In Stanley Kubrick's deeply dark, deeply insightful, and sadly timeless classic film "

Dr. Strangelove: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb

", we see people at every level of power and influence trying to figure out just how to deal with a potential catastrophe and reality of their own making. In the end (spoiler alert), well... things don't go well.

While the algorithms we have allowed to be designed have not yet grown to such a potentially calamitous end, they 

 and are deserving of our constant review and critique. 

Massively popular and also massively influential. And what do we know about it? Very little. How much do we talk about it? Very little. But we should.

Can we talk about the Spotify Discover Weekly algorithm? 

If you use Spotify with any regularity, chances are you are probably a fan of the 

 playlist, Spotify's algorithmically-determined list of songs tuned to you. 

Since its launch in 2015, it has been met with near-universal acclaim and listenership. A 

quick Twitter sentiment analysis for "discovery weekly"

shows overwhelming positivity - even when it misses, it still hits.

But, like all modern conveniences - from tailored ads to "customers also viewed these similar products", there's a lot going on behind its face. And with the millions of Spotify users, it has a huge impact.

With our personal data fueling this (and other) massive engines of influence, these things are worthy of understanding - and critique. I've found shockingly little critical discussion around the impact of Spotify's algorithm when the likes of Facebook, YouTube, and Google are being called before Congress to discuss their algorithms, so I've decided to take a deeper dive and consider it all.

Straightaway, I'll tell you that the Spotify is close-lipped about their algorithm because it is a private company protecting their intellectual 

. Secondly, it is very complicated, but not impossible to understand. Software engineer Sofia Ciocca published an 

in-depth Medium piece on how the Spotify algorithm works back in 2017

 that exposed from primary sources how it worked.

At the time, she wrote it was these three components:

Collaborative Filtering: What People with Tastes Similar to You Also Like

Natural Language Processing: What The Internet Likes

Raw Audio Processing: Sounds Like This Other Song You Like

You could argue that the above components map to "old school" discovery - asking your friends who like the music you do what they are listening to (#1), browsing music blogs or print reviews (#2), or ... just hearing a beat you like from a radio 15 feet away (#3). There's wisdom in modeling it as such - why reinvent the wheel?

But it's important to understand that 1) these algorithms are fueled by 

 positive) of a massive audience being influenced by a homogenous algorithm.

Don't be ignorant to the fact that your personally identifiable data is being used by Spotify to provide you this service, and to provide it to other paying users. But also: 

that data may be used or sold to third parties

. But that's the bargain, right? Thanks to laws like the 

 - most companies have been forced to provide a way for you to request or delete your data in a timely manner.

Quora: How Can I Download My Spotify Data?

There have been relatively few studies on the effects of Spotify on user's consumption of and discovery of new music. But one study, 

‘How Consumers’ Adoption of Online Streaming Affects Music Consumption and Discovery’

, determined that discovery of "highly valued music" increased dramatically with Spotify vs iTunes, as well as overall consumption. The general sentiment on social media also implies a deep, earned affinity with Spotify for these same reasons.

Empirically speaking, this maps to my own experience and that of my friends who I've discussed how Spotify has impacted them. I've encountered a number of new artists and albums that I now "highly value" through Spotify, and specifically 

. And of those, I've tended to purchase physical copies of the album as well.

One case in point is Pastor T. L. Burnett's 

 - a 1971 gospel album. I am not a religious person, nor do I have an affinity for gospel music but 

recommended a few tracks off this album to me sometime in 2016/17. Likely due to the algorithmic components described above, specifically my "favoriting" of tracks that feature "choral vocals" and "tight bass lines". This album has both, and it quickly became one of my all-time favorites. I bought the LP on vinyl.

What's more, is that later I saw this relatively unknown album in the front window of 

 that same fall of 2017. How did that happen? Was Spotify suggesting it to me because they conspired with a tiny label to push sales of a 2010 re-released album that had little fanfare before or after? Or because, rather, it resonated with others that shared my similar tastes?

