Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

TAYLOR VS SKOOTER PART 1 (Patreon)

Published:
2024-06-28 18:14:14
Imported:
2026-06

Content

Danny's Patreon Channel:If you crave a deeper connection with your favorite artists, visit Danny's Patreon. He takes you behind the scenes into their personal lives, exploring their struggles with addiction, paparazzi, mental health, and other real-life challenges.http://www.Patreon.com/7DeadlyBananas

Comments

Masha

I always found it weird that people wished harm because someone didn't like their artist 🤣 I love hearing perspective from someone who knows about music. It's intriguing ❤️

harperluu

If Bananaman covers addiction related topics, he must cover Red Leather. He has dealt with addiction and is a fantastic indie artist the is currently close to 900 days sober and shares his struggles/music during his live performances.

Joanette Fountain

My opinion, which can be taken with a grain of salt, is the issue was NOT that her masters were sold. It was the guy that owned her label was thought to be a dear friend and didn't provide her an opportunity to buy the masters and sold them to someone that she felt was a bully. This documentary makes it sound like she was upset that they were sold and everyone's response is "well, she signed the contract" when it's not about that.

Even a Frozen Heart Can Melt

Sorry rant incoming… I just think this is an interesting topic that I’ve really wanted to discuss for a while! I think that swifties unfortunately carry a LOT of baggage from the way that Taylor has been treated over the years. Sadly, I think it’s created a bit of a cycle that’s difficult to navigate. I also think it’s actually becoming a large part of the reason why Taylor faces so much backlash. It’s definitely true that Taylor has been unjustifiably maligned. It’s frustrating to see her have to constantly prove herself, while she never receives the benefit of the doubt. Every word is questioned, every move is seen as suspect or calculated. If she does a thousand things right, it doesn’t matter. She can always be doing more, or she did that one thing wrong, so she’s a horrible person or a bad artist… Quite frankly, it’s exhausting, particularly if you’re on social media. However, swifties take it way too far when defending Taylor sometimes. They take everything really personally and they can’t seem to separate what is worth fighting anymore, so they fight EVERYTHING. I think more people now have a problem with swifties and their behaviors than with Taylor herself, but they lash out at the artist because they feel persecuted. Ironically, that’s exactly what started the issue of swifties feeling so defensive in the first place! I think there needs to be some more open dialogue and swifties need to be more self aware and start picking their battles more appropriately. Not everyone has to like Taylor’s music or be a fan or like her voice or her dancing etc. As long as a person is being respectful and open minded, they deserve to express any opinion they have without facing backlash. Sure it would be nice if there weren’t so many people spreading false information or rage baiting or being misogynistic, but we can’t control those people. We CAN control our responses, and what swifties are currently doing isn’t working, nor should it!

Savvy

agree with this. She understood her contract, she just wasn't given the opportunity to buy them when they came up for sale. And were instead sold to one of her worst enemies.

Madeline Goble

To go off of your money hungry argument, as a swiftie I have to admit even Taylor can be money hungry especially with her merchandise. Her Midnights album is the biggest offender of money grab for instance 4 different standard edition variants, when put together make a clock. We also have Midnights 3Am addition, till dawn edition, target deluxe edition, and late night edition and possibly more variants that I don't remember. Taylor’s merchandise is crazy expensive too.

harperluu

Audrey be like anybody “sanctimoniously performing soliloquies” Yeah, I’ll never see them. Love you, Audrey!

Kirsten Shaffer

As a neutral and a newer swiftie who has done deep dives about her, i dont think taylor herself is money hungry, i think as she is with a team that wants money. I will say she could enjoy getting the money that is OK but when i think money hungry i think its people who are driven by money and never is satisfied. The variants i feel is kinda here or there as it really speaks to people who collect. There are people who throughly enjoy buying all the different variants and thats okay, its also okay as a team and taylor to understand that is a big thing in the fan base so why not target with the understanding people will buy? I dont think its a reflection on her in a negative way in fact i think it also shows shes giving fans what they may want and understanding the buisness of modern day world of music industry. The merchadise is also kinda just a team aspect they want more i would imagine, also inflation is high globaly so that pays a huge part too. Merchandise has always just been one of those things personally i find to be overpriced even when things were cheaper but that is coming from i never had extra money so i never could just buy merchandise. Taylor has too much intergity about not being selfish and being giving to sink to being money hungry. A money hungry person wouldnt be willing share the money and give the money or even use it to the people around them. So i think its more the buisness and not taylor herself.

