I don't see how 1 is an issue when Alex Jones et al were deliberately spreading hateful misinformation. Aiming to CYA by booting someone off of a private platform and others following suit is not the same thing as "conspiring to censor" someone
It's not an issue if you happen to agree this time. Next time you might not. And then it's too late, you've made your bed.
What does this even mean? Are you suggesting a private company should be forced to host content they don't want to? Should Fox News be forced to host Rachael Maddow and a Huffpost show? Is Fox News "censoring" Huffpost by not hosting a show on their network?
What is a government but a corporation that owns land and has a military? Why would you bar the government from impinging on free speech, but give nearly unbounded power to corporations to expand and snuff out free speech? If Google owned nearly everything, should we not be upset when they negate our rights?
The difference is the monopoly on the use of force. The government can legally send men with guns to make you comply, while a corporation can't.
Corporations might not be able to legally detain or use traditional force against people, but they can coerce and threaten people's livelihoods. Exile is an effective means of getting compliance.
I agree with JRE leaving YouTube over the censorship but I disagree with him moving exclusively to spotify for following reasons: 1. Spotify was the one who conspired with Facebook, Apple and Google to ban Alex Jones and others. So if Joe is moving off of YouTube because he doesn't like the censorship, he's not getting anything better with Spotify. 2. Currently, Spotify doesn't have video (except album cover clips wh…
Alex Jones being kicked off those services isn't the same thing. He was spreading major misinformation and targeted harassment at innocent people that were involved in a tragedy. He wasn't "conspired" against. They just told him to go host his hate somewhere else. And stop with these "censorship" BS. Alex Jones has every right to start his own network if he wants and put anything on it. There's nothing stopping him f…
If you were born an average American male and you trained your whole youth (and I mean really trained) to be the best basketball player you could be, you wouldn't ever beat Lebron James but you'd beat a lot of elite women basketball players. The physical gifts bestowed upon you by your mom would give you the advantage
We just don't have any evidence of that. Like I said in a previous post, we are in the second decade of this being allowed. Where are all the world class transgender athletes that are dominating men on a routine basis? People always point to the same 2 or 3 examples while acting like this is a widespread epidemic of men deciding to switch genders just to win athletic competitions. I don't think this is as big of a pr…
American males are an average of 5½ inches taller [1], which is an extreme advantage in Basketball [2]:
> Empirically, the over-representation of extremely tall athletes in basketball lends credence to the theory that the sport provides tall players with a very significant advantage. The average American male is 5 ft 9.3 in (1.76 m).[18] Yet, in a 2007-08 player survey, the average player in the National Basketball Association (NBA) is listed at 6 ft 7 in (2.01 m) in shoes.
The average male is either taller or within a couple of inches of the top female Basketball players [3].
Article really goes out of its way to let you know why you're supposed to hate Joe Rogan... I think it's probably a good move for his bank account but will piss off a lot of his fans. I casually follow him on Youtube, just watching clips mostly but occasionally full interviews. I never use Spotify for spoken word or video---and I probably won't follow him there.
I listen to his podcast all the time both audio and video versions on YT and I dont see what the big deal is, so I open spotify instead of youtube and click JRE.
Rogan makes tens of millions a year with the podcast ad revenue alone. I’ll make an educated guess his family is eating fine.
He has a $5M house in the LA Hills.. I think "doing the right thing for his family" means "buying a vacation home in Jackson Hole" or something by now.. https://www.thetravel.com/joe-rogan-house-bell-canyon-califo...
Unfortunate to see in the discussion that Americans are so disturbed by one Alex Jones that there seems to be an eagerness to empower quasi-government entities to a dystopian, Orwellian degree.
If I wanted to create more Alex Jones characters, this is one way to guarantee it.
Why is this sad? To me it illustrates that there is a lot of value in Spotify as a delivery mechanism and that the existing channels are not working. If anything it should inspire creative new solutions to the issue.
The main problem is Spotify isn't a podcast app. I don't listen to music like I do podcast, and I don't want my queue there because music would mix in, and it can easily reset. Also, most "real" podcast app have better playback options. I want to be able to see chapters, and skip silence, but forcing to use Spotify for an open format is bad for everyone. Podcasts are great because they are open, and give you choices…
This is exactly how I feel. I like having separate apps for separate types of content. If I reach the point of having to listen to my podcasts on Spotify, I'm going to start paying someone else for music instead.
> By any mainstream definition... Rogan has millions of downloads month and had at least one presidential candidate appear for an interview. Joe is one of the people who sets the mainstream definition.
Joe Rogan doesn't move culture by himself. It doesn't matter how many presidential candidates he talks to, he has had multiple guests on his show that have already been kicked off mainstream platforms like Twitter, Youtube, and Facebook. I guarantee there will be controversy for Spotify if Rogan continues to have on this type of guest in the future.
Uhh... no. The reality is YouTube, Twitter and Facebook's censorship do not actually line up with mainstream. People _know_ Alex Jokes is mental, but they still want to hear him talk.
Alex Jones is a much less serious threat then 2 or 3 large companies deciding what can discourse can be promulgated. (not a Jones supporter. nor can I imagine how anyone would be)
Battles over freedom of expression have nearly always occurred at the boundary of the vile: see the obscenity battles over the rap group 2 Live Crew [0], or Chomsky's vociferous defense for the right of Europeans to express Holocaust denial [1], despite he himself finding those views to be inaccurate and repugnant. It's a simple formula: Take the most awful idea you can imagine, that any reasonable person would also…
“despite he himself finding those views to be inaccurate and repugnant”
If only that were true. Most people who look into this are dumbfounded at Chomsky’s support of Faurisson—not just his right to speak, but his insistence that we take this holocaust-denying nutjob’s “research” seriously.