So, both objectively and empirically, I tend to think that the Impact on End-Users with Spotify is a 

It's been shown to increasingly expose listeners to music they find "highly valued".

: Keep in mind these recommendations are coming from an opaque algorithm from an organization with a profit motive. While useful, we have little way of knowing what goes into it. More on this later.

The Impact On Overall Sales: Initial Disruption Followed By Some Positive Trend

The record store as we knew it pre-iPod is long gone, replaced by digital downloads or more recently, streaming. And, since the nadir of music sales in 2015, 

it's been climbing in large part to streaming

. But there has been a recent and very interesting development. A few weeks ago, 

the RIAA announced vinyl sales have eclipsed CDs for the first time in three decades

, vinyl sales were being driven by streaming.

This stream-then-buy has been the case for me. I can't tell you the number of artists I've been introduced to - or re-introduced to and I've bought the vinyl. Apparently it's the same for other listeners? Emotional attachment may very well be turning into sales (again).

So, by all accounts while streaming (or perhaps the 

) killed the traditional music-buying marketplace, in its place a new ecosystem has risen. The barriers to discovery and purchase are lessened, but so has the need to purchase discrete albums and tracks lessened. 

One thing that an algorithmic approach to music discovery does provide is a wider view of cross-genre interests. I could not find any definitive information on the growth of genre diversity among listeners, but empirically - I've seen this in myself, and in my friend network.

The Impact On Artists: Likely Positive, But Is a Single Point of Failure

From an artist-revenue perspective, the general attitude is that 

Spotify isn't pulling its weight with the "middle class" of artist

. But, from a music discovery and overall awareness perspective, 

there's never been an opportunity like Spotify

When compared to the industrial "Top 40" machine, the "fairer" marketplace that is Spotify appears to be a win for most artists as they have a more open playing field. However, the payout (as mentioned in those prior articles) is a pittance compared to the sale of a physical disc or MP3 download.

In direct context with the algorithm - as long as the algorithm is solely based on user-generated patterns and NOT through sponsored nudges, etc - the algorithm looks to be working.

So, in sum: likely positive, but as Spotify is the 1000-pound gorilla and gatekeeper, it demands constant critique and attention. If it fails, a huge avenue for musicians fails.

The Problem With Algorithms: Transparency

Overall, my research says to me there is a positive outcome from the Spotify algorithm. However, the algorithm is opaque and proprietary, like most algorithms - including Google Search. And considering its massive impact on consumers, it demands criticism and investigation, on two fronts: 1) is Spotify allowing external influence and 2) how is the personal data being used?

Regarding external influence - it's hard to determine this except by outside observation. But, the driving force behind the recommendations appears to be data alone. Obviously we can't know that for certain - but 

 Spotify has been fairly transparent in the methods it uses and 

 music is so intensely personal that a song out of place in a Discover Weekly feels like your shirt is on backward. Listeners will smell (hear?) a rat.

In the Google world, there is much research, reporting, sleuthing, and experimentation done against that algorithm. From my research, 

this has happened, albeit on a very limited scale

, with Spotify as well. And that's completely necessary for businesses (artists) who use the platform, but also for consumers to have confidence that they are not being unduly influenced. Ever hear of 

The homogeny of the algorithm and our intensely growing comfort and need for it needs checking on occasion. Find other sources of recommendation, otherwise we will all collapse into a Spotify singularity.

Overall, through objective research and empirical observation, I think it is fair say that the net result of Spotify and its Discover Weekly algorithm

 for listeners has been very positive. For musicians 

(ignoring for a moment the overall music marketplace)

 has also been positive, though less conclusively so. 

 suggestion algorithm appears to do a good job of recommending music users like and tends to promote music discovery and genre expansion in ways that we've never seen before on a massive scale. Not everyone has that "one friend" who is a tastemaker, after all. 

: The overall market share and audience influence that Spotify has coupled with the lack of transparency is deeply concerning and demands constant critique and investigation. 

While not necessarily as important as, say, governance or legislation, music, and the environment needed to create it is a critical part of culture and the human condition. Completing ceding that it into the hands of an opaque, monolithic entity is a recipe for disaster.

