Proof of humanity as a marketing metric
DSPs fighting back against AI-slop.
If you are not a subscriber of The Fanbase Builder, join 1.000+ artists, creators, and music industry executives who receive it for free.
Let’s dive into today’s topic:
Proof of humanity as a marketing metric
Artists who can’t prove they or their fans are real are in trouble.
Why it matters
Rapid AI developments are flooding streaming platforms with new music, and fraudulent use of that technology is surging alongside it.
Deezer reports detecting 75,000 AI-generated tracks uploaded to its platform per day, while Spotify earlier removed over 75 million spammy tracks.
It’s a volume problem for established artists, and a discovery problem for emerging artists.
To be clear, the issue isn’t artists using AI creatively. It’s the spammy, fraudulent use of AI to game royalty systems: impersonating artists, churning out sped-up or slowed-down tracks, and diverting royalties to fraudsters.
DSPs are responding fast. Their discovery algorithms are tightening to prioritise quality and relevance.
New detection systems analyse listener behaviour to distinguish “real” music from spam. Tracks without behavioural signals, such as active streams (plays from search), saves, shares, or repeat listens, are flagged as suspicious.
The next step could be a distribution model where music is pre-evaluated before upload, and not every track automatically makes it onto a platform.
How it works
So, what does this mean in practice for artists?
DSPs are moving away from passive metrics and towards engagement quality. The question is no longer just “how many streams?” but “are real humans actually responding to this music?”
Earlier, I wrote that artists shouldn’t rush to release music on streaming platforms. I argued this for branding reasons: Streaming numbers are public. Tracks with fewer than 1,000 streams immediately signal limited audience interest, which damages the artist’s brand.
Now that DSPs tighten their music discovery algorithms, a new argument becomes even more valid:
Community is more than ever the most important quality signal an artist can build.
The old “drop-and-pray” strategy of uploading to DSPs and hoping the algorithm picks it up is increasingly unreliable in a world where millions of AI-generated tracks compete for the same editorial and algorithmic slots.
Artists who build an audience before release day have a structural advantage: real people interacting with their music from the moment it drops creates exactly the behavioural signals DSPs are now using to distinguish legitimate artists from bots.
Build community before the first release, not after. Fans will search for, save, and share new music.
Engagement by real humans is increasingly the proof that an artist isn’t a robot.
Yes, but..
Building community takes time. Not every emerging artist has the resources or network to generate meaningful engagement organically. I recognise that it’s much easier said than done for introverted bedroom artists.
However, I’m confident this shift benefits the authentic creator. While it’s harder to “lift off”, once you are validated by real human behaviour, you are no longer competing in the same arena as the bots.
Take action now
Emerging artists who haven’t yet released music on DSPs could ask themselves whether their community is engaged enough to support a release. You’ve only got one chance to make a great impression.
Your thoughts
Further reading
How streaming platforms release thousands of new tracks every day? (PowerOfMusic by Tuned Global)
Deezer: AI-generated tracks now represent 44% of all new uploaded music (Deezer Newsroom)
Spotify Strengthens AI Protections for Artists, Songwriters, and Producers (For the Record by Spotify)
Spotify has deleted 75m+ ‘spammy tracks’ – as it unveils new AI music policies (Music Business Worldwide)
The Attention Currency: Don Jazzy’s Lesson for African Creators (Ynaija)
The Music Industry Crosses an AI Tipping Point (The Hollywood Reporter)
Artists shouldn’t rush releasing music to streaming platforms (The Fanbase Builder)