Show track album cover image on home page when it is available

[eric-gilbertson]

Show track album cover image on home page when it is available. At times the 'on now' image displayed for a track is of the artist and not the actual album cover, even when the latter is available in discogs. An example of this is the spin for a track from Hot Tuna's Burgers release on 2/21/25 which displayed the discogs image for the band instead of the image for the Burgers release.

[RocketMan]

We show artists as the default as a matter of choice. Human faces create stronger emotional connections, and can evoke feelings of authenticity, making the listening experience more genuine. As well, by showing a variety of faces, we promote diversity and inclusion.

An exception is if the album is in our music library, we show the album cover art if available. These linkages happen automatically if the playlist is built online, but for CSV import, it's a manual process.

To assist in the latter case, I have enhanced the CSV import #505 to do a best-effort match if no tag is supplied. In this way, if the album is in the library and cover art is available, you will see it, even with CSV import.

[eric-gilbertson]

Suggest that you reconsider this policy as it does not make sense, is consistent and it contradicts the display policy used by virtually all other stations that display track visuals. The best way to reinforce the bond between listeners and artists is to display the album cover that the artists choose to represent their work at the time it was released (which oftentimes includes a facial photo). If you still feel that the display of stock artist images is preferable to cover art, then it should be done for all tracks ,rather than making what to the listener is an arbitrary distinction between disks that are contained in ZK and those that aren't.

[RocketMan]

The best way to reinforce the bond between listeners and artists is to display the album cover that the artists choose to represent their work at the time it was released

And you know this how?

If you still feel that the display of stock artist images is preferable to cover art, then it should be done for all tracks ,rather than making what to the listener is an arbitrary distinction between disks that are contained in ZK and those that aren't.

The cover art signals a link to the zookeeper review, whilst artist art is a link to Discogs. If it were ALL artist art, then some links would go to Discogs and others to ZK. THAT would be inconsistent. That's why we make the exception.

Album art is fine when the context is an album (like music reviews). For streams, it's debatable. I've seen radito stations that do it my way, and others do it as you suggest with albums, but in those cases, I note they almost always monetize the albums (e.g., link to Apple Music). We're non-comm. We don't want On Now to look like a music store.

[eric-gilbertson]

And you know this how?

Think about your reaction to a stock photo of a band, e.g. The Beatles versus their album covers, e.g. Sgt. Peppers - most (virtually all?) will have a much stronger reaction to the latter because it is designed to engage you by setting a context in time & style that means far more than yet another band photo. Even decades on people are captivated by album art as evidenced the fact albums are still released with interesting cover art and not a boring stock photo.

The cover art signals a link to the zookeeper review, whilst artist art is a link to Discogs. If it were ALL artist art, then some
links would go to Discogs and others to ZK. THAT would be inconsistent. That's why we make the exception.

This would be far less obtrusive than the current display inconsistencies in the On Now page. The seeming random display of cover art, band photo or an empty div is the white elephant of inconsistencies (as is showing a current photo of a band for a track that was released decades earlier).

We're non-comm. We don't want On Now to look like a music store.

We already have this presentation whenever Zootopia tracks are displayed because they are all from the ZK library. If cover art is so commercial, then we shouldn't show it at all.

[RocketMan]

The Beatles versus their album covers, e.g. Sgt. Peppers - most (virtually all?) will have a much stronger reaction to the latter

You're using what is arguably one of the most iconic album covers of all time to illustrate the value of a typical album cover?!?

In general, the albums we play are not well known. There is no emotional impact.

There are numerous published studies that examine emotional reactions when participants view images of people, as compared to viewing inanimate objects. Even infants show a preference for looking at faces rather than other shapes. This is one reason why KZSU Music prefers images of people, and augments that as appropriate with cover art.

Another key point you're missing is that not all of our airplay is album-orientated. Take Romain's show for example. Classical is released on albums, but the focus is on the performance and the experience, not on the packaging.

Album cover art is fine in the right context, like album reviews on the kzsu home page. That's great, and I applaud that. On Now/Recently Played is a different matter, as it is focused on specific songs.

We're non-comm. We don't want On Now to look like a music store.

We already have this presentation whenever Zootopia tracks are displayed because they are all from the ZK library.

No. The albums in On Now/Recently Played as well as the albums on the kzsu home page link internally to the station's music library. What you are proposing here is that we display album art for albums that are not in our library. In this case, it is not possible to link internally. Where do they link to then? That's the problem. It would be a page of products (albums) that link offsite. A music store. This came up before with the YouTube links; it's implied endorsement. It is not something that we are prepared to do.

As for Hot Tuna/Burgers, the album cover would have been displayed in On Now if it had been linked in the playlist. This has already been addressed in #505.

[eric-gilbertson]

Showing an image that happens to be sourced in publicly available commercial site is not an endorsement of said provider, e.g. the station home page has for years shown links to several social media sites and no one has interpreted this as an endorsement for them. Also, these image links are not links to YouTube. Instead they are links to 'unbranded' Google servers that are used by sites all over the planet (otherwise the web wouldn't work). Finally there are numerous non-commercial sites that could source these images rather than relying solely on discogs.