FAKE LOVE: STREAMING MANIPULATION IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY

Streaming numbers don’t just measure success - they create it. Chart positions, royalties, and reputations hinge on those figures, but what happens when the numbers aren’t real?

This is at the heart of Drake’s recent legal filings - accusations against Universal Music Group (UMG) for artificially boosting Kendrick Lamar’s diss track, Not Like Us and a call for testimony from iHeartRadio about its promotional practices. Allegations of bots, payola, and manipulation have turned a personal feud into a larger, unsettling conversation about how the music industry operates behind the scenes. 

Drake’s filings might not lead to legal action, but they’ve pulled back the curtain on an uncomfortable question: how much of what we see at the top is real?

HOW STREAMING MANIPULATION DISTORTS THE INDUSTRY 🫠 

Let’s be honest - using bots and payola to create the illusion of success isn’t new. These practices have been a part of the music industry for decades. But what exactly are they, and how are they used?  

Bots are automated tools that repeatedly play tracks, generating fake streams and artificially inflating numbers. These sneaky tools don’t just skew play counts - they trick algorithms into treating a track as a breakout hit, boosting its visibility and reach. The result? A cycle of false engagement that drowns out organic success. While most major platforms officially ban bots, their sheer scale and sophistication make them difficult to detect and even harder to eliminate.

Payola in streaming is the digital evolution of the old pay-for-play model on radio. Today, it often involves payments for premium playlist placements or algorithmic boosts. While platforms officially denounce payola, certain promotional programs blur the lines. For instance, Spotify’s Discovery Mode has drawn criticism for allowing labels to prioritize tracks in exchange for lower royalty rates, a practice some see as reminiscent of payola. Similarly, some playlist submission services charge fees, which many view as another form of payola-like behaviour. 

Promotional Support is essential for marketing, but when certain tracks receive disproportionate attention - whether through playlist rotation, radio airplay, or label partnerships - it raises questions of fairness. Major-label artists often gain an edge from high-budget campaigns, leaving independent or emerging artists struggling to compete. Without similar resources (or when caught in the middle of a feud), smaller artists can easily feel like the system is stacked against them.

These tactics might make a track look like a hit, but the fallout is real. Manipulation skews listener engagement, erodes trust in platforms, and pushes independent artists further to the margins. For the industry as a whole, the stakes are even higher: the integrity of charts, playlists, and royalty payouts is left hanging in the balance.

 Drake’s recent legal filings push his feud with Kendrick Lamar into a debate over the murky world of streaming ethics.

BUT WHY NOW?

Drake’s motivations remain unclear, but theories abound. Is this about Lamar’s success in controlling the narrative? Frustration with UMG? Or is he simply fed up with the streaming games everyone’s been whispering about?

What is clear, however, is that many critics are asking their own question - wouldn’t Drake, as one of the most streamed artists in the world, have benefited from similar practices in the past?

AND WHAT ABOUT OTHER MAJOR ARTISTS?

Does this mean your favourite artist’s success isn’t legit? Not exactly.

Major success typically requires more than just inflated numbers. Many artists build genuine fanbases and achieve popularity through authentic engagement. Still, the prevalence of manipulation casts a shadow over everyone, leaving fans to question what’s real. Though they might fuel a one-hit wonder (or a viral diss track), high streams alone don’t make a career - especially one with any longevity.

The real problem isn’t with the artists - it’s with the system. Metrics built on shaky ground undermine trust across the board. Transparency and accountability are the only ways to rebuild faith in what the numbers actually mean.

IF YOU ASK ME…🤔

Drake’s legal filings may never reach the courtroom, but they’ve already done something important: they’ve forced the music industry to once again confront the uncomfortable reality of streaming manipulation and its far-reaching effects:

For Independent Artists: Fake streams create an uneven playing field, pushing smaller voices out of playlists and off the charts. Artificial boosts often overshadow organic growth and genuine talent.

For Major Artists: Inflated numbers erode fan trust, distort royalty payouts, and create scrutiny that can tarnish reputations - even if the artist wasn’t involved.

For Labels and Platforms: Skewed metrics lead to poor decision-making, wasted budgets, and reputational damage. Worse, the industry risks losing credibility with fans and artists alike.

PLEASE SAY THERE’S HOPE!

There is always hope! Platforms like Spotify and Apple Music already have policies against manipulation, but enforcement must evolve to match the problem. Here’s how the industry can improve:

• Stronger Oversight: Independent audits of streaming data are essential to ensuring that play counts reflect real engagement. By analyzing patterns like unusual spikes in streams or repeated plays from the same source, audits can help identify and curb manipulation. For platforms, this safeguards credibility; for artists, it means fairer competition. 

• Ethical Promotional Practices: Strategies should aim to reduce confusion between organic growth and paid opportunities. Clearer processes for playlist submissions, royalty trade-offs, and promotional programs would give artists better tools to navigate their options. Fostering lasting fan engagement over inflated metrics ensures promotional strategies benefit artists and the industry without sacrificing competitive edges.

• Blockchain Technology: Blockchain offers a transparent, tamper-proof way to verify streams and track royalties. Imagine a system where every play of a track is logged as a unique, traceable transaction on a public ledger. Artists would see exactly when and where their music is streamed, ensuring accurate payouts and eliminating the ambiguity of inflated numbers.

WHAT CAN YOU DO?

Independent artists should focus on learning to track and interpret their streaming data - tools like Spotify for Artists can provide insights into where their music is thriving and where growth opportunities lie. Meanwhile, major artists can lead by advocating for transparency - whether by publicly questioning promotional practices or collaborating on initiatives that support fairer metrics.

AT THE END OF THE DAY

Drake and Kendrick’s feud may fade, but the issue it highlights—streaming manipulation and fairness—aren’t going anywhere. Streaming manipulation - through bots, payola, or gray-area tactics - hurts everyone: artists, platforms, labels, and fans alike. Without meaningful reform, the problem will only grow.

The music industry has a choice: keep chasing inflated numbers at any cost or commit to a system that values real engagement and transparency. If nothing else, let this serve as a reminder:

Pay attention to the numbers, but never at the expense of the music!