Taylor Swift’s “1989” Won’t Be Available to Stream on Apple Music


Last week, it was reported that Apple’s upcoming $9.99 per month music streaming service will not include a single song by The Beatles and today, we learn that Taylor Swift’s 1989, which has not been released to any streaming services, will not be available on Apple Music at launch as well (via BuzzFeed News). The news has been confirmed both by Swift’s label Big Machine Records and Apple.

Enhanced 4555 1434666116 1

According to Big Machine Records, Apple Music will have only Swift’s back catalog when it launches later this month, which is also available on other streaming services including Rhapsody and Tidal. Last year, Swift pulled all of her music from Spotify, arguing that its free version devalues the art form. Meanwhile, a Big Machine representative said that there are currently no plans to release 1989 to any other streaming service either.

“The Big Machine rep said there are currently no plans to release 1989 to any streaming service, a strategy which forces consumers to either pay for the album in stores or procure it through other means. The strategy has certainly not harmed Swift’s commercial prospects. 1989 has sold nearly 5 million copies since its release last November, making it the best-selling album of both last year and this one”.

A couple of years back, Beyoncé similarly withheld her self-titled album initially from streaming services, but eventually released a deluxe edition after 1 year.


  • raslucas

    Apple Music keeps getting better and better eh? Apple should add this to their feature list. Seriously…. Maybe they could take Nickelback off too? Or would be too good?

  • I feel decisions like this from artists will only hurt them more in the long run. I see many people (including myself) using streaming services rather than buying full albums. I can spend 14.99 for a single album, or I can pay 9.99 for essentially everything for the price of 1 album per month. To me personally, streaming services is just a clear winner in terms of value/content to the dollar.

  • xxxJDxxx

    Most likely a decision made by the various people that middle-man her music to the rest of us. Most likely just trying to preserve their jobs as its becoming more and more clear that in the digital age these all these over payed music industry executives are becoming less and less relevant.

  • Tim M

    if you want that album, just head to a torrent site

  • Tim

    Oh my, no Taylor swift? Shucks. I love her “music”. So much.

  • iGard Anderson

    I’ve never paid for any music, and as horrible as it might sound for someone, I don’t feel bad about it. I am a musician and I would be happy if one day I’ll famous enough that people will be uploading my albums to internet for free. I support artists by buying expensive tickets to their concerts and I will support them by buying the songs if I have to ever use it in any business purposes.
    Now… there are streaming services (like Spotify, and now Apple Music) that maybe in small amount but do get something from me and give it to artists. I just don’t get the philosophy behind pulling albums and restricting music content on such services :/

  • Eric

    Isn’t she rich enough?