Paramore’s Hayley Williams has responded to criticism that her band’s music is back on streaming services in Israel just a week after they announced they were supporting the No Music For Genocide campaign, where artists pledge to geo-block their tracks so that they are no longer available to stream within the Israeli market.
Her response is a reminder that artists are not always in direct control of where their music is available. In a post on Instagram, she wrote, “I don’t know why those albums were made available again after being successfully geo-blocked”.
Warner’s Atlantic Records controls all of the Paramore albums. Williams told fans she has “been waiting confirmation that all of the Atlantic albums are taken down and actively participating in the No Music For Genocide initiative”, before admiting that she previously “wondered whether those records are even able to be a part of this boycott”. However, her team “have been relentless in trying to help get it done”.
In recent months there have been increasing music streaming boycotts. Some artists are specifically boycotting Spotify, over various grievances, but especially the involvement of now outgoing Spotify CEO Daniel Ek in weapons company Helsing. Those artists are removing their music from Spotify worldwide.
Then, earlier this month, the No Music For Genocide campaign launched, via which artists pledge to remove their music from all streaming services specifically in Israel, in protest over the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Massive Attack, Enter Shikari, Fontaines DC and Saul Williams were among the artists to back that campaign at launch, with both Paramore and Björk then announcing their support last week.
These boycotts often begin with independent artists who more directly control their recordings, usually working with distributors who provide more flexibility when it comes to choosing which platforms and which markets music should be delivered to.
However, where artists are signed to record labels under more conventional record deals, it will usually be the label that controls and often owns the recordings, and therefore the label that decides where that music is available. Whether or not the artist has a right to demand their recordings be removed from certain platforms or markets will depend on whether their record contracts provide such a right.
That said, labels may well comply with their artists’ wishes regarding the boycotts of certain platforms or markets even if they are not contractually obliged to do so.
Either because they too back a boycott, or because they don’t want to get into a public squabble with their artists over sensitive political issues. Though at the same time, many labels would prefer the music they control to be available on as many platforms in as many markets as possible.
Independent artists involved in streaming service boycotts also sometimes point their fans towards their direct-to-fan stores as an alternative place to engage. But labels may or may not be involved in an artist’s direct-to-fan activity, and some labels – the majors in particular – generally don’t use direct-to-fan platforms that are not fully licensed on the publishing side.
All that said, it doesn’t seem that the return of Paramore’s music to streaming services in Israel is because of any disagreement with Warner. Williams’ statement concluded, “hopefully Paramore albums are/will remain taken down because it is my belief that boycotts work and I do think as many artists as possible should try and participate in this initiative”.