And never forget that your data is running it. You are a stakeholder, and you have influence.

Shortly after Amazon Prime launched, I noticed a lot of pressure on ecommerce vendors (and really, anyone who was shipping anything) to ship quickly and ship cheaply. If it didn't say "Free Shipping", it was dead. It became a major trend because users were factoring it into their purchasing decisions. And now everyone, from Etsy to eBay offer expedited, free shipping.

, but you could also call it "The YouTube Effect" because shortly after YouTube hit the mainstream in the early 2010s users came to expect quick, cheap, high-quality, lag-free video streaming. If you or the vendor you chose to stream video didn't live up to that it was a letdown. But few for-pay video streamers could do that - though thanks to tech and bandwidth improvements, they have - because they were forced to.

Now, recommendation engines like Spotify's have changed the game for any sort of recommendations - from music to shopping to the "related posts" at the bottom of a blog post.

Research

Privacy & Compliance

Analysis

A Critical Look at Spotify's Algorithms, Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Algorhythm

Console video game systems are a hotly debated topic. Users typically are extremely loyal to their preferred system and the internet is full of message boards and threads of fierce debate over which console is superior. These debates however, typically focus on the comparison of the latest Xbox or PlayStation console. Nintendo’s strategy to differentiate themselves from their competition has positioned them to succeed without having to compete directly with the latest consoles from Microsoft and Sony.

For the past 3 generations of consoles, Xbox and Playstation have competed mostly on hardware terms; lively debates over processing power, memory, storage and graphics between the two have been held for nearly 20 years now. The latest Nintendo consoles have, for the most part, been largely absent from these arguments. This is because following the Nintendo GameCube, the last Nintendo console to compete directly with Microsoft and Sony, Nintendo’s strategy shifted away from competing in hardware with the latest Xbox and Playstation.

The GameCube was not a failure by any means. The console 

 worldwide since its release in September, 2001 and It is also widely beloved in video game circles. However it was behind the original Microsoft Xbox, which 

. Both consoles combined couldn’t touch the Sony Playstation 2, the best selling console ever, recording 

Nintendo was able to flip the script 5 years later with the release of the Nintendo Wii. Launching in November, 2006, the Wii recorded 

 sold over its lifetime! The Nintendo Wii outsold its competitors from Microsoft, the Xbox 360, which sold 

. All three consoles were released within a year of each other between 2005 and 2006.

How did Nintendo go from last in sales in the previous generation of consoles to top of the mountain? Nintendo pivoted away from what their competitors and focused less on hardware specs and instead introduced a novel gameplay experience and catered more toward family gaming.

The Nintendo Wii was a novel system that did away with the typical two handed console controller and instead introduced the Wii Remote. The Wii remote was revolutionary in introducing motion sensing controllers as a core component of a console gaming system. Wii users played games using point and click and gesture controls with the Wii remote. For example, users could swing the Wii remote like a sword while playing the Legend of Zelda and simulating a bowling motion while playing Wii Sports. The Wii required users to physically engage with their game playing experience.

The Wii remote was a unique offering at the time and was hit with users and critics. Gamespot named the Wii “

” in 2006. PC World named the Wii as one of magazine’s 

The motion based game play experience was so successful that Xbox and Playstation both introduced motion based hardware following the success of the Wii. Microsoft released the Xbox Kinect in 2010 for the Xbox 360, nearly 5 years after the launch of the console. Sony, followed suit releasing PlayStation Move two years later in 2012.

In addition to its innovative game play experience, The Nintendo Wii focused on a different gaming demographic. Nintendo conceded the passionate hardcore gaming audience to PCs and its console competitors from Sony and Microsoft and shifted its focus to casual gamers and families. Just after its launch 

, Nintendo president Satoru Iwata, said “We’re not thinking about fighting Sony, but about how many people we can get to play games. The thing we’re thinking about most is not portable systems, consoles, and so forth, but that we want to get new people playing games.”

