The Brief

Over the summer, a slew of bands began to make similar announcements on social media: They'd be pulling their music off Spotify, the largest streaming service in the world.

It started in June with indie rock quartet Deerhoof. Within weeks, groups like Xiu Xiu, King Gizzard and the Lizard Wizard and Hotline TNT followed suit. The wave of departures continued into September; most recently, The Mynabirds, WU LYF, Kadhja Bonet and Young Widows have all decided to leave Spotify. So why are musicians — many of them independent — removing their songs from the most popular streamer globally, which has nearly 700 million users?

All artists cite Spotify Chief Executive Daniel Ek's ties to Helsing, an artificial intelligence defense company with a mission to "attain technological leadership so that democratic societies are free to make sovereign decisions and control their ethical standards." In 2021, Ek's venture capital firm Prima Materia invested more than $100 million into the German startup. In June, Prima Materia raised more than $700 million for Helsing, where Ek is now also chairman. He told The Financial Times that Prima Materia is "doubling down" on its investments in light of the role that AI plays in Russia's war on Ukraine. The Financial Times reported that Helsing is now producing its own drones, aircraft and submarines.

It's not the first time artists have decided to cut ties with Spotify. In 2013, Thom Yorke removed his solo albums from the streaming service to protest low royalty payouts (his music has since reappeared on the platform). The following year, Taylor Swift wrote an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal arguing that "music should not be free" and pulled her songs from Spotify; three years later, she returned her discography to all streaming services. In 2022, Neil Young and Joni Mitchell left Spotify in objection to the company's exclusive relationship with Joe Rogan, citing concerns that Rogan was spreading COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on his massively successful podcast, The Joe Rogan Experience. Young and Mitchell ended their boycott in 2024 after Rogan's podcast became available on multiple streaming platforms.

But this most recent exodus, which began shortly after the June fundraising news, marks a new wave of artist-led protests against Spotify.

"We don't want our music killing people. We don't want our success being tied to AI battle tech," Deerhoof wrote in a statement shared with NPR. "Deerhoof is a small mom and pop operation, and know when enough is enough. We aren't capitalists, and don't wish to take over the world. Especially if the price of 'discoverability' is letting oligarchs fill the globe with computerized weaponry, we're going to pass on the supposed benefits."

Spotify and Helsing declined to comment on artists leaving the platform in protest of Ek's investments. But several artists NPR spoke with say their concerns with Spotify span far beyond how the CEO spends his earnings.

"The sound quality is horrible. The disposable-ness of music has become almost culturally endemic, and then obviously the financial aspect of it is a joke," says Jamie Stewart of the experimental rock group Xiu Xiu. "It has not done anything good for bands. It has done good things for itself."

Xiu Xiu formed in California in 2002. Stewart says the rise of file-sharing and iTunes caused a near-immediate decline in royalties, but in the last decade and a half, the popularization of streaming platforms including Spotify has significantly worsened financial compensation.

In a statement shared with NPR, a Spotify spokesperson explained how the company's payout model is structured.

"All of the major streaming services use the same pro rata model for payouts to rightsholders, and we pay the most," the statement reads. "In this model, payouts are based on streamshare, not a per-stream rate. That means if an artist's catalog accounts for 1% of total streams, it would earn 1% of total royalties. It's not a coincidence that the least popular streaming services, where people listen the least, have the highest per-stream rates, as lack of user engagement is exactly what drives a higher per-stream rate."

Spotify's annual economic Loud & Clear report found that the company paid out $10 billion to the music industry in 2024, the most out of any streaming service. The number of people uploading music to Spotify has also grown, which means "the fraction who find success appears smaller over time."

Stewart says Spotify is a large source of digital revenue for Xiu Xiu, and they're expecting to feel an impact from exiting the platform. "We don't make very much money at all to begin with, but it's enough that it's a noticeable amount that we will not be making anymore," they explain. "It's not going to make any difference to Spotify. But it is a very, very small way of standing up to what tech companies have become."

