Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal • Hacker News Board

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#421

Post by deanCommie » Wed, May 20, 2020, 3:42 AM UTC

chroma wrote: post #410

GoofballJones wrote: post #283

Earlier 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…

You are conflating two forms of free speech: The right to freedom of speech enshrined in the constitution and the norm of free speech that we all tend to grant each other. Of course YouTube is a private company and can ban and delete whatever they want. But they are breaking a norm and the consequences of that may be worse than the consequences of letting us watch videos of crazy people. I've said it before and I'll…

Sorry, that's not a great analogy.

Are you saying that Alex Jones's views are just ahead of their time and the culture is not ready for it?

I understand that there is one perspective on free speech that says any restriction means that in the future people will abuse it to suppress ANY ideas they disagree with, and I find that this is only true with a very specific type of religious, authoritarian, American, republican voice.

The entire western world bans holocaust denial, and it hasn't led to a chilling effect on other expressions.

Truth is truth. No matter how much some people try to redefine it to be meaningless today, there are still some essential facts. Humanity did go to the moon. The earth is not flat.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#422

Post by eloff » Wed, May 20, 2020, 3:42 AM UTC

chroma wrote: post #410

GoofballJones wrote: post #283

Earlier 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…

You are conflating two forms of free speech: The right to freedom of speech enshrined in the constitution and the norm of free speech that we all tend to grant each other. Of course YouTube is a private company and can ban and delete whatever they want. But they are breaking a norm and the consequences of that may be worse than the consequences of letting us watch videos of crazy people. I've said it before and I'll…

I've been making this point for a while on hackernews, but never so eloquently. Very well put.

Some part of the heterodox ideas of today will invariably be Orthodox in the future. A small fraction of them, mind you, but you impede progress if you enforce the orthodoxy. That's what the church used to do when it had sufficient power.

I noticed that one of the videos removed by YouTube is medcram #71. Which discusses, logically and with citations, treatment results using zinc and hydroxychloroquinine. Surely because the media are quick to paint it as Trump's widely discredited treatment that he was pushing. However, if you dig into the actual studies, they don't support that conclusion, in my opinion. The media jumped on one Veterans study where the treatment was given too late in the disease to make a difference. They never reevaluated their conclusion when other studies contradicted that result, possibly because they badly want Trump to be wrong. So here is one heterodox idea being suppressed potentially to the detriment of all mankind, in our hour of need. Even if you ascribe a very small probability that I'm right on this, you have to admit censorship could be doing us a great harm.

My prediction is this gets down voted to hell because the hn voting system itself not only is a way of suppressing heterodox ideas by moving them down the page and greying them out, but it leans left as well, and I had the gall to defend a thing Trump said. I can't stand Trump for the record, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#423

Post by Marsymars » Wed, May 20, 2020, 3:43 AM UTC

nikivi wrote: post #8

Ben Thompson & James Allworth had a nice discussion recently on the podcasting space and how Spotify is posed to close over this space. https://overcast.fm/+BihnTujyQ Disregarding over all the negatives of centralizing podcast discovery in one place, I would love to pay one fee and get 0 ads on all the episodes. Where the money is then distributed to the podcast hosts I listen to the most (like Spotify does already w…

> Disregarding over all the negatives of centralizing podcast discovery in one place, I would love to pay one fee and get 0 ads on all the episodes. Where the money is then distributed to the podcast hosts I listen to the most (like Spotify does already with music).

This is one aspect of ad-free monetization that I'm not really comfortable with. I value my content for reasons other than "how much of my time they take" - in fact, for a given amount of information, the podcast is more valuable the shorter it is.

I really just want a model where I pay some dollar figure in exchange for each episode or set of episodes (or album or discography for music, etc.) - high-value podcasts are free to set higher fees, and I'll pay more for them.

Basically I want podcasts on Bandcamp, I guess.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#424

Post by danso » Wed, May 20, 2020, 3:43 AM UTC

tomcam wrote: post #348

tyre wrote: post #332

Earlier 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.

