通用点化?“Spotify”作为媒体行业典范的意义转变

IF 1.5 Q2 COMMUNICATION Popular Communication Pub Date : 2020-04-02 DOI:10.1080/15405702.2020.1744607
Rasmus Fleischer
{"title":"通用点化?“Spotify”作为媒体行业典范的意义转变","authors":"Rasmus Fleischer","doi":"10.1080/15405702.2020.1744607","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Ever since the music streaming service Spotify was launched in 2008, it has been referred to as a model for an ongoing transformation of the media industries. Dozens of other technology startups have promised to deliver “a Spotify for books”, “a Spotify for movies”, “a Spotify for journalism” or even “a Spotify for art”. Yet, most attempts to replicate the model has actually failed. Analyzing a large body of Swedish and US news articles from 2008–2018, this article demonstrates how the metaphor of “Spotify” has been filled with very different meaning. Not only has the early promises of relying on advertising to make consumption “free but legal” been discarded, in favor of subscription-based models. Another major trend in the development of streaming services, including Spotify, has been the shift toward curation and algorithmic recommendation systems, which has added new associations to the metaphor or “a Spotify for x”.","PeriodicalId":45584,"journal":{"name":"Popular Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15405702.2020.1744607","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Universal Spotification? The shifting meanings of “Spotify” as a model for the media industries\",\"authors\":\"Rasmus Fleischer\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15405702.2020.1744607\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Ever since the music streaming service Spotify was launched in 2008, it has been referred to as a model for an ongoing transformation of the media industries. Dozens of other technology startups have promised to deliver “a Spotify for books”, “a Spotify for movies”, “a Spotify for journalism” or even “a Spotify for art”. Yet, most attempts to replicate the model has actually failed. Analyzing a large body of Swedish and US news articles from 2008–2018, this article demonstrates how the metaphor of “Spotify” has been filled with very different meaning. Not only has the early promises of relying on advertising to make consumption “free but legal” been discarded, in favor of subscription-based models. Another major trend in the development of streaming services, including Spotify, has been the shift toward curation and algorithmic recommendation systems, which has added new associations to the metaphor or “a Spotify for x”.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Popular Communication\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15405702.2020.1744607\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Popular Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2020.1744607\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Popular Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15405702.2020.1744607","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

自从音乐流媒体服务Spotify于2008年推出以来,它就被称为媒体行业正在进行的转型的典范。数十家其他科技初创公司承诺提供“图书Spotify”、“电影Spotify”、“新闻Spotify”,甚至是“艺术Spotify”。然而,大多数复制这种模式的尝试实际上都失败了。本文分析了2008年至2018年期间瑞典和美国的大量新闻文章,展示了“Spotify”的隐喻是如何被赋予了截然不同的含义。不仅早期依靠广告使消费“免费但合法”的承诺被抛弃,更倾向于基于订阅的模式。流媒体服务(包括Spotify)发展的另一个主要趋势是向管理和算法推荐系统的转变,这给“x的Spotify”这个比喻增添了新的联系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Universal Spotification? The shifting meanings of “Spotify” as a model for the media industries
ABSTRACT Ever since the music streaming service Spotify was launched in 2008, it has been referred to as a model for an ongoing transformation of the media industries. Dozens of other technology startups have promised to deliver “a Spotify for books”, “a Spotify for movies”, “a Spotify for journalism” or even “a Spotify for art”. Yet, most attempts to replicate the model has actually failed. Analyzing a large body of Swedish and US news articles from 2008–2018, this article demonstrates how the metaphor of “Spotify” has been filled with very different meaning. Not only has the early promises of relying on advertising to make consumption “free but legal” been discarded, in favor of subscription-based models. Another major trend in the development of streaming services, including Spotify, has been the shift toward curation and algorithmic recommendation systems, which has added new associations to the metaphor or “a Spotify for x”.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Popular Communication
Popular Communication COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
Video game characters and transmedia storytelling. The dynamic game character, A big little fiction form: last decade of production and circulation of made-for-TV movies in Europe Unspooled: how the cassette made music sharable Mourning the greatest: “unforgivably black” and peacefully Muslim Muhammad Ali Making fandom great again: silencing discussions of racism in reactionary and transformative fandoms
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1