It’s Monday and we have a new POTUS. It was a long weekend, and a lot of us would love a sunny vacation right now. But for Mark Zuckerberg, that might be a little more complicated than he expected. Check out our piece on why he is suing hundreds of Hawaiians. Have a great, rant-y day!

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Kellyanne Conway: Sean Spicer Used “Alternative Facts”

On his first full day in office, President Donald Trump said during a speech at the CIA headquarters that the media has published false information and “invented” a feud between his team and the intelligence community. That narrative is debatable–Trump himself criticized the CIA and other intelligence agencies just a few weeks ago, calling them “Nazis.”

Trump also claimed that about 1.5 million people attended his inauguration, though aerial photos clearly show it was way less crowded than Obama’s inauguration in 2009. Sean Spicer went so far as to say that Trump’s inauguration had the largest audience ever, “both in person and around the globe.” That claim has also been debunked. But when NBC’s Chuck Todd asked Kellyanne Conway on Sunday why the new president and his press secretary made false statements on their first day in office, her answer was even more baffling. “Sean Spicer, our press secretary, gave alternative facts,” she said.

“Alternative facts are not facts. They are falsehoods,” Chuck Todd tells Pres. Trump’s counselor Kellyanne Conway this morning. WATCH: pic.twitter.com/Ao005dQ13r

— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) January 22, 2017

Todd pointed out that “alternative facts” really means claims that are “not true.” But that didn’t stop the people of Twitter from coming up with some of their own “alternative facts.”

Me: Hi, SAT Board, I need you to change my test scores. I didn’t get the questions wrong. I provided #alternativefacts @MeetThePress

— Jenni Tilton-Flood (@jtiltonflood) January 22, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: January 23, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

How would you feel about a music streaming service with CD quality sound, video and editorial content, full offline capabilities, and exclusive tracks from your favorite artists? Sounds amazing, right? But is it worth ditching your free Spotify account for a $20-a-month fee? Rapper and business mogul Jay Z thinks that it is, and has enlisted a crew of Illuminati grade artists to back him.

The new music streaming website Tidal, also known as TidalHiFi, promises to revolutionize the music industry by becoming the first “artist owned” music streaming platform of its kind. That sounds like a great way to solve some of the problems artists have with the music industry, like getting next to nothing for music royalties. But it’s not solving a problem for consumers–it’s creating one. Tidal subscriptions will end up costing listeners $20 for high-definition streaming and $10 for regular quality, with no free ad-supported option.

The fact of the matter is that music listeners don’t want to pay for music, especially when they can easily get it for free. Spotify, which is the current leader in online streaming, attempted to solve that problem by starting out with a free ad tier in its service that allows listeners to enjoy their music mixed with ads first before deciding whether or not to upgrade to the premium benefits of its subscription version, which costs $10. That worked for Spotify, but with no free version to entice listeners, convincing anyone to pony up $20 for Tidal is a tough sell.

One thing Tidal does have working for it is a list of top names in the music industry invested in it, including Nicki Minaj, Beyonce, Daft Punk, Rihanna, Kanye West, Madonna, Alicia Keys, and Taylor Swift. Convincing Swift to come back to online streaming is impressive, especially after the singer famously broke up with Spotify last year over a disagreement with how artists on the site are compensated. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, she stated “valuable things should be paid for.” Tidal’s plan to offer a few exclusive tracks is nice, but still not a huge selling point. If Tidal were somehow able to make it so people could only listen to music from these artists on its site, they would really be getting somewhere.

You can watch some of the platform’s celebrity supporters below in Tidal’s press conference:

Not every artist supports the new platform. Singer Lily Allen was pretty vocal about her apprehension by voicing her first impressions of the site in a series of tweets that posed some valid concerns. Allen writes:

i LOVE Jay z so much, but TIDAL is soon expensive compared to other perfectly good streaming services, he’s taken the biggest Artists

— lily (@lilyallen) March 30, 2015

made them exclusive to TIDAL (am i right in thinking this ?), people are going to swarm back to Pirate sites in droves

— lily (@lilyallen) March 30, 2015

sending traffic to torrent sites. up and coming (not yet millionaires) artists are going to suffer as a result.

— lily (@lilyallen) March 31, 2015

Making content exclusive to Tidal may in fact push people only interested in hearing these artists’ music for free back to pirating sites as an alternative, which would make all artists suffer. While Jay Z’s idea sounds cool, I’m not convinced it will somehow revolutionize the music industry. A greater quality music experience is definitely something to strive for, but it’s also important to keep in mind consumers’ desires and not just artists’ pockets.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Tidal: Music Industry Revolution or Expensive Setback? appeared first on Law Street.