waxahatchee needs to be bigger than everyone else mentioned in this article, and kanye, taylor, drake and so many others. a once in a generation talent.
this literally is the worst comparison. nazis believe in the literal extermination of the Jewish race. we’re not talking about political ideologies and their downstream ramifications which sometimes result in people dying. stop arguing for the sake of arguing.
OSU said “have you ever taken a course in philosophy?” - it seems like responding with “i have a bachelors degree in political philosophy” is an appropriate response. and saying that using genocide as a tool to advance a philosophy, doesn’t merit the use of philosophical tools or discussion because someone who has experience in using those tools and having those discussions, and has never seen that be demonstrated is probably also an appropriate response. you are literally making this something it is not - which you seem to do a lot.
furthermore - yes. someone with training and education in a particular study or practice is 1000% of the time more competent than someone else in that field of study or practice. stop positing stupid assertions.
are you following what i’m saying here correctly? i was responding to osu’s comment that studying ideologies that use genocide is important for philosophical discussions. i’m using my degree to demonstrate that it does not - not that i’m right and he’s wrong. discussing exterminating a race is not necessary to have a philosophical discussion for fucks sake my god.
a company’s domicile/principal place of business doesn’t protect them from violating another jurisdictions laws when they operate them. my god i can’t believe i needed to state that to someone.
all the companies you named are not private companies. they are publicly traded companies whose entire motive is to increase the price of their shares for profit. seems like you’d understand this.
taking someone’s platform away is not silencing someone. in a democracy, good ideas rise to the top, and big tech’s platforms aren’t needed for good ideas to promulgate. in fact, big tech has a profit motive for good ideas to proliferate. you are forgetting that things that are bad/harmful, ultimately hurt big tech in the long run.
i think you’re forgetting one important fact that Spotify is a publicly traded company, whose shareholders have the ability to voice their opinion on any matters of the Company. I do not think it is a stretch that there is a wide crossover of spotify users that are also stereogum commenters, and if they don’t like the idea of Rogan giving airtime to people who have questionable theories on something (and this extends to things beyond COVID) and it could get in the way of them enjoying unlimited streaming at a low price, then they have that right. if anybody has actual shares in this publicly traded company, than they have even more of a right.
Second, this isn’t really censorship either, where a moderating party (whether it is the corporate oversight, or an external third-party) is prohibiting someone from sharing information. additionally, Rogan may be prefacing himself with his “i’m just an idiot so don’t listen to me” nonsense, he’s giving air time to people under the veneer of “experts” which has been a trick of media corporations since the beginning of time to spread information that is of use to them. while i can’t see what spotify has to gain from covid misinformation, they clearly have seen the profit motive in spreading conspiracies, which covid-misinformation is.
lastly- i think you’re conflating misinformation with the criticism of govt policy. what’s happening in Canada is a reaction to what is seen as overreach of govt to free trade and commerce. this is completely different than sowing doubt over effective treatments to a disease causing a pandemic, and conspiring that the government is actually the cause of it.
i have a bachelors degree in political philosophy, and i can assure you that ideologies that use genocide as a tool to achieve their goals serve no purpose in philosophical study and discussion.
do yourself a favor and google “metaphor”. this also is not compelled speech, either - nobody is forcing someone to speak a certain way.
i assure you, that a corporation isn’t silencing anyones ability to speak freely here. is spotify holding a gun to Rogans head and saying “you must podcast Joe! and you must speak freely!” no - they are giving him 100 million dollars to do it.
if someone doesn’t want a corporation to moderate what they say - you don’t enter a relationship with the corporation - it’s as simple as that.
if i used your same logic - prove to me that the COVID-19 pandemic isn’t a scheme by George Soros to take over the world. you can’t. that is why Joe Rogan will continuously be able to say whatever the fuck he wants regardless of the harm it causes to people. How are the conspiracy theories that Alex Jones peddled any different?
i actually think it is pretty easy to quantify the damage Rogan is doing versus Carlson. I don’t see Tucker getting 100 million dollar podcast deals, or becoming the face of an anti-vax movement. also - don’t forget that Rogan’s podcast, which has always peddled conspiracy theories ranging from the innocuous to the harmful, pre-existed shows like Carlson’s. in fact - i think Fox News and others look at JRE as proof in concept that reporting conspiracy theories as news is worthwhile and bankable.
and while i agree with you that my assertion that JRE caters to conservatives maybe a little off, i would say that JRE has done a pretty great job at bringing a lot of conservatives into his tent since the beginning of the pandemic. he often talks about hunting wild game, reverence and glorification of the military, and is extremely anti-govt (despite supporting policies like UBI, as you’ve pointed out) which are all things conservatives traditionally value. i’m sure there are a lot of people all across the political spectrum that listen to JRE, but to say that he doesn’t have large numbers of conservatives in his audience is naive.
Have we all forgotten about rocket pizza already? are we getting to a point where people should just be permitted to say whatever they want, regardless of its veracity, because people can decide whether it’s “dangerous” or not? do well have to reduce this conversation to the walking onto a plane and shouting that person has a bomb scenario, again?
what people seem to not understand in this entire ordeal is that joe rogan and spotify have a profit motive to spread misinformation. why would neil young, and other artists want to be part of a platform, that claims to be a music service, that really doesn’t care as long as they are taking in the money. what neil young said to spotify was - do you care more about music or making money? spotify chose the latter, and neil demonstrates his point further by pointing out the quality of the music on spotify. this isn’t about free speech or giving someone a platform where listeners can make their own decisions about the content they are in taking - i assure you. this is about $ - as it always is.
it’s hilarious how what seems to be the same people who we’re calling for the NFL to kick kap out of the league for exercising his free speech rights dont seem to have the same idea when it comes to spotify - and when that information could potentially be killing people.
so you don’t respect him for giving the middle finger to Spotify too? this isn’t about free speech, it’s about prioritizing $ over peoples lives. spotify is quite literally making hundreds of millions of dollars off of a guy whose saying an anti parasitic medication meant for animals is a better treatment for a deadly disease than a clinically proven vaccine.
i’ve watched a lot of that guys videos, and while i find them interesting, i’m not sure if he’s really moving the discourse forward, or just re-treading it. seems to not be very original. the video dude did on hamilton was hilarious tho.
i don’t like spotify because they steal peoples music and don’t pay them shit, while they make billions of dollars. do your research you fucking moron.
i don’t disagree with your underlying premise that “cultural gatekeepers” should not have undue influence over what “news” gets reported and where. i also agree with you the long term ramifications of shutting down “free speech” is often overlooked. However, i think you are misdiagnosing the problem. There is a problem across all media right now where they are prioritizing $ over peoples lives. This isnt necessarily about free speech or taking away platforms where people can become aware or certain news items. this is about the realization that someone’s rhetoric is dangerous but they don’t care because of the amount of money the guy makes them. and i would argue that future is much much bleaker than any of the things your expressing concern about down the road. 20 years ago, major media wouldn’t have given this any air time, and while i’m not pining for those days, i do wish facebook, spotify, twitter and the like had some fucking spine to not priories profits over people.
Comments