Searching for alternatives 

According to the Recording Industry Association of America, recorded music revenue has been growing consistently for nearly a decade, and streaming is the largest driver of that growth. But a survey conducted in 2024 by MusiCares — the nonprofit founded by the Recording Academy to support the financial, mental and physical well-being of musicians — found that 69% of respondents cannot cover expenses from working in music alone. The artists NPR spoke with expressed frustration that despite record-breaking profits for both the recording industry and streaming services, that money does not seem to always trickle down to the artists.

"It's really hard to have superhigh principles at this point with how problematic so many of these companies are," says Seth Hubbard, director of Xiu Xiu's label, Polyvinyl Records. "If you start looking under the hood a bit, a lot of it is problematic. And then where do you draw the line?"

For singer Kadhja Bonet, the answer is clear. After negotiating an early exit from her former label, Bonet announced in August that all future releases, including her upcoming EP Battlewear, out Sept. 18, will not be available on Spotify, Apple, Deezer, Amazon or YouTube.

"We give these tech giants power by furnishing them with all of our best ideas and driving business their way," Bonet wrote in a statement shared with NPR. "I put a lot of thought and love into the music I make, so it's only right to put the same thought into the way it's delivered."

She recommends alternative platforms and digital stores like Qobuz and Bandcamp.

The indie rock band Hotline TNT, which announced its departure from Spotify in August, is also focusing on substitute revenue streams. On Sept. 5, singer and guitarist Will Anderson hosted a 24-hour livestream on Twitch, YouTube and Instagram to promote sales of the band's latest album, Raspberry Moon. Anderson, who started Hotline TNT as a solo project several years ago, sold over 300 copies of the album on Bandcamp alone, which he says accounts for more profit in 24 hours than the band usually makes in months of Spotify streams. He says fans have been supportive of the group's decision to part ways with Spotify, leading record sales to triple on tour.

"I would like to see consumer spending habits drift back into ownership over this rental system we have right now," Anderson says. "When someone buys one of our records at a show, no one's going to take the music off their shelf overnight like we just did with Spotify."

A new reality

For some artists, a push toward that ownership model works. In January, folk-pop chameleon Caroline Rose announced that her new album, year of the slug, would not be available on any streaming platforms. Instead, with Rose inspired by a similar release model used by artist Cindy Lee, the album would be available for purchase on Bandcamp or directly from Rose on a solo tour of all-independent venues.

"You have to try ever so slightly harder, or you have to come to a show and get an album," she says. "We only had a limited number of vinyl that we were selling, so once it sold, it sold. I miss that feeling that something was special, that there was a limited amount of it."

Rose says the rollout was the culmination of years of frustration with the industry's emphasis on profits and numbers, all of which was exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic, when label and tech executives continued to make money while artists canceled tours and struggled to get by.

"It just felt like we were being overlooked and forgotten and everybody else was just kind of biding their time until they could go back to work and everything would be normal again," she says. "It felt catastrophic, and that feeling has only become bigger."

When her label contract ended, Rose says, she breathed a sigh of relief and decided to try something different. In February, year of the slug came out as a completely independent project; it's also her most profitable record to date because it's the only one she fully owns. More importantly, she says, the feedback from fans has been overwhelmingly supportive.

Rose admits that there are drawbacks — this kind of release doesn't lend itself to discovery by new rather than existing listeners, and it would become much more difficult to financially sustain a tour with a full band rather than by herself. But for now, it was the break she needed.

"It's been extremely fulfilling, and personally, I needed this just to feel a little bit more connection to my fans and to the audience. I meet people. We have drinks together. It feels very communal," says Rose. "I want a career of quality rather than any and everything quantifiable. I don't want to be hounded by stats and money and how many ticket sales I'm selling. It's not a quality life to me."

Copyright 2025 NPR

As Los Angeles homeowners grapple with the expense of rebuilding after last year’s devastating fires, an L.A. City Councilmember is putting forward an idea that could lower some costs.

Councilmember Traci Park, who represents the Pacific Palisades, has introduced a motion to explore waiving part of the city’s portion of the local sales tax for fire victims who purchase rebuilding materials in the city.

The 1% of the local 9.75% sales tax that goes into the city’s general fund would be given back to consumers under the proposal. The waiver could apply to lumber, appliances and other rebuilding goods purchased within the city.

