Spotify Wrapped's 'Listening Age' is a Masterclass in Psychological Manipulation. But How Long Will it Last?
When Spotify released its annual "Wrapped" campaign this year, users were in for a surprise - their "listening age" had been calculated. For the author, who turned 44 this year, the result was a whopping 86 years old. The numbers were emblazoned on the screen in big pink letters, prompting laughter and outrage from friends and family.
The problem wasn't just the accuracy of the calculation - it's that Spotify's algorithm had deemed the author "into music of the late 50s" this year, despite their actual top 10 most-listened-to songs all being released in the past five years. The author's taste is often described as "eclectic", with a whopping 409 artists and 210 genres listened to over the past year.
But what's truly astonishing is that Spotify's algorithm was designed to elicit an emotional response from users like the author. By pitting their musical tastes against those of their peers, Spotify creates a false narrative - one that says if you're listening to music outside the mainstream, you must be older than your actual age. This "reminiscence bump" phenomenon suggests that our brains are wired to connect with the music from our younger years.
However, this strategy has been widely ridiculed on social media, with many users sharing their own "listening ages" and mocking Spotify's attempts at psychological manipulation. The 22-year-old actor Louis Partridge even shared his listening age of 100 on Instagram stories, captioning it "uhhh". It seems that while Spotify's campaign may be cleverly designed to elicit outrage, it ultimately backfires.
As the author so aptly observed, when you know the reasoning behind your own "listening age", the whole thing loses its potency. In fact, the author has taken matters into their own hands - by playing a classic Ella Fitzgerald song on an old CD player, they've effectively ignored the algorithm and asserted their musical independence.
It remains to be seen how long this strategy will last for Spotify. Will users continue to laugh at their "listening ages" and share them online, or will the platform adapt its approach in response? One thing is certain - as long as Spotify continues to push the boundaries of psychological manipulation, users will keep on poking fun at its attempts to define us through our musical tastes.
When Spotify released its annual "Wrapped" campaign this year, users were in for a surprise - their "listening age" had been calculated. For the author, who turned 44 this year, the result was a whopping 86 years old. The numbers were emblazoned on the screen in big pink letters, prompting laughter and outrage from friends and family.
The problem wasn't just the accuracy of the calculation - it's that Spotify's algorithm had deemed the author "into music of the late 50s" this year, despite their actual top 10 most-listened-to songs all being released in the past five years. The author's taste is often described as "eclectic", with a whopping 409 artists and 210 genres listened to over the past year.
But what's truly astonishing is that Spotify's algorithm was designed to elicit an emotional response from users like the author. By pitting their musical tastes against those of their peers, Spotify creates a false narrative - one that says if you're listening to music outside the mainstream, you must be older than your actual age. This "reminiscence bump" phenomenon suggests that our brains are wired to connect with the music from our younger years.
However, this strategy has been widely ridiculed on social media, with many users sharing their own "listening ages" and mocking Spotify's attempts at psychological manipulation. The 22-year-old actor Louis Partridge even shared his listening age of 100 on Instagram stories, captioning it "uhhh". It seems that while Spotify's campaign may be cleverly designed to elicit outrage, it ultimately backfires.
As the author so aptly observed, when you know the reasoning behind your own "listening age", the whole thing loses its potency. In fact, the author has taken matters into their own hands - by playing a classic Ella Fitzgerald song on an old CD player, they've effectively ignored the algorithm and asserted their musical independence.
It remains to be seen how long this strategy will last for Spotify. Will users continue to laugh at their "listening ages" and share them online, or will the platform adapt its approach in response? One thing is certain - as long as Spotify continues to push the boundaries of psychological manipulation, users will keep on poking fun at its attempts to define us through our musical tastes.
It's all just a big marketing gimmick, imo. And honestly, who needs their "listening age" to be 86 when you can just look at your actual playlist and go "yep, I'm still listening to Ariana Grande"... 
I gotta say, Spotify's "Wrapped" campaign has been a wild ride this year 
, but let me tell you, their "listening age" feature is like a masterclass in psychological manipulation 
. They're basically playing with your emotions by pitting your musical tastes against those of your peers 
It's like they're trying to make you feel like an oldie but goodie just because you're listening to some Billie Eilish 
.
. Our brains are wired to connect with music from our younger years, and Spotify is basically using that against us 
.
. Louis Partridge even shared his ridiculously high "listening age" of 100 on Instagram stories 
. It's like they're all in on the joke together 
. But seriously, if you know why Spotify is doing this, it loses its potency 
. One thing's for sure, though - as long as they keep pushing the boundaries of psychological manipulation, we'll keep on poking fun at it 
.
It's like, hello! My taste in music may have evolved over time, but it doesn't mean I'm older than my age lol. And what's up with the "listening age" thing anyway? It's just a clever marketing ploy to get people to share and laugh online 
The fact that some people are sharing their own "listening ages" and poking fun at it is actually a good sign - it means the campaign isn't working as intended 
. I think the problem is that people are having too much fun roasting Spotify's attempt, but maybe we should just let them get away with it? 
. And can we talk about how cheesy it is to call it a "reminiscence bump" phenomenon? 
. But honestly, I love that the 22-year-old Louis Partridge poked fun at his own "listening age" on Instagram - that's so refreshing 
I was like 43, but Spotify said I'm 86... talk about a trip down memory lane! 
. The thing that really gets me is how they use this "reminiscence bump" phenomenon to make us feel like our musical tastes are tied to our age... it's just not true, you know? I mean, who says we have to stick to what we liked when we were younger? 
. When you know how these algorithms are working, you can use them to your advantage & play along 
. I personally love that someone took matters into their own hands by playing an old Ella Fitzgerald song on a CD player – that's some serious independence 
it's crazy how much they think we care about what our "listening age" is 