It has now been called “bizarrely short-sighted”, “very stupid” and it appears to be turning legions of Spotify’s most vocal fans into its most-vocal opponents. Haven’t heard the story? Spotify is now requiring all new users to have a Facebook account in order to sign up.
The move comes just days after announcing deep integration with Facebook at the social network’s f8 conference. While we perhaps (as TNW’s Drew Olanoff suggests) shouldn’t be surprised by the move, it appears that many of us are, and surprised is just the beginning of what’s being expressed over on Get Satisfaction:
“Both [my] parents have Spotify premium accounts already, but they wouldn’t dream of having a Facebook account. My kids have a Spotify Free account, which I have planned turning Premium soon. But kids arent even allowed having a Facebook account untill they are 13.”
Comments like this aren’t lacking. Some, unfortunately, aren’t nearly as constructive, but they tell a tale that’s still very important: Spotify is losing its “cool factor”. Here in the US, we lusted after Spotify for ages, and all but ignored the Rdio and MOG alternatives. Once Spotify landed, some found themselves falling victim to hype, while others (like myself) were quite enamored with the service. A move like this tarnishes the reputation of a service that has paved its own way in a difficult fight.
There’s another side to this story though, and it comes in the form of an adage – “Complaints are always louder than praise.” So it’s worth noting that even though there are literally hundreds of comments between Get Satisfaction and a thread over on Hacker News, Spotify’s overall customer base might not be well represented. With Facebook crossing over 800 million worldwide members, it’s fair to say that those of us who dislike the service are simply a vocal minority.
What’s not yet clear, because neither Spotify nor Facebook have spoken up, is what would happen to your Spotify access if your Facebook account gets suspended for any number of reasons. It’s also unclear what would happen if Facebook decided to clean out its inactive accounts, as some people have noted in response to Spotify’s suggestion on Get Satisfaction:

So what are your thoughts? Disgusted by the move? Couldn’t care less? We’d like to hear you sound off in the comments, and of course make sure to keep the thread going over at Get Satisfaction, too.
Looking for an alternative to Spotify? We have 6 great ones listed here.


















Couldn't care less as an existing user. I've been with Spotify for years and I still will be. All the extra bells and whistles on top of the already excellent service they offer are cool, and the social integration is quite handy, but at the end of the day I use it to listen to music and that hasn't changed. That is all I want.
I use my Facebook account to stay in touch with my close friends only, so why would I have a problem with them seeing what I'm listening to? They know what kind of music I listen to anyway...sure there's privacy concerns, but just make sure your settings are correct and get on with it.
As for a Facebook account being compulsory for sign up, can't quite agree with that. Perhaps Spotify were bullied into it by FB, but hopefully they will change the sign up process. Every company can make a mistake or 2.. :)
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeJust wanted to weight in that this is utter shit from Spotify. Music is a private thing for me. Also the requirement to have a FB account to use it basically says: you have to give your data to us and THEM who will use it to make money. To be able to use our product.
Please rectify, Spotify is great otherwise.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeI don't see what's so bad! I like the fact that my friends can see my playlists, I can view theirs, find new music etc. All the people who are against Facebook I understand they have their reasons, but Spotify didn't lose their cool factor - they gained points with me! I like seeing more of my FB friends joining and seeing what they add to their playlists.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikehahahahahaGuess its time for you all to go to Music by google. F facebook.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeAw Spotify just became uncool.
Oh well. To hell with it.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeThe Pirate Bay + Google Music = WIN ^_^ who the hell need spotify anymore. get lost Spotify
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeSo "Spotify" is now saying that new users should create an empty Facebook account? And Facebook is OK with this?
That makes me think, once more, about how many of those 800 million users are really active on Facebook and why the number keeps getting published without a grain of salt.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeI am a big fan of Spotify, but don't want Facebook. I am glad I signed up before this new requirement, but if I were signing and were hit with this screen I would have hesitated signing up in the first place.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeGElectrick That's the killer for me, too. I love Spotify. I was singing its praises to my wife last night. But now, I can't recommend it. I won't ever recommend someone use Facebook. Too many potential dangers.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeBrad McCarty GElectrick The potential dangers aren't even known to the majority of Facebooks users. Their servers are a goldmine for potential hackers, if they haven't broken in and stolen users information already. Think of it this way, with so many users and so much information on so many servers, there's no way of actually knowing if someone's broken in or not majority of the time. It's rather scary.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeDan WilliamsBradGElectrick Thats why I prefer Grooveshark for online streaming. Although not entirely legal but sure as hell just works for me.Oh Piratebay is good too!
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeBrad McCartyGElectrick What are the potential dangers of someone using Facebook? What information do you feel people should hide or not have publicly known? Just curious...
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeRaychel D. EspirituGElectrick Herein lies the problem. Facebook tracks MUCH more than just what you do or post on the site. For some people, that's unacceptable. I use Facebook, but I don't have any expectation that the site isn't using everything I do to further its own causes. The vast majority of people don't realize that, and that's why we get the "Facebook is going to start charging" spam, because they don't understand that they're the product being sold. There's a place for privacy, and when a good company with a good product requires you to violate that privacy, that's a shame.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeBrad McCartyGElectrick Understandable. However since I work in marketing, I also understand why having user data is important. People are more responsive to the ads, and at worst the user sees an ad that is relevant to their interests. However I don't quite understand your last sentence "There's a place for privacy, and when a good company with a good product requires you to violate that privacy, that's a shame." - I most people know when you use the Internet, everything you do is tracked by your IP, browser, cookies etc. To be completely anonymous usually means you're hiding something. I just don't quite see it the same way.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeRaychel D. EspirituGElectrick You work in marketing (I did too, for years), so of course you don't see it the same way. That mentality that wanting privacy equates to hiding something is flawed, and it's somewhere that marketers have gone wrong for years. In doing so, marketers have led businesses to violate the trust of their customers. That's a real shame. I think you're incorrect that "most people know" about tracking. It's been my experience that the vast majority of people don't know. Those of us who read tech sites, we're the extraordinarily small minority.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeBrad McCartyGElectrick To each his own!
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeI wonder, how much money is FB giving Spotify for this stupid desicion?
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Likewilliam torres Oh no doubt that there's a LOAD of cash involved. FB can sell that data directly to the music labels, etc. There's SO many ways that FB can make money from this.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeBrad McCartywilliam torres The only plus point I see if FB actually does sell the user data to music labels is content discovery. There are many people out there who are not musically-inclined and thus have no knowledge of the existence of many genres and perhaps this could help. Just like FB ads, I have indeed discovered may cool things, right. So I think it can be turned into a good thing.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like@william torres to be honest I think Spotify is paying FB. I definitely see this as Sean Parker redeeming himself for what he did to Facebook.. His foot back in the door if you will.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeThis really doesn't surprise me. Sean Parker is most likely trying to redeem himself for his acts back when he was an actual part of Facebook. This is an ignorant move on Spotify's account to unify the web. I guess Zuckerbergs ideal dream is starting to gain momentum.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
LikeDan Williams Thanks DW. It's all too AOL for me. It seems so much like what we saw with early "web portals" and I hate it.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like