Madeline Goble

Thats a great way to look at it, It's probably Taylor’s team more than Taylor herself

KyraB

Variants in albums has become pretty much the standard practice for all major artists however people only are super vocal about it being negative when it comes to Taylor. Also for Taylor there was a big shift in how she releases music with all the extras her fans love like the voice memos and acoustic versions after leaving big machine and signing with UMG. With her old label it was typically a standard version and a deluxe version. It has been said that because Taylor owns her masters in her new record deal instead of UMG part of that deal was increasing variations of the albums that get released because album sales and merchandise are how they make their money of Taylor and the obviously want to maximize that. If you actually dig into the sales after the 4 initial variants that all came out on the album release day the subsequent variants in the weeks later have not had significant sales and without them TTPD would remained number 1 on the billboard charts this whole time.

Erwin 𐚁

I don’t know much about Kayne besides that he definitely had some great music early on. I remember my friends telling me the death of his mother in 2007 really affected him and is where his downward spiral started. I definitely remember the 2009 VMAs for many reasons. Seeing him drinking from the bottle on the red carpet was wild. Taylor won for the video “You Belong With Me” in the Best Female Music Video category. “Single Ladies (Put a Ring On It)” won Video of the Year - it was the final award of the night and instead of giving a speech Beyoncé asked Taylor to come out and finish her speech because she still remembers how important that moment was for her and Destiny’s Child during their first win.

Erwin 𐚁

Also - another artist who had to re-record was Jojo. Her big breakout song was “Leave (Get Out)”. For a long time, her old label removed her first albums online platforms /streaming. So in 2018, she dropped the re-recordings of her first two albums. JoJo said she wanted to give fans the nostalgia of the music they grew up with, and to provide an opportunity for the song's creatives to receive royalties. She also said that re-recording her music "kind of changed the narrative".

Jaz

Yesss! This is so important! I don’t think people really grasp this.

Jennifer Lawrence

Fandom culture in general is just wild to me with the directions some people can take it. Including sending hate messages and death threats to people.

Joanette Fountain

Same thing happened with Prince. To fight for his masters he changed his name to a symbol. And everyone called him crazy, the media painted that picture.

mc_1000

Anyone who wishes someone would get hit by a bus for having an opinion on someone’s voice has serious problems! Plus it’s so strange that people writing things like that lack the awareness to realise that the artist is pretty unlikely to think much of a person who would write things like that.

Nikki Badgett

Have been looking so forward to seeing you guys react to this and to your reactions together in general and I wasn't disappointed! I'm so excited that you'll be doing things together now! I agree with Audrey that a contract is a contract; though I definitely have a bias toward Taylor's side of anything, but I think what is important to remember here is that Taylor tried to BUY her masters. She wasn't asking for them to just be given over... she fulfilled her contract without complaint and when it was over she wanted to own her work and was willing to purchase them. Every time she entered into talks to do so she was manipulated and bullied. She was either told to turn in more albums for the right to own them or to keep her mouth shut about the situation. That's where the outrage stems from. She could have and would have happily payed for them but was denied the respect to do so without emotional manipulation tacked on. And this from Scott Borchetta whom she considered family.

Krysta Hawkins

In the song "peace" (which Taylor performs in the Long Pond Studio Sessions on Disney) one of the lines is: "there's robbers to the east, clowns to the west" and it really seems to me as though she is referencing Scooter Braun taking ownership/robbing her of what should have been her money/rights as well as Kanye West generally being a clown lol. During the recording of the Long Pond Sessions, she rolls her eyes while singing this line and in the lyric video the word "east" is not capitalized but the word "West" is which further convinces me

mc_1000

@1h24m I don’t think it was only about money - I think it was also about payback and power - trying to show they could put her back in her place, despite her success.

