Some Last.fm users recently discovered that the song “Fancy” by Artemas isn’t showing up in their profiles—even though they’re listening to it on connected platforms. This has sparked talk of censorship on Last.fm, since the scrobbles (recorded plays) for this track seem to be getting blocked on purpose. Let’s dive into what Last.fm officially says about this issue, what the community is buzzing about, past cases of similar incidents, and even some tech workarounds to dodge this “censorship.”
The Official Story: Last.fm’s Spam Filter in Action
Last.fm has admitted in their support forums that some songs don’t get scrobbled because of an automatic spam filter. For “Fancy” by Artemas, it looks like the problem is tied to the title of the release—it includes the word “xvideos.” Users and moderators have explained that Last.fm “doesn’t want” certain terms in song metadata, likely to prevent spam or inappropriate content. In plain language, the system mistakenly flags “xvideos” as a red flag, even though it’s just part of the song’s artistic concept.
To fix this, Last.fm uses a whitelist process. That means if a legitimate song gets blocked, users can report it to support so the song can be manually approved. In a forum post, a user mentioned that Last.fm eventually added the problematic release to the whitelist, hinting that they’re working on letting the song’s plays show up normally. So, while Last.fm isn’t denying the block, they explain it as an automated anti-spam measure that can be corrected on a case-by-case basis.
What the Community Is Saying: Forum and Social Media Outrage
The response from the Last.fm community was immediate. Many Artemas fans expressed frustration that their listens to “Fancy” weren’t showing up in their profiles. “Why isn’t this song appearing in my scrobbles?” one confused user asked on the song’s page. As more people confirmed the issue, the mood shifted from confusion to anger. “It’s so annoying… I’m losing my scrobbles,” another fan complained, while someone else demanded, “OMG, someone fix this!” on social channels.
On Reddit and other online forums, the sentiment was the same. Users shared links to the relevant support threads and explained that the issue wasn’t a glitch in Spotify or the scrobbler, but a deliberate decision by Last.fm. On Twitter, some fans even tagged Last.fm asking for an explanation, comparing the situation to outright censorship. One user known as Paradise summed up the general disbelief: “This is the first song I’ve ever not been able to scrobble, WTF!” For many, the idea that Last.fm is essentially “censoring” a legitimate musical release just because of its title feels like a betrayal.
Similar Cases in the Past
Although the block on “Fancy” came as a shock, it’s not the first time Last.fm’s filter has caused issues. There’s a pattern here: songs with titles that include file extensions or generic names often trigger the filter. In the past, Last.fm didn’t scrobble songs labeled “Track 01” or “Unknown” (common when files aren’t properly tagged). There were also issues with tracks that had parts of their file names in the title, like the case of “SVANG.MP3” by Browsing Collection. A Reddit user even pointed out that several songs with names like “Track1” or ending in “.mp3” simply never got scrobbled.
Another odd case involved “Song 9” by Hobo Johnson, which also failed to scrobble for a while. The community later discovered that having a number in the title made the system think it was a placeholder or spam. After enough complaints, a moderator announced that the song was added to the whitelist, and it began scrobbling normally again. Similarly, the song “Hug.m4a” by Japanese band Hitsujibungaku was blocked at first because the “.m4a” looked like a file extension—but once fixed by Last.fm, it started scrobbling without issue. These examples show that Last.fm has been using these automatic filters for years, originally set up around 2015 when they revamped the site. While they claim it’s a preventive measure to avoid erroneous data or potential code injection through metadata, it’s clear that sometimes genuine music gets caught in the crossfire.
How to Bypass the “Censorship”: Tech Workarounds
Until Last.fm fixes the issue officially, users have come up with temporary workarounds so they don’t lose their scrobbles for “Fancy.” One popular tip is to use a manual scrobbler—a third-party tool that lets you edit the song’s metadata before it’s sent to Last.fm. For instance, using services like Open Scrobbler or other apps, you can simply remove the word “xvideos” from the album field when submitting the scrobble. One user even confirmed that by changing the album name to just “Fancy” (dropping “xvideos”), the song was successfully scrobbled.
Another technical fix, especially for those playing local files, is to edit the MP3’s ID3 tags. In other words, change the album name on the file itself (say, to “Fancy (single)”) before playing it, so that the scrobbler doesn’t see the banned term. If you’re streaming from platforms like Spotify, however, this isn’t an option—so the manual scrobbler route is your best bet.
Lastly, the community strongly suggests reporting the issue to Last.fm support to speed up the process. Many users have already shared the support thread link to demand that the song be whitelisted. The idea is that if enough people report the problem, the staff will be more likely to fix it quickly. While it might take a few days or even weeks, collective feedback has often led to such issues being resolved.
Personal Take: When Protection Turns into a Frustration
This whole “Fancy” episode really makes you question if Last.fm is striking the right balance between protecting their platform and giving users a smooth experience. On one hand, it makes sense that Last.fm wants to avoid spammy or garbage data in its records. An automated filter can help keep things clean, preventing thousands of fake plays from messing up the stats. But when that filter ends up blocking legit music—like a cool, experimental release by Artemas—it starts feeling more like censorship.
In my view, Last.fm should tweak these mechanisms so they don’t penalize genuine art and loyal listeners. Maybe smarter filters that can tell the difference between a suspicious file name and a creative title are in order, or at least a heads-up to users when their scrobbles are blocked. The anger and disappointment from the community—like the exasperated “don’t do this to me, why isn’t it scrobbling?!”—show that a lack of transparency only makes things worse. If Last.fm explained, “Hey, this song wasn’t scrobbled because it contains a term flagged by our filter,” users would at least understand what’s going on and know how to fix it.
At the end of the day, the “Fancy” debacle is a classic clash between automated security and user control. Sure, Last.fm has every right to keep its database clean, but that shouldn’t come at the expense of genuine music. For fans of Artemas, this isn’t just a minor glitch—it feels like a personal slight. And while community workarounds help in the short term, Last.fm ultimately needs to step up its game and communicate better with its users.
No comments:
Post a Comment