This shift was reflected in Wii’s messaging too. “Wii would like to play” and “Experience a new way to play” were messages used in ads for the system at launch. Most Wii games were family oriented and carried E (everybody) ratings. Popular M (mature) titles at the time like “Grand Theft Auto IV” and “Red Dead Redemption” were not available on the Wii. Of its top 10 best selling games, only one (Super Smash Bros. Brawl) had a rating higher than E.

Nearly a decade after the success of the Wii and following its poorly received successor, the WiiU, Nintendo once again introduced a radical new product for its eighth generation console. The Nintendo Switch, released March 3, 2017, is a hybrid console that can be used as a home console connected to a television set or as a portable gaming device. The Switch maintained motion sensing as a part of its functionality.

The handheld/mobile nature of the Switch is a big draw for consumers. Nintendo has released handheld systems and dominated the handheld market since the launch of the original Game Boy in 1989. In fact, it’s only competition from its console rivals was the Sony PSP, which launched in 2004 but fizzled out within a few years. However, in the years prior to the Switch’s release, Nintendo was experiencing new competition in the handheld gaming market, smartphone mobile games.

The Switch however, was a completely new sort of handheld/mobile gaming system. Whereas previous handheld systems were separate from their console counterparts. The Switch merged the traditional console with a handheld system. Previous handheld systems had sacrificed hardware specs for portability, the Switch offered a true one-to-one experience between its console and handheld modes. Switch users can seamlessly pivot from playing the console on their television set to going mobile, simply by removing the console from its television dock.

The Switch eliminated the choice users had previously been forced to make between in home and mobile gaming. Additionally users didn’t have to settle for differences between their at home and mobile gaming experience. The hybrid nature of the Switch has allowed the Switch to appear in some pretty 

The Switch’s eighth generation competitors, Xbox One and PlayStation 4, certainly have the Switch beat from a hardware perspective. Xbox One and PlayStation 4, for example, both offer models that support 4K output, while the Switch does not. Additionally, the Switch has no native media player or video streaming apps currently available. Native media players and video streaming apps are both accessible on the Xbox One and PlayStation 4.

Has the Nintendo Switch dominated eight generation video game sales like the Nintendo Wii did as part of the seventh generation consoles? It is hard to say currently. The PlayStation 4 has sold more than 100 million units as of January 2020. Meanwhile Microsoft announced a shift in focus to the amount of active users on Xbox Live as its “primary metric for success” rather than unit sales. 

 of the Xbox One are 47 million units sold.

 since its launch in 2017, surpassing the estimated sales of the Xbox One. While it still has significant ground to make up in order to equal or surpass sales of the PlayStation 4. One thing to consider is that the PlayStation 4 launched in 2013, nearly 4 years before the Nintendo Switch.

The lesson to learn from Nintendo’s strategy is sometimes you don’t have to compete directly with your competitors. Nintendo conceded the hardware arms race typically fought between Sony and Microsoft. Instead, Nintendo focused on introducing new game play experiences with motion based game controls and the hybrid nature of the Nintendo Switch.

Additionally, Nintendo has made a concerted effort in bringing in new users to their systems. An effort to focus on family gaming and making titles that appeal to wide audiences has helped keep Nintendo competitive in the market despite releasing systems that lag behind competitors in terms of hardware. Sometimes the best option is to buck the market and forge your own path.

Marketing Strategy

Nintendo's Strategy to Fight the Console Wars

Branding

Art Direction

Web Design

Graphic Design

Illustration

Ben Sollee

Copywriting

UX / UI

Provi

Creating innovative, well-considered strategies relies upon experience and knowledge - but also the ability to research, find facts, and identify trends and opportunities. We provide this service to clients who are challenged with new platforms, new markets and new technology. Naturally curious, we like to stay up-to-date and ahead of the curve for our own knowledge, and for the benefit of our future work.

Below is a selection of journal entries for some of our most recent research subjects.

Research

Research: Case Studies

01

Ben Sollee

02

Provi

Research: Blog Posts

A Critical Look at Spotify's Algorithms, Or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Algorhythm

Nintendo's Strategy to Fight the Console Wars