I Am Not Chamari

One thing about that category for Best Female Video… it was STACKED. In addition to Beyoncé and Taylor, there was Kelly Clarkson - My Life Would Suck Without You Lady Gaga - Poker Face P!nk - So What Katy Perry - Hot N’ Cold And since you asked… Beyoncé would absolutely be my choice to win that category to this day, as she, quite literally did, in fact, have one of the best music videos of all time. But she won Video of the Year as Erwin mentioned so it all was a fool’s errand. Although Kanye was definitely not okay that night. I will say I was a Kanye fan before I was a Taylor Swift fan and way too many people excuse his antics because he’s a “genius” I think people are now starting to realize, at least in the past couple of years, he’s turned into the worst possible version of himself that he possibly could, but for years, tolerated what he did in the name of art. That “Famous” video is CRAZY and sickening. Doing that to Taylor is gross but he also violated so many other people in that video. He put Rihanna next to her ABUSER and she was featured on the song! Crazy!

Erwin 𐚁

Yes!!! A complete fool’s errand. And who can forget Lil Mama’s antics. It Gaga killed that performance. Such a memorable show. The video for Famous is so disturbing. Like how did he get away with it!!!

Sasha

I wanted to give some context, that hopefully helps you understand this situation even better. For Taylor's AMA performance - Scott & Scooter initially would not let her perform her songs, but after Taylor posted on social media, they caved to public pressure to allow her to perform. This was especially important for that night because she was receiving artist of the decade and would not have been able to perform her songs she made in the last decade. Scott - what makes Scott's betrayal worse is that he "discovered" Taylor when she was 15 at a showcase in Nashville, he was setting his label up at the time and told her he wanted to sign her. She was one of his first, and was his biggest artist, she was about 70-80% of the revenue for the label. He was also a kind of mentor/father figure in the music industry for her. He had her back when things went wrong, and she believed he actually cared until everything went bad. When he went to sell the label, he had to sell her masters because his label was almost worthless without them, he only had a handful of other big names who didn't produce nearly the quantity or quality of music. The big irony about this sale is that there is an old interview with him in a spot about Taylor where he talks about his label and how the big labels made him sick how they treated their artists, and that was how he got people to buy into his new label. Taylor's contract - you will notice she doesn't dispute her contract, she has been very open with the fact she knows she didn't own her masters but would like too. She reached out to the owner and tried to broker a deal, what the owner (Scott) came back to her with wouldn't be possible for Taylor to do (the album for album deal) because she knew that if she signed on for another 6 albums the label would be sold as soon as she signed on and then she would be stuck with whoever the owner was. She has really only spoken out about contracts in relation to paying artists for streaming (an Apple Music controversy) and that artists should be allowed to own their albums. She has said before that she thinks artist should lease the masters to their label for a set period of time (maybe 5 years or so) so the label can earn back their investment into the artist but after the time periodic ends, the artist has full rights. She has had a large hand in changing music industry contracts and protected artists at UMG in her contract by requiring UMG to pay out the artists on the label when it comes to Spotify - https://variety.com/2018/music/news/taylor-swift-news-alert-1203032124/ Here is a video about the what Taylor did legally https://youtu.be/M-A_RrOeoWw?si=SnsFo7mam6BmcLsq

Shanice Marie

Yup and then they offered her a deal where they would give her an album back for every new album she put out. So it would just be an endless cycle where they would still own something of hers regardless. Which was a really bad deal all things considering I understand why she didn't want to accept it.

Erika

As far as her father being apart of it- Scott Borchetta didn’t actually have a label at the time he signed Taylor. He had left the recording company he worked for and was trying to start his own; although, he didn’t have the money. Taylor’s father owned 5% of Big Machine Records in order to help Scott get the label started. Taylor’s father was not allowed in board meetings when it came to selling her catalog, as it was a conflict of interest. So even though people say all the time that she knew it was being sold to Scooter because her father was an investor; he wasn’t even made aware of who was buying her discography. Also, just background for the money put into Taylor to get her career off the ground; she was the one who payed for music videos, concerts, her band, etc. Very little was payed for by Scott Borchetta and Big Machine Records.

