All up, it looks like she made about $85,000 from October of 2011 to March of 2012. That's antihistamine money, especially for someone not making pop music. This appears to be unambiguously good news for independent artists.
It's antihistamine money because it's nothing to sneeze at
What algorithm do you use for your amazing extrapolation based on one data point?
It's like saying a $1M exit for a random startup is unambigiously good news for all startups. What if the startup took an investment of $2M? What if the founders lost money and are now stuck in a low paying job? What looks good on the surface could very well be bad news if you know all the facts.
People use these services the same they would as if they owned the music. It is possible that total lifetime revenue from these services could be higher, but I doubt it.
Right now, though, it's still easy to think of Spotify in the way Keating suggests: As a form of advertising first and foremost.