Obnoxious comments I would mutter under my breath in the Lessons Learned meeting for Spotify's Premium Duo
Spotify Premium Duo is here, and I’m kind of perplexed by it semantically, visually and contextually (NB SPOTIFY: I STILL LOVE YOU PLS DON’T CUT ME OFF).
1. “I think the targeting is a bit… off.”
I am not single. I’m not showing off, this is just a fact. What is also a fact is that anyone who is not single is but one uncomfortable conversation away from finding themselves once again most convincingly so.
So with that in mind, can we chill out on couple idolisation here, please?* It’s 2020, life is nuanced, and people can’t necessarily afford to get their own places as they would have in the past, so let’s use our words such that we don’t completely erase the idea that two people living in a house together might not be ‘officially together in a romantic sense’. I mean that sounds fucking stupid even typing it.
I do get it: Premium Duo is “music for two”. Duo = two. It’s Latiny, it’s clever. And there’s only so many words for ‘two’, hmmm it’s a conundrum! And yet: “Two Premium accounts under one roof.” It just kind of works, doesn’t it? (Oh, and by the way: I would put money on the fact that none of this is the copywriter’s fault AT ALL.)
*And that’s putting entirely to the side people in one-person households (estimated to be one in seven by 2039), who haven’t been through enough already so far this year, and apparently have so little to offer that they are unworthy of the undeniable spoils that cut-price music streaming presents. They’re just asking to be alienated, quite frankly.
2. “The imagery is kinda problematic.”
This is basically just… not great. We’ve stipulated ‘couples’ so it’s a heteronormative mess of our own making, plus it portrays a man relaxing while a faceless woman smashes some cardio — I didn’t realise that Peloton Husband worked on this brief, cool!
Oh no wait, not cool at all. If we can’t do representation properly because of space considerations, I’m sure there’s plenty of playlists with puppy/cactus/panpipes nestling in the roots of a very old and somehow wise-looking tree type imagery instead.
3. “Basically just a whole pile of what.”
Late capitalism loves to fetishise convenience. I understand that. And superficially I can comprehend that this sounds like a good idea. But I’ve been sitting here for about an hour trying to game this out, and maybe I’m being obtuse, but I just don’t really get it.
Let’s say I can accept the notion that there are people walking around in society who share (SHARE!) a Spotify account with their partner (side note: I’m not sure I can accept this), and it gets inconvenient when they both want to listen at the same time, whether that’s out and about or at home.
If they were seriously inconvenienced the majority of the time, by now they would probably have decided to get separate accounts, and pay the separate subscription fee. The rest would just put up with it.
Then, Spotify says: “Hey! Let’s create Premium Duo! People who are sharing one account will end up paying more per month — the only added benefit we have to provide is an extra profile (kind of like what Netflix does now, for free, you know?), and a playlist combining their favourite songs and genres, which has the potential to be just a complete nightmare (remember that thing we said on Twitter about different tastes in music not getting in the way?). PLUS, we’ll continue to get that extra £3.50 each from individual subscribers who probably won’t want to migrate over because they’re used to having aural autonomy and won’t want to give that up, coz who knows what’s going to happen in the future!”
Ok, so actually maybe that does make sense.
Anyway, that leads neatly into my penultimate muttered obnoxious comment…
4. “Conscious uncoupling = scorched earth policy?”
Breaking up is hard to do; deciding what to do with your shared Spotify account is even harder.
Do you let it endure, and continue to unconsciously fortify the gossamer threads of algorithms that link you invisibly yet irrevocably (or until one of you meets someone else)? Do you attempt to extricate yourself, with all the admin that that will no doubt entail? Or do you abandon it to the ages as a kind of sonic commentary of your life together, a requiem to requiems, and start anew?
(This is getting dark, but we’re almost there…)
5. “Couples don’t need to share all the things with each other all the time.”
Being partnered is great (if that’s what you want). Being single is also great (if that’s what you want).
But that’s not the point. Music is an intensely, profoundly personal part of a lot of people’s lives. And as is usually the case with intensely and profoundly personal things, sometimes you might not want to share them. Sometimes they need to be just yours, impervious to inquiry, interrogation or the world’s incessant need for authentication.
Whether that means spending most of 2011/2012 listening to Codex, singing your little heart out to the Elephant Love Medley in the shower, or doing the dishes with the Succession main title track on repeat because it makes you feel like a cynical, amoral media mogul, then you should be able to do that without the spectre of accountability hanging over your head.
So if that extra £3.50 is the price I need to pay to retain my own tiny little corner of the internet to be weird and joyful and sorrowful and free: sign me up.