Erika

Variants are something every artist does- and it’s not always more variants=more sales, in fact, that’s very rarely the case. As far as Midnights; 3am and Til The Dawn editions were never made physical. Merch is all under UMG, Taylor is not operating her merch. UMG knows Taylor is one (if not is) their biggest moneymaker and they’re capitalizing off of it as much as they can before her contract ends.

Starbuck1234!

Just like everyone, Taylor (nor her fans) have issue with her contract. It wasn’t a bad contract (well, one could argue all contracts with labels are bad), it was just a standard everyday contract similar to 95% of the rest of the artists out there. She fulfilled her contract. She has not complained about her contract. Scott would not sell her her masters, which she wanted. BMR was worthless without them, so he really couldn’t unless he wanted to retire. He chose to betray her by selling to a man who has contributed to bullying her for a decade, who then immediately that day was on Instagram with Kanye and Bieber “what up,Taylor”. Rubbing it in her face. I think Bieber posted it, but he was there, he knew what Justin was doing. Taunting her like that. Classless. What was the phrase, “i just bought Taylor Swift”. These are not just songs to her. They are her memories, her experiences, her friends, her family, her entire life. And it just doesn’t stop at the songs, he owned all of it, the artwork, the pictures, her HANDWRITING. Knowing all of that was now in the hands of a man who for years tried to destroy it, upset her very much and will haunt her until the day she dies. She will never be over it.

