Is different than when Howard Stern signed to Sirius XM? Seems like there is some precedence.
Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
341–350 of 781 posts
Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
#342The way I see it, some positives to come out of this:
-Will be fun again to hear "Jamie pull that up" and actually be able to see the content in question on video without any awkwardness.
-Competition for Youtube is needed. This is a massive channel moving ship, may lead others to follow.
-Having controversial guests/topics won't be such a big deal (Assuming Spotify is less beholden to advertisers than youtube because of its premium memberships - for now)
-A smaller audience is not a such a bad thing for Joe, esp if $ is still guaranteed in this exclusive deal. Slightly less eye balls on him, and in turn, less social responsibility, scrutiny and pressure from pseudo justice warriors.
Negatives:
-Exclusivity is in itself a form of censorship. Spotify is yet another company silo that relies on a proprietary ecosystem and pay-walling content.
-You may have to sit through 20 spotify ads in a 3hr podcast (if you don't have premium). Or worse, maybe spotify is not even available in your country.
-Sets a bad precedent, especially given that JRE was always at the forefront of promoting accessibility and openness. This is a move in the other direction, supporting a pay walled, ad-infested solution that is known to underpay artists. A platform that Joe himself was criticizing heavily just a year or two ago...
Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
#343Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
"Alex Jones has every right to start his own network if he wants" Ah, the tired old "start your own Google / Facebook / Twitter / YouTube" trope. That can't be too hard /sarc Why is delegating (effective) censorship to Big Tech suddenly a good idea?
Ah, the tired old "everyone is owed access to every platform in America" trope.
Think of "Youtube" as "CBS/NBC/Network of your Choice". They don't have to produce/host any content they don't want. They should be very transparent about how they choose their content (and "not going to piss off our users" is as legitimate as any other reason) but that's all the consumers are owed.
Do I want Youtube or whomever controlling things? No. Do I understand that unless you want to pass some laws dictating them a different utility status than they currently have they're going to be in control of their own platforms? Yes. Does it just so happen that I'm fine with Alex Jones being de-platformed? Yup
Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
#344Earlier quoted context omitted.
People born as men who transition to women, and I fully support them, have unfair advantages against people born as women. Would you agree with that statement? A better solution would be to allow a gender-agnostic bracket alongside women and men, where anyone can compete. To people downvoting me: Please use the upvote/downvote as marking my contribution relevant or irrelevant, not to mark disagreement. PS: I fully su…
The part of that first statement that I question is the "unfair" part. Almost all world class athletes are born with a natural gift that most of us don't have. Most of those athletes need to train and hone that gift over decades to be truly elite, but that natural gift is still present. No matter how many hours I train playing basketball and no matter how long Lebron James goes without touching a basketball, I am nev…
Rogan is happy for people born female to complete in male sports just not the other way around.
You can't discount how unfair it would be for women to compete against people who have lived for years with high testosterone levels.
Maybe we need a new non gendered sports category where athletes are free to take any hormones they wish. That might be fair. But may cost the athletes their health.
Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
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...
What the heck. That's quite modest.
Hmm.. maybe by certain definitions of the word.. 9,000sq ft. 6 bed/9 bath..
https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/47-Dapplegray-Rd-Bell-Can...
Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
#346Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Are you aware that high school boys soccer and hockey teams are competitive with elite, world class women's teams? Do you think the advantages that men appear to have are anywhere near fully erased by transitioning genders? You are exaggerating with that first claim. It is in no way common for high school male athletes to be competitive against world class female athletes. Secondly, the advantage that men have is ce…
> I am perfectly willing to admit that my primary motivation here is the acceptance of transgender people. I don't know what to tell you if you don't prioritize that over the sanctity of the outcome of some high school girls soccer game. Here's the problem (aside from deriding something a lot of average people care deeply about): you are forcing these two things to be in conflict, when they simply aren't to most peop…
Banning trans women from competing in sports it telling them they aren't "real" women. The societal repercussions of that are much larger than the outcome of high school athletics (and this issue is almost always about high school athletics and below). I fundamentally don't understand arguments to the contrary.
For the record, I care deeply about sports. I think it is fundamental part of both our culture at large and the education of a lot of people. You can dig deep into my comment history on HN and see I regularly defend the importance of sports to the usually derogatory "sportsball" comments that are common in intellectual and technological communities like HN. I just don't think the outcome of specific games is important enough to justify further ostracizing a group of people who are already incredibly marginalized.
Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
#347Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You are exaggerating with that first claim. It is in no way common for high school male athletes to be competitive against world class female athletes. They're not though. https://www.reddit.com/r/sports/comments/3ceeih/the_us_mens_...
The US Men's U-17 team is not a high school team. It is a team made up of world class athletes who are high school aged. That is a huge distinction. You are saying a team a world class men can beat a team of slightly older world class women. That isn't surprising.
The US women's team is best in the world, US men's team doesn't even come close to being best 20 teams in the world. They are high level athletes but not world class (especially for soccer) by any sorts.
Anyway's here another link: https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/a-dallas-fc-under-15-b...
Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're really going to delegate censorship decisions to big tech? What's classes as "misinformation" should be our choice as consumers, not theirs. Example: David Icke may be a conspiracy theorist, but banning him is one step closer from Alex Jones towards a censorship nightmare. The slippery slope is 10ft behind and we're cruising down at 100 mph.
No we're not, calm down. Alex Jones is riling people up on conspiracy theories that actively do harm in order to make money. What happens if a private company removes him from their platform? … he can still post on his website? This isn't some Orwellian nightmare. A lot of people are trying to figure out how to balance absolute freedom with building a better collective human society. It's messy! People are messy! And…
> Alex Jones is riling people up on conspiracy theories that actively do harm in order to make money.
This is literally what Rachel Maddow did with the Russia conspiracy nonsense.
Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Alex Jones has every right to start his own network if he wants" Ah, the tired old "start your own Google / Facebook / Twitter / YouTube" trope. That can't be too hard /sarc Why is delegating (effective) censorship to Big Tech suddenly a good idea?
I mean, in general - yeah. But Alex Jones? I've personally launched a few streaming video platforms for audiences within the same # of listeners as AJ's demo - with far less money than AJ has. It's actually not that big of a deal to load an MP4 into a tag, turns out.
> It's actually not that big of a deal to load an MP4 into a tag, turns out.
Kind of a big deal if you can't host that MP4 somewhere? If Google/Twitter/Facebook/etc. don't want your stuff ... chances are Amazon doesn't want to host it either. Even if you stand up your own hardware, you're at the mercy of whatever company is providing you the internet connection.
Free speech as a principle isn't about hearing stuff you like. It's about hearing stuff you don't like. That's where the tolerance part of it comes in. When you're tolerating something, it means you're putting up with it even if you don't like it.
And it's not about the law. Yeah, they can do whatever they want since they're private entities. It's about what values we choose to uphold as a society.
Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
#350Earlier quoted context omitted.
No we're not, calm down. Alex Jones is riling people up on conspiracy theories that actively do harm in order to make money. What happens if a private company removes him from their platform? … he can still post on his website? This isn't some Orwellian nightmare. A lot of people are trying to figure out how to balance absolute freedom with building a better collective human society. It's messy! People are messy! And…
> Alex Jones is riling people up on conspiracy theories that actively do harm in order to make money. This is literally what Rachel Maddow did with the Russia conspiracy nonsense.
It doesn't count when the popular side does it.
/s