You know what actually keeps neighborhoods cooler in the summer? TREES. Literally trees. Stop cutting them down for data centers and then acting shocked when our cities turn into ovens. Give us our damn trees back. We don’t need another data center.
@BTSArmyMom3 I wouldn't know I don't pay attention to other Hybe groups generally. But I did remember that he transferred to a new group back in the day.
“Made to be played to no one”. Such insight. I could name a few artists that have trouble matching streams to sales to concert ticket sales. But BTS isn’t one of them. 💜
We need to bring back intellectual elitism. Sorry, but a virologist will always know more about vaccines than a yoga mommy blogger with a ChatGPT Plus subscription.
Hi @lastfm
I'm reaching out publicly because I wasn't able to find another way to contact the appropriate people, and I genuinely hope someone on your team takes the time to read this.
I've used https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh for years and have always considered it a valuable part of my music listening experience. I love music across many genres, and one of the artists I listen to most is BTS. Because I value the platform, I wanted to explain why so many users (including myself) are concerned about recent statements and decisions from your team.
My concern isn't simply that you're changing how the real-time charts work. Companies evolve their products all the time. My concern is why those changes have been communicated and the message they send.
In your official forum response discussing what was called "the K-pop problem," https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh specifically named BTS as the reason changes were being made to the real-time charts:
"Through this, the phenomenon of BTS and BTS-related artists permanently monopolizing the chart or trending tracks page will be resolved."
Immediately afterward, the post discusses mitigation strategies for "inauthentic" scrobbling activity.
Whether intentional or not, placing those two ideas together creates a very clear implication: that BTS listeners are somehow responsible for inauthentic activity. No evidence was provided to support that connection, yet one specific artist and fandom were publicly singled out.
If your concern is fraudulent scrobbling, then address fraudulent scrobbling. I think every user would support removing fake data. But if your concern is simply that one artist appears at the top of the charts because they have an exceptionally dedicated fanbase, that is an entirely different issue.
https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh has always presented itself as a platform that measures listening habits. The purpose of data is to reflect reality, not to reshape it because the results are repetitive, inconvenient, or unexpected.
If millions of people legitimately listen to the same artist every day, shouldn't the data reflect that?
Changing a chart to unique listeners rather than total scrobbles is a perfectly reasonable product decision. But justifying that change by naming one artist gives the impression that the methodology is being changed because the data is producing results the company doesn't like.
That's a dangerous precedent for any data platform.
I've also noticed interactions from https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh's social media account with posts calling BTS fans "bots" or suggesting that our listening habits are somehow illegitimate. Even if those interactions weren't intended to endorse those opinions, they reinforce the perception created by the forum post, that BTS fans are viewed differently from other users.
At the same time, many BTS listeners have reported legitimate scrobbles not being counted despite following Spotify's and Apple Music's streaming guidelines. If that's a technical issue, I sincerely hope it's investigated. If it's an intentional filtering decision, then users deserve transparency about how those decisions are being made.
What concerns me most is consistency.
Would https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh publicly name Taylor Swift if Swifties dominated the charts?
Would you redesign your charts because another fandom listened more than everyone else?
Would heavy listening by fans of The Beatles, Oasis, Metallica, or any other artist be described as a "problem"?
If the answer is no, then BTS should not have been singled out either.
Every large fandom has people who break rules. Every large fandom has people who stream heavily. Those are separate issues. Legitimate listening should never be treated as suspicious simply because it comes from an organized or passionate fanbase.
The value of https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh has always been trust.
Users trust that if they play music legitimately, their listening history is recorded accurately.
Artists trust that the data reflects actual listening.
Researchers, journalists, and music fans use https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh because they believe the platform measures behavior objectively.
The moment users begin to wonder whether certain artists or fandoms are being treated differently, that trust begins to erode.
I'm writing this not as someone looking for an argument, but as a longtime user who genuinely wants https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh to succeed.
I would appreciate answers to a few simple questions:
** Why was BTS specifically named in an official company response instead of discussing chart methodology more broadly?
** Why were discussions of BTS immediately followed by references to "inauthentic" scrobbling without evidence connecting the two?
**Is https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh intentionally filtering legitimate scrobbles from certain listening patterns?
**Does https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh recognize how these communications have created the appearance of bias, even if that wasn't the intention?
**Does the company plan to address these concerns publicly?
I have screenshots of the official forum post, social media interactions, and examples of the issues I've referenced, and I'm happy to provide them if they're helpful.
I truly hope https://t.co/bvrfSzrUdh chooses to address this openly. Music is for everyone, and the data representing that music should be equally fair to everyone.
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
— Teresa
BOOMER MOM: “You eat out too much.”
GEN Z: “I cook every night.”
BOOMER MOM: “Groceries can’t be that expensive.”
GEN Z: “I spent $310 last week.”
BOOMER MOM: “For one person?!”
GEN Z: “Eggs are $7. Chicken is $9 a pound.”
BOOMER MOM: “You’re shopping wrong.”
GEN Z: “Store brand. Sales. Coupons. Everything.”
BOOMER MOM: “We fed a family of four for $100 a week.”
GEN Z: “That was 1987.”
BOOMER MOM: “Excuses.”
Walmart made $16 billion in profit last year.
Grocery bills up 36% since 2020.
But sure.
I just don’t know how to shop.
Les tiraban de las coletas a los 5 años y les decían "eso es porque le gustas"
Les levantaban la falda a los 8 y les decían "son cosas de niños".
Les tiraban del sujetador a los 13 y les decían "así son los chicos".
A los 15, ¿sigo?
Normal que a los 25 estén hasta el coño.