The motion, introduced Friday by Park and seconded by Councilmember John Lee, says: “The City should do everything within its power to alleviate the financial burden for these residents and businesses in order to facilitate their return and stabilize the Pacific Palisades community.”

Would it make much of a difference? 

Economists told LAist the proposal could help many homeowners mitigate the high cost of rebuilding, but likely wouldn’t tip the scales for under-insured, under-resourced property owners.

“It wouldn't hurt if it's very well designed and easy to use,” said Alexander Meeks, a director at the Santa Monica-based Milken Institute. “But I'm not sure if it's really going to tackle the scale of the financial challenge that survivors are facing.”

Meeks noted that the tax waiver wouldn’t lower up-front costs such as environmental testing, architectural design and permitting. And it may not help homeowners sourcing raw materials from outside the city.

Zhiyun Li, a UCLA Anderson School of Management economist, said the waiver could help some homeowners justify the additional cost of rebuilding more fire-safe structures.

“Homeowners must typically pay out of pocket to upgrade to IBHS+ standards, which are more stringent,” Li said. “The tax waiver could encourage upgrading to IBHS+ standards or investing more in mitigation, thereby reducing future risk and improving the likelihood of maintaining insurance coverage.”

What’s next for the proposal? 

The proposed tax relief would not be available to properties that have been sold since the fires started in January 2025.

The motion has been sent to the City Council’s budget and fire recovery committees. If approved by the full council, it would require the city administrative officer, the Office of Finance and the city attorney to report back to the council within 60 days on options for crafting a tax relief plan.

The motion calls for the report to consider factors such as how to minimize the burden of administering the tax relief, what documentation homeowners would have to submit and what it would cost the city to oversee the program.

Senate and House Republican leadership have resurrected a stalled plan to fund the Department of Homeland Security after a record 47-day funding lapse.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said in a joint statement on Wednesday that the House will take up a measure passed by the Senate last week to fund most of DHS except Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol through the end of September.

Republicans would then attempt to fund ICE and Border Patrol for three years using a party-line budget reconciliation bill that would not require support from Democrats.

"In following this two-track approach, the Republican Congress will fully reopen the Department, make sure all federal workers are paid, and specifically fund immigration enforcement and border security for the next three years so that those law-enforcement activities can continue uninhibited," Thune and Johnson wrote.

The agreement comes nearly a week after House Republicans dismissed an identical plan, refusing to take up the Senate-passed measure and instead passing a 60-day short term funding bill for all of DHS that had little chance of overcoming Democratic opposition in the Senate.

Johnson called the agreement a "joke" and President Donald Trump declined to publicly endorse the deal. Trump had previously resisted any package that did not include his push to overhaul federal elections known as the Save America Act.

"I think any deal they make, I'm pretty much not happy with it," Trump told reporters last week.

Democrats welcomed the agreement as in line with their pledge not to give ICE any more money without reforms after immigration enforcement agents killed two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis. But the deal does not include any of the policy demands Democrats are pressing for, such as a ban on masks for immigration enforcement officers and requiring warrants issued by a judge, not just the agency, to enter homes.

"For days, Republican divisions derailed a bipartisan agreement, making American families pay the price for their dysfunction," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote in a statement Wednesday. "Throughout this fight, Senate Democrats never wavered."

Trump seemed to bless the revived plan earlier Wednesday, writing on social media that he wants a party-line bill to fund immigration enforcement on his desk by June 1.

"We are going to work as fast, and as focused, as possible to replenish funding for our Border and ICE Agents, and the Radical Left Democrats won't be able to stop us," Trump wrote.

Despite the shutdown, ICE has been minimally impacted because Republican lawmakers approved $75 billion for ICE through another party-line budget reconciliation bill last year.

Congress is on a two-week recess, but the Senate and House could move to fund all of DHS except ICE and CBP as early as Thursday using a procedure known as unanimous consent that allows the chambers to circumvent formal voting as long as no member objects.

Even during a recess when most members are not in Washington, this could be unpredictable, especially in the House, where many hard-line conservatives oppose a deal that does not fully fund DHS.

