Music insiders accuse Taylor Swift of ‘playing the victim’ & misrepresentation

Embed from Getty Images

Amazon Prime Day is now, like, a holiday. It’s a holiday worthy of a concert with multiple performers, including one of the richest women in music, Taylor Swift. Taylor joined Dua Lipa and Becky G at the Amazon Prime Day Concert at the Hammerstein Ballroom in New York on Wednesday. Jane Lynch was the host. Honestly, it doesn’t have to make any sense. Amazon has billions of dollars to burn and if they want to throw themselves a concert, so be it. As for Taylor’s look – chica loves hot pants. She always has loved that hot-pants/romper look.

Taylor agreed to perform at this concert because her new album, Lover, is coming out soon. This will also be her first album with Republic Records, as part of the new deal she signed last year with the label. Her Republic contract gives her full control and ownership of her masters from here on out. But the masters for her first six albums now belong to Scooter Braun. There are about a million new stories about Taylor’s Summer Beef with Scooter, but I found this Page Six item interesting/sketchy/mean and funny:

Taylor Swift was crowned the world’s highest paid celeb Wednesday, according to Forbes, with more than $185 million raked in over the past year. But music industry insiders are accusing the star of “playing victim” in her attack on Scooter Braun last week for buying her former label, Big Machine Records, and say she could’ve scooped up the label herself.

Swift posted after Braun bought the label, “Scooter has stripped me of my life’s work, that I wasn’t given an opportunity to buy” and, “This is what happens when you sign a deal at fifteen.” But an insider said of Swift: “Everyone knows she’s playing the victim. She has five homes, a private jet. She even summons her boyfriend [UK actor Joe Alwyn]. She sends a jet to London to pick him up and bring him to her when she needs him.”

Swift wrote in the lengthy post: “For years I asked, pleaded for a chance to own my work. Instead, I was given an opportunity to sign back up to Big Machine Records and ‘earn’ one album back at a time, one for every new one I turned in.”

But a source pointed out that Swift comes from a family of finance pros, and her dad, Scott, is a Big Machine shareholder. “She’s omitting the fact that someone acquired the company. She could’ve bought it!” exclaimed a source of the deal. “Her dad is a multimillionaire shareholder. It’s a business transaction, and she’s making it all about her.”

Another insider told us Swift did try to purchase her masters — and the label — on several occasions, but was met with stipulations. “It was a s - - tty deal. She tried to buy it multiple times, but they wouldn’t let her cut a check like Scooter,” the source said. Swift’s lawyer, Donald Passman, has said, “[Big Machine CEO] Scott Borchetta never gave Taylor Swift an opportunity to purchase her masters, or the label, outright with a check in the way he is now apparently doing for others.”

[From Page Six]

While I enjoy this tea – “She has five homes, a private jet. She even summons her boyfriend. She sends a jet to London to pick him up and bring him to her when she needs him” – I also don’t think it has anything to do with the subject of “why wasn’t Taylor allowed to buy her masters?” I would be very interested to know what this “sh-tty deal” was and what those negotiations looked like. Because the argument of “Taylor is super-rich” isn’t really a good rationale for “and that’s why she shouldn’t own her work/masters.”

Embed from Getty Images

Embed from Getty Images

Photos courtesy of Getty.

Source: Read Full Article