Let's go to specifics. Alex Jones is facing a civil suit alleging that he defamed the families of Sandy Hook victims, the harm from which include harassment and death threats from Jones' followers [0]. When you say that Maddow's coverage of Russiagate is "literally" the same: what actual harm – both in layperson's terms and legally actionable – do you see as a consequence? Defamation? Who would be the aggrieved and threatened party? Trump, personally? The U.S. law affords a much higher legal burden for the president of the U.S. (or anyone as public and powerful) to prove defamation.

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/31/alex-jones-p...

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#425

Post by sagichmal » Wed, May 20, 2020, 3:46 AM UTC

Reedx wrote: post #209

jhamilton wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Just because you can apply a rule with one set of nouns and achieve an unjust outcome doesn't mean the rule is bad.

There's no daylight between "we can't restrict shitty speech because one day we might restrict non-shitty speech" and "we can't have laws against bad things because one day we might have laws against non-bad things". It's an obviously stupid argument and it's not any less stupid because the operating verb is speech.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#426

Post by threeseed » Wed, May 20, 2020, 3:46 AM UTC

chroma wrote: post #410

GoofballJones wrote: post #283

Earlier 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…

You are conflating two forms of free speech: The right to freedom of speech enshrined in the constitution and the norm of free speech that we all tend to grant each other. Of course YouTube is a private company and can ban and delete whatever they want. But they are breaking a norm and the consequences of that may be worse than the consequences of letting us watch videos of crazy people. I've said it before and I'll…

> But they are breaking a norm

Media companies selectively choosing what to publish has been the norm since forever.

My local paper won't publish libellous comments I may write against a particular person whom I hold grudge against. And my local TV station wouldn't show a pornographic commercial that I thought would be hilarious to see.

Private media companies ultimately answer to their advertisers and most of them simply don't want to be associated with inflammatory or socially unacceptable content.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#427

Post by brailsafe » Wed, May 20, 2020, 3:48 AM UTC

convery wrote: post #360

brailsafe wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly doubt many are convinced he's educated in any way about his topics lol. Some interviews are just entertaining.

Not to mention that's the entire point of the podcast. Having people on to explain topics he knows nothing about. There's even a meme about how regardless of the topic, Rogans only input is "but have you tried DMT?" or something about chimps =P

Elk, Kettlebells, DMT.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#428

Post by s1artibartfast » Wed, May 20, 2020, 3:48 AM UTC

tinyhouse wrote: post #112

Never understood why his podcast such a hit. I mean, I like the guy, and he's knowledgeable about MMA. But he's not someone I care to listen to on other topics.

Not a big fan but an occasional listener. He covers a wide range of topics and his content is interesting if you have no prior exposure to them. I think many people find his attitude a breath of fresh air in the face of cancel culture.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#429

Post by Marsymars » Wed, May 20, 2020, 3:49 AM UTC

TylerE wrote: post #173

css wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, ads are not the issue. The freedom to listen without being spied on is.

You really think your http requests aren't being "spied on"? Especially since virtually every podcast is served via a CDN.

I download podcasts in bulk by downloading every available episode, and then listening in the offline audio player of my choice. I repeat every year or three when I catch up on a particular podcast. I'm unwilling to give any further information about myself to podcast publishers.

Re: Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal

#430

Post by threeseed » Wed, May 20, 2020, 3:50 AM UTC

eloff wrote: post #422

chroma wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are conflating two forms of free speech: The right to freedom of speech enshrined in the constitution and the norm of free speech that we all tend to grant each other. Of course YouTube is a private company and can ban and delete whatever they want. But they are breaking a norm and the consequences of that may be worse than the consequences of letting us watch videos of crazy people. I've said it before and I'll…

I've been making this point for a while on hackernews, but never so eloquently. Very well put. Some part of the heterodox ideas of today will invariably be Orthodox in the future. A small fraction of them, mind you, but you impede progress if you enforce the orthodoxy. That's what the church used to do when it had sufficient power. I noticed that one of the videos removed by YouTube is medcram #71. Which discusses, l…

It is still a grey area as to whether Youtube is legally responsible for the content it shows.

So given that HCQ kills people in certain situations you can understand why they might be reluctant to allow non-experts to promote its use.