Heida

An essay incoming! Big Machine Records hadn't even been founded when 15 year old Taylor signed with them in 2005 (she was their first client). She had offers from bigger labels with a development deal (giving her time and money to record, but not promising that they’ll put an album out), but since they were just starting out, BMR was able to take a leap and offer her a record deal right away. But she took a chance on them just as much as they did on her. And yes, her dad did own shares in the label but only about 3-5% in order to help Scott Borchetta get the label started. And I don't think he had any say in any major decisions regarding Taylor's career or that he knew about the sale since he was not allowed in the board meetings. So for people who say that she knew it was being sold to Scooter because her father was an investor: No she didn't. Also, Taylor's parents were well off and yes, they did move to Nashville to help further her career and helped fund BMR. But this notion that they were filthy rich and basically "bought" her career is not true at all. Taylor has always acknowledged her privilege but to say the only reason she is where she is today is because of that is absurd and insulting. For her first 2-3 albums, Taylor and her parents were mainly the ones who payed for music videos, concerts, her band etc, which is usually all payed for by the label. BMR definitely helped Taylor a lot, no one is denying that. But Taylor helped them a lot too. Their success can almost entirely be attributed to her. Not only did her music make up about 70-80% of their overall net worth but their other artists benefitted from her success as well. In October 2018, BMR was placed for sale and a month later, after her contract with BMR expired, Taylor signed with Republic Records/Universal Music Group. The contract included that she would maintain ownership of her master recordings going forward and that they give more profit to their new artists as well. For years she tried to buy her masters from BMR but was not given a chance unless she signed another contract that would require her to create 6 more albums under the label in exchange for the first 6, which she felt was unacceptable. In June 2019, Scooter Braun's company, Ithaca Holdings, purchased BMR from Scott Borchetta and became the owner of the masters of her first 6 albums. Taylor wrote on Tumblr that she was unaware that Scooter was the buyer, which was a major shock and betrayal to her because of their history and his ongoing bullying of her. She said neither Scott nor Scooter reached out to her personally and they made her sign an NDA, essentially banning her from talking about them in public, unless it was positive — You can read it here: https://taylorswift.tumblr.com/post/185958366550/for-years-i-asked-pleaded-for-a-chance-to-own-my). It was an even bigger betrayal that Scott, who had been with her from the start and was someone she thought she could trust, went behind her back and sold it to the man he knew had hurt her (My Tears Ricochet from Folklore is rumoured to be about him). Scott denied that Taylor had not been informed about it, that he had texted her a few days before, said that she had the opportunity to own her recordings and that they were on good terms — You can read it here: https://www.bigmachinelabelgroup.com/so-its-time-some-truth/. Regarding his statement, Iggy Azalea made a great point: "Telling someone about a deal days before it’s public means the deal was already done and she never had the opportunity to even make a bid to own her own work. These deals take months to negotiate in long form". In October 2020, Scooter sold the masters of her albums to Shamrock Holdings, a private equity company. According to Taylor, they did not reach out to her either beforehand. She also revealed that Scooter would continue to profit from her masters for a long time. All of this led to Taylor re-recording the albums she did not own anymore, i.e. the master recordings, under Taylor's Version (Kelly Clarkson was one of the first to suggest that). She has released 4 re-recorded albums: Fearless, Red, Speak Now and 1989. Left are her debut album, Taylor Swift, and Reputation, which is the last album released under BMR. Loyal fans of Taylor buy the re-recordings instead of the original ones and when each re-recording so far has been released, the orignal album has dropped and their value decreased. Fearless dropped 20% in sales and fell off the Billboard 200 chart completely, while Taylor's Version debuted at number one. It was also the first re-recorded album in history to top the charts. The original Red dropped by 45% while Taylor's Version broke Spotify’s record for the most-streamed album in a day by a female artist, surpassing her own album Folklore. The original Speak Now dropped by 59% and original 1989 by 44%, the latter being the highest single-day streams globally for an album in 2023. Taylor also broke her own record for the most single-day Spotify streams for an artist. Its songs occupied the top 6 of the Billboard Global 200 the same week, making Taylor the first artist to achieve this. The re-recordings are also generally considered better because Taylor's voice is a lot better but they still sound similar enough that non-fans or non-music people genuinely can't hear the difference. Also, Taylor actually reached out to all the musicians and singers that played with her on the originals for the re-recordings, and almost all of them said yes. And for people who say it's not a big deal because Taylor still owns the actual songs (which is why she is able to re-record them and perform them), record companies are already changing their contracts because of her, which could make it harder for artists in the future to be able to re-record their music. What people misunderstand is that Taylor is not arguing that what they did wasn't legal. She knows how the industry works, she knows the law. But