"Let's make this simple: caving to Democrats and not paying CBP and ICE is agreeing to defund Law Enforcement and leaving our borders wide open again," Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., a member of the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, wrote on X. "If that's the vote, I'm a NO."

If a member does object, that could require waiting for another vote when all members are back from recess.

Claudia Grisales contributed reporting.
Copyright 2026 NPR

California clocked its second-worst snowpack on record Wednesday, a potentially troubling signal ahead for fire season.

It’s an alarming end to a winter that saw abnormally dry conditions briefly wiped from California’s drought map in January, for the first time in a quarter-century.

Though precipitation to date has been near average, much of it fell as rain rather than snow. Then March’s record-breaking heat melted most of the snow that remains. The state’s major reservoirs are nevertheless brimming above historic averages and are flirting with capacity, and a smattering of snow, rain and thunderstorms are dousing last month’s heat wave.

But experts now warn that California’s case of the missing snowpack could herald an early fire season in the mountains.

On Wednesday, state engineers conducting the symbolic April 1 snowpack measurement at Phillips Station south of Lake Tahoe found no measurable snow in patches of white dotting the grassy field.

“I want to welcome you call to probably one of the quickest snow surveys we’ve had — maybe one where people could actually use an umbrella,” joked Karla Nemeth, director of the California Department of Water Resources. “We’re getting a lot of questions about are we heading into a hydrologic drought? The answer is, I don’t know.”

State data reports that California’s snowpack is closing out the season at an alarming 18% of average statewide, and an even more abysmal 6% of average in the northern mountains that feed California’s major reservoirs.

Only the extreme drought year of 2015 beat this year’s snowpack for the worst on record, measuring in at just 5% of average on April 1st, when the snow historically is at its deepest.

“I think everyone's anticipating that it will be a long, busy fire season,” said Lenya Quinn-Davidson, director of the UC Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources Fire Network.

“Without a snowpack, and with an early spring, it just means that there’s much more time for something like that to happen.”

‘It’s pretty bizarre up here’ 

In the city of South Lake Tahoe, which survived the massive Caldor Fire in the fall of 2021 without losing any structures, fire chief Jim Drennan said his department is already ramping up prevention efforts.

“It's pretty bizarre up here right now. It really seems like June conditions more than March,” Drennan said. “People are already turning the sprinklers on for their lawns.”

Without more precipitation, an early spring may complicate prescribed burning efforts. But Drennan said fire agencies in the Tahoe basin can start mechanically clearing fuels from forest areas earlier than usual.

“That means we can get more work done,” he said.

It also means homeowners need to start hardening their homes now, said Martin Goldberg, battalion chief and fuels management officer for the Lake Valley Fire Protection District, which protects unincorporated communities in the Lake Tahoe Basin’s south shore.

Goldberg urges residents to scour their yards for burnable materials, create defensible space and reach out to local fire departments with questions. The risks are widespread — from firewood, wooden fences, gas cans, plants, pine needles — even lawn furniture stacked against a house.

“In years past, I wouldn't even think of raking and clearing until May,” Goldberg said. “But my yard's completely cleared of snowpack, and it has been for a couple weeks now.”

‘A haystack fire’

Battalion chief David Acuña, a spokesperson for Cal Fire, said fire season is shaped by more than just one year’s snowpack.

Climate change has been remaking California’s fire seasons into fire years. And California’s recent average to abundant water years have fueled what Acuña called “bumper crops of vegetation and brush.”

“Most of California is like a haystack. And if you’ve ever seen a haystack fire, they burn very intensely because there's layers of fuel,” Acuña said.

Like Quinn-Davidson, Acuña wasn’t ready to make specific predictions about fires to come.

But John Abatzoglou, a professor of climatology at UC Merced, said the temperatures and snowpack conditions this year offer a glimpse of California in the latter decades of this century, as fossil fuel use continues to drive global temperatures higher.

How this year’s fires will play out will depend on when, where and how wind, heat, fuel and ignitions combine. But it foreshadows the consequences of a warmer California for water and fire under climate change.

“This,” Abatzoglou said, “is yet another stress test for the future in the state.”

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.