Deezer vs Spotify vs Apple Music editorial Compared
Deezer vs Spotify vs Apple Music editorial
Deezer, Spotify and Apple Music dominate editorial playlist placement, but the competition, team structure and strategic value differ significantly. Understanding how each platform operates — and where editorial gatekeepers are most accessible — changes how you build a pitching calendar and allocate resources across the three services.
| Criterion | Spotify Editorial | Deezer Editorial |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial team size and visibility | Spotify employs hundreds of editorial staff across multiple regions, with publicly listed curators, genre leads, and playlist managers visible on industry platforms | Deezer's editorial team is significantly smaller and operates with minimal public visibility; curator names and structures are rarely published, making contact research time-intensive |
| Pitch competition and inbox saturation | Spotify editorial inboxes receive thousands of pitches daily, making unsolicited submission acceptance rates extremely low; established relationships are essential | Deezer playlists receive far fewer pitches proportionally, meaning your submission is less likely to be buried and may receive actual consideration even from cold outreach |
| Playlist reach and listener engagement quality | Spotify's top editorial playlists (RapCaviar, Today's Top Hits, New Music Daily) deliver millions of streams; listener quality is high and engagement data is industry standard | Deezer playlists generate solid listener volume in core markets (France, Belgium, Brazil) but lower visibility in UK; listener loyalty is strong but stream volume is lower than Spotify equivalents |
| Geographic editorial strength | Spotify maintains equal editorial weight across all major markets including UK, US, and Europe; UK editorial team has dedicated resources and regional autonomy | Deezer editorial operations centre on France and Brazil; UK presence is minimal with editorial decisions often made at international level rather than localized curation |
| Pitch tool usability and data feedback | Spotify for Artists provides pitching access, playlist analytics, and pitch status updates; interface is clear and feedback loops are documented within the platform | Deezer for Creators lacks equivalent pitch functionality; submission processes vary by territory and feedback on rejected pitches is minimal, creating uncertainty on positioning |
| Editorial playlist turnover and refresh rates | Spotify refreshes major editorial playlists weekly, with consistent slot additions; this frequent rotation creates ongoing placement opportunities but requires sustained pitching | Deezer playlists update less frequently; placements are less fluid but once secured, retention rates tend to be longer, reducing need for constant re-pitching |
| Regional playlist depth and specialisation | Spotify operates tiered editorial playlists by genre and sub-genre with extensive regional variants; UK has dedicated rock, hip-hop, pop, and emerging artist playlists at multiple levels | Deezer's editorial playlist structure is less granular; genre-specific and emerging artist playlists are fewer, limiting niche placement opportunities for specialist PR campaigns |
| Label and management stakeholder perception | A&Rs and managers universally track Spotify editorial placement as a KPI; playlist inclusion is treated as equivalent to radio play and used in deal negotiations | Deezer placement is rarely requested as a primary objective; it is seen as secondary gain and generates scepticism from stakeholders unfamiliar with the platform's real listener value |
| Relationship-building accessibility for new contacts | Spotify editorial staff are difficult to engage cold; contact directories are limited, and gatekeepers expect established agency credentials or direct label relationships before responding | Deezer editorial contacts are smaller in number but more accessible to persistent outreach; smaller team size can mean faster response times and willingness to discuss pitches with serious agencies |
Verdict
Spotify editorial is the strongest platform for immediate reach and stakeholder credibility, but it is also the most competitive and resource-intensive. Deezer editorial should be treated not as a replacement but as a strategic secondary target, particularly when pitching in core European markets or building long-term listener bases in France and Brazil. For UK-focused campaigns, Deezer offers value as a lower-competition placement opportunity that is less saturated than Spotify and can be won with focused research and direct outreach. Apple Music sits between the two in terms of competition and accessibility, making it an essential third pillar but not the focus of this comparison. The most effective strategy combines Spotify pitching for scale and label credibility with targeted Deezer pitching where the smaller team and lower saturation can deliver actual playlist consideration.
Frequently asked questions
How do you find actual Deezer editorial contacts when they're not publicly listed?
Start by identifying Deezer playlists in your artist's genre, note the playlist descriptions for curator names or team attribution, then cross-reference these on LinkedIn. If direct curator contact fails, contact Deezer's press office or label relations team and ask for genre-specific playlist manager introductions—smaller teams mean they often respond to professional requests. Follow up with direct submission via the Deezer for Creators channel while simultaneously pursuing human contact through your label or distributor relationships.
Is Deezer editorial worth pitching to if the campaign is UK-only?
Deezer is worth pitching for UK campaigns if your artist has growth potential in Europe or you're building catalogue depth across multiple territories. However, if the label or manager has strict UK-focused KPIs, Deezer should be positioned as a secondary play rather than a primary objective—manage expectations upfront. The real value is in campaigns targeting artists with European touring dates, French-speaking audiences, or long-term international growth plans.
What's the realistic timeline for getting an answer on a Deezer playlist pitch?
Deezer editorial response times typically range from 2–4 weeks, versus Spotify's 1–2 weeks when using Spotify for Artists. Because the team is smaller, expect longer initial response but potentially faster follow-up conversations once contact is made. Without a formal pitch tool equivalent to Spotify for Artists, status uncertainty is higher—follow up proactively after 10 business days if you haven't received confirmation.
How do you convince a label that Deezer pitching is worth the effort?
Present Deezer as a non-competitive secondary opportunity where acceptance rates are higher than Spotify, not as a replacement for Spotify pitching. Share listener data from your distributor showing Deezer's active user base in your artist's core markets, and highlight that successful placements reduce pressure on Spotify re-pitching cycles. Frame it as risk-free: if it wins placement, it adds reach; if it doesn't, the label has lost minimal resource compared to Spotify's competitive inbox.
Does Deezer editorial playlist placement translate to measurable stream impact?
Deezer placement does generate measurable impact, but scale differs by territory—expect 50,000–500,000 streams from a solid placement depending on playlist size and listener activity. In core markets like France and Brazil, the impact is higher; in the UK, it's more modest. Track performance through your distributor's analytics dashboard, and use Deezer placements as proof of playlist inclusion for future pitching to other platforms, not as standalone proof of campaign success.
Related resources
Run your music PR campaigns in TAP
The professional platform for UK music PR agencies. Contact intelligence, pitch drafting, and campaign tracking — without the spreadsheets.