back then she didn't, at least not as much as she does now. Should she have known better before she signed a contract? Yes. But you also have to realise she was 15. Should someone older have been supervising and making sure what went down, like her parents? Probably. But she was a young, new artist who was being taken advantage of. She was still not dumb. She even declined a contract with Sony because they wanted her to release songs she hadn't written. BMR sold/bought the masters of HER songs that SHE wrote without her permission (a big part of why she is able to re-record her songs is because she owns a part of the composition rights since she wrote/co-wrote all of them). And the worst part is that it was all legal. But it shouldn't be. It's not ethical or moral. She decided to push back against what may be standard music industry business practice but is morally wrong and she then used her influence over public opinion to sway that standard to be more just. For daring to speak out and use the power she earned on her own merit to try to change the industry, the other side labeled her as "playing the victim", a stereotype often applied to people when they try to change what they believe is wrong. That's the point Taylor is trying to make. She is also speaking on behalf of artists who are not as big as her and don't have the means to fight back or to re-record their music. Taylor knows how lucky and privileged she is. But this isn't just about her. She took out her entire catalogue off of Spotify and Apple Music so they'd pay artists more and it worked. She has always fought for artists' rights to their work. Taylor's team said in a statement at the end that she has completely moved on from this whole thing. First when I heard about this doc, it seemed to be very pro-Scooter and anti-Taylor. I didn't realise there were two different episodes basically showing both sides. So it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. Taylor's side (Part 1) argues that they wouldn't sell her her masters, at least not without strings, and that it was an utter betrayal. I was also happy to see some genuine fans of Taylor that I've followed over the years, like Alex Goldshmidt who's engagement party Taylor showed up to (he was also in the Shake It Off music video) and more recently Zachary Hourihane (aka Swiftologist on YouTube). I know they would not have participated in this if they had an inkling that it was gonna twist the story to make Taylor look like the bad guy. However, Scooter's side (Part 2) is definitely very biased and just talking about the legalities and completely missing the point. They argued that Taylor refused to negotiate and instead incited a public feud by pitting her fan base against him. I don't agree with bullying or harassment EVER, and I think it's horrrible that Scooter has received death threats, and even worse, HIS KIDS. That is unaccceptable. But Taylor didn't incite that kind of behaviour and it's not her fault that some people are so unhinged they send people death threats, even innocent kids. At the same time, I don't blame Scooter for people on his side sending Taylor death threats. Even though he's treated her horribly, he's NEVER insinuated he wanted her dead. It's still wrong what he's done but there's a clear difference. Also, Scooter just announced he's "retiring" as a manager, allegedly because of the toll it has taken on his family life. He and his wife got divorced in 2022 and there were rumours that he cheated and possibly committed some crime (Vigilante Shit from Midnights is rumoured to be about him). He has joined the board of South Korean entertainment company Hybe and continue to serve as the CEO of Hybe America. As for toxic Swifties, there are toxic fans in every fandom, but it's important to remember those people are not the majority, they are just the loudest. As a Swiftie myself, I do understand where they are coming from. We've watched Taylor being beaten down by the media and other people in the industry, especially men. So when they see someone like Danny, they automatically think that you're just a misogynistic hater who literally has to criticise EVERYTHING she does and says (ahem Ben Shapiro ahem). She's also been criticised for writing songs about her exes her entire career so it's a very sensitve subject. But the real ones know what you meant and that you didn't mean it in a bad way. Not everyone has to like Taylor's music or be a fan and even fans don't have to like or agree with everything she does. As long as people are being respectful and open minded, they deserve to express any opinion they have without facing backlash. Also, nobody is saying Taylor is the first one this has happened to or to re-record their catalogue. There is Prince (who once said "If you don’t own your masters, your master owns you"), The Beatles, George Michael, Janet Jackson, TLC, Jay-Z, Rihanna, Def Leppard and JoJo to name a few. But, first of all, she owns a part of the composition rights since she wrote/co-wrote all of her songs. Second of all, she's one of the biggest artists in this generation and has a lot of power and influence, especially in this day and age with social media. I mean, record companies are already changing their contracts because of her, which could make it harder for artists in the future to be able to re-record their music. Olivia Rodrigo said that witnessing what Taylor has been through made her realise how cautious she needs to be. She said she refused to sign with a label until she found one that would allow her to own her masters and give her a fair deal in royalties, licensing and revenue. I don't either think Taylor herself is money hungry, I think it's more her team/label. The argument regarding the different album variants is just ridiculous to me because it's not like people are forced to buy it, it's THEIR CHOICE. There are people who feel like they "have to" buy all the different variants