As Spotify’s 600 million users brace for the highly anticipated, albeit dreaded, event known as Spotify Wrapped, they are set to receive a yearly summary of their listening habits. This report showcases top songs, artists, albums, and podcasts, all presented with vibrant graphics ready for sharing on social media.

Since its launch in 2016, Spotify Wrapped has thrived on our cultural fascination with self-exploration and understanding our choices. It’s akin to astrology, but for our playlists. Did you discover “The Tortured Poets Department” was your favorite album this year? Perhaps it’s time to book a session with BetterHelp! If Addison Rae or Charli XCX topped your charts, maybe reducing time on X could be beneficial! Were you among the elite 0.01% of Beyoncé fans? What must it feel like to have such excellent taste? Or did you spend countless hours listening to ambient rain for sleep? It might be time to consider a white noise machine and a sleep assessment.

Besides the shock of seeing an artist or song in your top five that you thought you disliked, or the uncomfortable truth that your music choices contradict the vibe you’ve been working hard to create, Spotify’s current setup has me raising my eyebrows at my Wrapped and questioning the authenticity of my listening preferences.

Is record label interference responsible for Spotify’s repetitive algorithms?

Sabrina Carpenter’s sixth studio album, “Short N’ Sweet,” became one of the most successful albums this year, and its tracks “Espresso,” “Please Please Please,” and “Taste” were everywhere—not just on radio stations and social media but also across streaming platforms. It felt like regardless of what I chose to listen to, one of those singles was bound to pop up next.

And I’m not alone in this experience.

Others have reported similar encounters with Kendrick Lamar’s chart-topping single “Not Like Us.” Amid their ongoing rap feud, Drake even accused Universal Music Group and Spotify of using shady practices to manipulate streams and artificially boost the success of “Not Like Us.” (Ironically, Drake spent the entirety of 2018 featured on numerous Spotify playlists.)

While there’s no concrete evidence that music labels are colluding with Spotify or other streaming services to inflate streaming numbers, many users’ experiences suggest that such practices could be occurring. Some have compared this to payola, an illegal act where radio stations are compensated to play certain songs without disclosing the payments.

The most akin to payola seen with Spotify is a tool called Discovery Mode. This feature allows artists and record labels to promote specific tracks, helping them appear in personalized playlists, Spotify Radio, autoplay, and Spotify Mixes.

With so much outside influence embedded in Spotify’s algorithm, I find myself questioning whether my music choices are authentically my own or if they’ve been dictated by those in corporate boardrooms or during virtual meetings.

AI and algorithms create music echo chambers

In recent years, Spotify has wholeheartedly adopted the use of artificial intelligence, much like many tech companies.

Last year, Spotify rolled out an AI-driven DJ feature to enhance the music listening experience and make it “more interactive.” At first, the DJ would vary genres every few songs, providing a fresh experience and even speaking in between tracks for a more “human” feel. However, as I continued using it, I noticed it tended to play the same or similar songs repetitively.

Last September, Spotify introduced “Daylists,” a feature that utilizes algorithms to curate playlists which collect “the niche music and microgenres you typically enjoy at certain times of day or on specific days of the week.”

Daylists are often recognized for their quirky, somewhat nonsensical titles created by AI. Right now, my Daylist is titled “mood music quiet storm Monday evening” whatever that might mean.

Spotify emphasizes its AI capabilities to enhance hyper-personalization. However, this user-centric algorithm can sometimes create echo chambers, providing constant exposure to the same artists, songs, genres, and overall “vibes.” When does hyper-personalization become too impersonal and disconnected?

The design of the Spotify homepage illustrates this perfectly. Most of the homepage showcases recently played tracks. If you scroll down, you will see algorithmically generated playlists populated with songs that align closely with your tastes, supplemented with a few new suggestions that don’t stray far from your listening habits. Further down, popular album recommendations based on your recent interactions appear, and even lower, podcasts and audiobooks show up, regardless of whether you engage with that type of content.

There have been numerous occasions where I wanted to discover new music, but this homepage layout offered little assistance. I would prefer Spotify to occasionally introduce me to an artist or album outside of my usual preferences instead of continually feeding me recommendations derived from user data, AI, and algorithms. This method only encourages us to become passive listeners.

Like any other platform, Spotify’s goal is to keep us using their service for as long as possible. They achieve this by creating a comforting atmosphere that can verge on mind-numbing predictability. When our listening choices are largely influenced by algorithms and potential manipulation from labels, end-of-year reports like Spotify Wrapped might illustrate less about our personal tastes and more about what Spotify has filtered within our reach.