Unfortunately for artists, although opportunities for "exposure" are nearly endless, they don't pay the bills. Part of the problem here is that, as the article

Unfortunately for artists, although opportunities for "exposure" are nearly endless, they don't pay the bills. Part of the problem here is that, as the article mentions, Apple is using these artists to improve its optics when it comes to diversity. Apple can almost certainly afford to pay these artists a fair wage. So why does it choose to put them in the difficult position of passing up a collaboration with Apple, vs. putting on a show with a questionable return value for the artist? Not being willing to offer fair compensation for the labor and costs these artists incur to put on these performances, especially given how difficult it is to survive in places like the Bay Area as an up and coming artist, it seems a bit like Apple is getting the better end of the deal here. Especially when, as the article mentions, the audience is more focused on getting an iPad repaired or a new iPhone charger -- they aren't the engaged audiences that strengthen a fanbase.