and all the merchandise and that's okay, but it's also okay if you don't or can't, because not everybody has the money. Certain fans don't think you're a "real fan" unless you have all those things but again, that is ridiculous. I don't buy all of the variants and the only times I have ever bought any mechandise from one of my favourite artists is a T-shirt or something from a tour I've gone to. But I'm just as much of a fan. I also don't have the money or even just the mental and physical health to go to a different country for their tour, which is why I have to hope and pray they come to Iceland (which is becoming more and more common with bigger artists). I'm afraid the chance of Taylor coming with the Eras Tour here is out of the question, which just makes me so sad I want to cry. I've never wanted to go to a concert that bad. Also, as for the different variants, Taylor is not the first and only one to do it yet she is the only one who gets criticised for it (like with the private jet thing), which is just another example of how these people aren't actually concerned about that, they just need something to criticise when it comes to Taylor. People don't even acknowledge or appreciate the incentive Taylor is giving her fans to actually go out and buy the physical CDs/Vinyls. In a an age of online streaming, people don't do that as much anymore. And to clear things up: Scooter was Demi's manager, but thankfully, Demi had already left him last year. What's interesting is that several of his clients seem to have dropped him around the same time, namely Demi, Ariana and Idina Menzel (voice of Elsa from Frozen/Elphaba in Wicked on Broadway/Rachel's birthmother on Glee). At the time, an anonymous source said all of his clients were under contract not to leave him and not to say anyting bad about him. Justin appears to have still been with him, though there were rumours he left too. As someone who is not just a Swiftie but a Belieber was well (and a Lovatic), I don't agree with the way Justin talked about Taylor around the time all this shit was happening or his friendship with Kanye (and certain other people), but as someone who's followed him and his career since practically the beginning, I understand it's more complicated for him than the others. He was with him the longest and Scooter WAS kind of a father figure to him since Justin's real father wasn't really in his life in his early childhood, not until his career really took off (shocker). So I definitely think Justin may have been a bit blinded by Scooter and felt indebted to him. He is the one who kind of discovered him and has helped him a lot in his career and his life in general. Also, Justin has since apologised for the Instagram post but still remained loyal to Scooter. It's sad because he and Taylor actually used to be friends since he opened up for her on her Fearless tour. Many people think what Taylor said in her speech at the Billboard Women in Music event (which you can watch here: https://youtu.be/ZVpkFb9-fts?si=0yNI4cU5mOdDdeau), i.e. "He's always been nice to me" was shade towards Demi, who said something along those lines when she had recently signed with him (many people also think it could have been directed towards Sia who said something similar, or both of them). As someone who is a fan of hers too, I was disappointed in her for that, especially because she claims to be such a feminist. Demi and Taylor have had some "beef" over the years but even I can admit it was mainly just Demi being a  petty drama queen. Things seem to be okay between them now, at least Demi seemed to appreciate Taylor supporting her during her performance at this year's VMAs. Taylor dated Taylor Lautner (from Twilight) briefly in 2009. They were together when the Kanye/VMA thing went down and a lyric in Back to December references that: "That September night, the first time you ever saw me cry". Taylor and Taylor (who were called Taylor-Squared) are now good friends along with Taylor L's wife, who is also not only called Taylor but Taylor Lautner too since she took his name (maiden name is Dome). They don't have any kids, the ex she sent his kids presents to was Joe Jonas. Taylor dated Tom Hiddleston (Loki) in 2016. After Harry Styles, they show a photo of her with Calvin Harris, a singer/songwriter and DJ she dated from 2015-2016 and then British actor Joe Alwyn, her 6 year relationship. Taylor won for the video You Belong With Me in the Best Female Music Video category at the VMAs in 2009. Single Ladies won Video of the Year and Beyoncé asked Taylor to come out and finish her speech, which, as someone who is not a Beyoncé fan, I think was so kind and generous of her. The Single Ladies video is iconic but I prefer You Belong With Me, not just because I'm a Swiftie but because it has an actual storyline (even though it's like a cheesy teen rom-com but I love those kind of movies 😆). Though I don't think it's relevant which one we think should have won, what Kanye did was still shitty. But I don't think Danny meant that it wasn't. Regarding the AMA performance, in spite of denying Taylor's claims that she wasn't allowed to perform her old songs, they issued a statement saying they had agreed to "allow" it a week before the show. Lastly, here is a video explaining copyright laws from a fairly unbiased view by an actual lawyer, Devin James Stone/LegalEagle on YT, from 2021 (by this time, only Fearless TV had been released): https://youtu.be/M-A_RrOeoWw?si=RpZ1_IWSIjnFvYYH. Here are also great articles about it: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/01/arts/music/taylor-swift-master-recordings.html https://pitchfork.com/news/taylor-swifts-music-ownership-controversy-with-scooter-braun-what-it-means-and-why-it-matters/ https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-48801130 https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/nov/23/taylor-swift-scooter-braun-amas-old-music-masters

