Apple's Swift response to Taylor provides mutually beneficial PR
Yesterday, in an unexpected turn of events, Apple caved after receiving a bold request relating to its new franchise, Apple music. The most successful and valuable company on the planet submitted to an open letter from a 25 year old ex-country singer from Reading, Pennsylvania. But Taylor Swift isn’t any 25 year old. With over 100 million followers on social media, a back catalogue of annoyingly catchy tunes and millions of YouTube views, Taylor Swift had the power to go head to head with the $700 billion company with the support of other artists.
Swift’s open letter on Tumblr requested that Apple do a U-turn on their decision to not provide artists with any royalties from the first three months of the new Apple Music streaming service. Apple responded via social media within a matter of hours agreeing with Swifts stance and undergoing a complete U-turn on their original trial period policy.
Three things strike me about this story. First how quickly Apple responded; second that they gave into the request, and third how much decent exposure (sorry to steal 72Point's marketing slogan here) this has given both parties involved.
Firstly, let’s look at the speed of the response. I truly believe this is the key to what has ultimately led to such good public relations for both Swift and Apple. The rapidity of the response shows a total commitment from Apple to get things right and to emphasise the fact they want to be on the side of the artists from day one. It’s a shame they didn’t make this decision initially, but I don’t think going from bad cop to good cop has harmed their latest venture. In fact I think it’s done them every bit of good.
Perhaps the response was quick because Apple was already expecting it. Also, there’s a case to be made that Swift’s record label (Big Machine Records) may have been a driving force, as contractually, record labels generally have at least some power over what artists can do. The cynical side of me thinks that this publicised agreement could have been a pre-planned way for Apple to publicise Apple music, especially because Swift has previously indicated that she’s not keen on streaming, making her the perfect candidate to make this story viral.
Similarly with Swift, had this episode drawn out over a few weeks, we may have forgotten all about the fact it was her that complained in the first place (further promoting the idea that it's one big PR stunt). However, the pixels on news sites had only just loaded onto our iPads and iPhones with the news that Swift had taken Apple on,when almost immediately, Apple had backed down. Swift went from being a manufactured pop star to a guardian of the music industry in a matter of hours, with her partner Calvin Harris and other artists showing their support across social media.
Secondly, Apple backed down without any sign of a struggle. Apple are famous for holding firm with their commercial decisions, especially in the early days of digital music, as they were offering music artists a new way to sell their music to millions of people across the world. Apple created a digital space that artists weren’t ready for. The late Steve Jobs knew this and didn’t buckle for requests to increase the cost per song on iTunes.
Fast forward to 2015 and here we have a music streaming market that is competitive, established, and where artists are starting to flex their muscle to protect themselves financially. Apple is new to the game, and they appear to understand just how important it is to come across fair and on the artist’s side. So whereas in the early days Jobs could put his foot down and that was that, now it’s the turn of the artist to regain some power within the changing face of the music industry.
Lastly, let's discuss image. After all as we’re a PR company so we should probably talk about PR. Apple historically has sold products, with the obvious exception of music or films on iTunes. Because of that, they can control our experience and attitudes towards those products. In the music streaming business, this is the first true service that Apple will be proving to millions of people. We’ll be paying a monthly subscription in return for music and an experience with Connect and Beats 1.
Apple knows that it's vital that they start Apple Music with the right footing. The saying “you only get one chance to make a first impression” really rings true here. Apple knew this was their chance to project a positive, collaborative, respectful and caring image onto Apple Music. They grabbed it with both hands. Sometimes in business you can under promise and over deliver. Apple hasn’t over delivered here, but they have certainly projected an image of being understanding and on the artist’s sides.
As for Taylor Swift, we can’t underestimate how huge the impact of this coverage has made to her current image and her future career within the music industry. Not only her image towards fans and the general music loving public, but her music peers and other influential figures within the industry. The biggest news story I’ve seen to date on Taylor Swift was her dating Harry Styles (among others), so I find it noteworthy that she is now achieving column inches by taking on (and beating) the most valuable company in the world.
Swift put her neck (and possibly reputation) on the line to go head-to-head with Apple. Particularly risky bearing in mind how stubborn Apple can be when meeting opposition over their business decisions.
However, she has come out on top and many in the industry are calling her a shrewd businesswoman after this episode. Already recently named in the Forbes power women list, I’m sure she’ll be moving up the charts in more ways than one after this victory.
