) position re: her masters and the way she’s gone about making her case?

我们将在历史上最臭名昭著的MTV VMA之一的10周年纪念日上映，当时坎耶·韦斯特（Kanye West）在泰勒（Taylor）的接受演讲中冲进了舞台，开始了十年的戏剧。当时，我写了坎耶在冲突上蓬勃发展，似乎他必须继续制造冲突才能继续创造。从那以后，泰勒（Taylor）看到了她与坎耶（Kanye）以及许多其他人的冲突。就像她要放下新专辑一样情人，她坚持认为自己已经摆脱了战斗模式，并且生活在和平模式下，我们在战斗中找到了她。战斗应该是她的主人。那是我们所有人都可以落后的战斗。这是一场主要的战斗，可以帮助许多其他没有影响力的人。但是她在这里喜欢粉丝的帖子关于贾斯汀·比伯（Justin Bieber）是否欺骗了她的朋友赛琳娜·戈麦斯（Selena Gomez）的侧边栏对话，似乎确认这确实是两者之间发生的事情。这是现在参与的正确战斗吗？那是需要赢的战争吗？