His point is, that for some artists, exposure is helpful enough that Spotify's awful rates and the fact that the money goes to the labels and not the artists is

His point is, that for some artists, exposure is helpful enough that Spotify's awful rates and the fact that the money goes to the labels and not the artists is still a net positive. Once you get past the new, unknown stage, it's a net negative. David Byrne is one of my favorite artists, and coincidentally, another one (Lois McMaster Bujold) had a similar issue with releasing a bunch of ebooks for free. Where the exposure can be _very_ helpful at the beginning of a career, giving everything for free after a long and relatively full career doesn't help pay the rent.