Heida

I don't either think Taylor herself is money hungry, I think it's more her team/label. The argument regarding the different album variants is just ridiculous to me because it's not like people are forced to buy it, it's THEIR CHOICE. There are people who feel like they "have to" buy all the different variants and all the merchandise and that's okay, but it's also okay if you don't or can't, because not everybody has the money. Certain fans don't think you're a "real fan" unless you have all those things but again, that is ridiculous. I don't buy all of the variants and the only times I have ever bought any mechandise from one of my favourite artists is a T-shirt or something from a tour I've gone to. But I'm just as much of a fan. I also don't have the money or even just the mental and physical health to go to a different country for their tour, which is why I have to hope and pray they come to Iceland (which is becoming more and more common with bigger artists). I'm afraid the chance of Taylor coming with the Eras Tour here is out of the question, which just makes me so sad I want to cry. I've never wanted to go to a concert that bad. Also, as for the different variants, Taylor is not the first and only one to do it yet she is the only one who gets criticised for it (like with the private jet thing), which is just another example of how these people aren't actually concerned about that, they just need something to criticise when it comes to Taylor. People don't even acknowledge or appreciate the incentive Taylor is giving her fans to actually go out and buy the physical CDs/Vinyls. In an age of online streaming, people don't do that as much anymore.

Jackie Lehman 💅🏼

Im so sorry that some of the "fans" have attacked you in comments. I hope it is just age and they will grow out of it. I really love your reactions! And love that you are authentic and genuine! Having only positive reactions would mean taking away from that. I'm 41 and Ive loved Taylor since Tim McGraw came on CMT 😅, I just thought it was so awesome that a young girl was making country music! I was a huge Reba fan, but I was always just a little younger than her demographic. I started really loving her her music at the Red Album, but became an all out Swiftian (Elder Swifty) at Reputation. :-) and since then Folklore and Evermore are my favs. Ive always been low-income until the last couple years, so I have never been able to buy merch or go to concerts, Ive just listened the heck out of her albums. I think this is why I appriciate your videos so much because its so heavy on the music 😘💗

Autumn Atencio

This documentary is infuriating in the fact that it doesn’t give the most vital piece of information that taylor TRIED to buy her masters. She offered to buy them, even offering to pay more than they were asking and he denied her and sold them to scooter. It was done out of spite and anger and intention to hurt her. That’s the main issue and the fact that this documentary doesn’t address that side of it, invalidates the entire thing in my eyes.

Rachael Wright

We are not all like that i hate those fans that comment things like you 2 have received. i see them exactly like what Kanye did to Taylor you can disagree with an opinion and not wish awful things on people. My best friend hates Taylor and her music but i can understand that me and her have a different opinion x

Rachael Wright

So true and literally none of this is in the program at all x

Starbuck1234!

I’m so glad you went into her UMG contract and how she has met with label executives all over the world to lease masters to their labels, etc. IN addition, her contract negotiations to include UMG payouts to all artists when they sell their shares in Spotify. I mean, what artist does that. And, thinking back to the Apple letter and the Spotify “controversy”, back then those were thought of as “taylor drama”, but now are viewed as really making changes. Who else stood up to them? Apple caved within a day or so but Spotify actually now credits Taylor for influencing the business model they have today. I always say to naysayers, when their faves get streaming royalties from Apple and Spotify, well just thank Taylor for that.

Michelle Peeples

You are so right when you said he has a stake in Shamrock. He sold the masters for what he paid for them. Who does that? Her masters are worth way more than 300 mil and that's all he got for them. I do wonder what percentage he gets from playing those songs.

Caitlin Green

What this doesn’t show is that the record label really didn’t fund a lot of Taylor’s beginning. Her family paid for her first music videos to be shot, not the label, they paid for her travel for concerts, her photo shoots, and her wardrobe for on stage…not the label. All to help save the label money to help them get up off the ground 🫠

Elisa Hanna

She is there for her fans and that's why they will go to war for her. And even 18 years in the love we feel fron her feels completely genuine.

Daniella may Harrison

Thr main point of this I got was a decade old stereotype of she is pritty blonde and woman so they probably taught he was stupid and they could easily manipulate her into what they wanted. BUT THEY CHOSE THR WRONG . Correct if I'm wrong but this is my opinion as a woman raised by stong independent woman. Doing what she had done just shows how smart and intelligent she is we need more people like her in thr world. And the fact that rhey said you give us a new album and we will dive one on of your back is bulshit yet again she would be stuck in a endless cycle being controlled by misogynistic men who don't rely care all they want is a paycheck.