21–30 of 328 posts
"Warning, the following content may offend some listeners and contain factual inaccuracies. The content presented does not represent the views of blah blah"
Would help
Certainly, I appreciate Facebook's "Sensitive Content" screen, and wish it was used more widely on content.
https://www.presscouncil.org.au/document-search/adj-1783/
> The publication said the word “epidemic” is appropriate when reporting the exponential increases in those attending gender clinics and the term “social contagion” is an accepted term in social science and was taken from areas such as anorexia and suicide attempts, and where its relevance to adolescents, attitudes and behaviors is widely documented
Adjudication:
> However, the Council considers there is public interest in vigorous public debate particularly when it concerns submissions made to a parliamentary inquiry. The Council considers that to the extent there was offence and distress it was justified in the public interest.
Identity politics will destroy our country. Whatever happened to freedom of thought? Shameful
> Identity politics will destroy our country The idea of “our country” is , fundamentally, an expression of identity politics. Your disagreement is with other’s choice of primary identity, not with “identity politics” generally.
Identity politics will destroy our country. Whatever happened to freedom of thought? Shameful
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts. Rogan is mostly an opinion guy but he has spread covid disinformation and hosted guests like Alex Jones who say things like Sandy Hook was staged. That's not harmless self-expression. Spotify is under no obligation to host anyone's content and certainly not required to pay $100M for content that is detrimental to society.
Regarding your point about "harmful to society" I would argue that there are plenty of individuals (not myself) who would claim vulgar lyrics or promotion of drug use is "harmful to society" but I don't see those individuals having a voice and trying to cancel and deplatform those ideas.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think Rogan needs Spotify’s money. If he continues as before with zero changes then it’s on Spotify to send the message to all potential partners wether they will be free to be themselves or if they will be censored. I’m sure Spotify’s shareholders will have a lot to say if editorial/censorship decisions reflect negatively on the bottom line. Side note: it’s amazing to me we’re even having the discussion of c…
>Imagine what Spotify’s staff would do if they tried to land one of the biggest conservative podcasters? Bawl their eyes out and chant protest mantras outside of their office building?
If I work for a bank and I find out they have predatory lending (and I had the luxury of being in demand), I'd likely threaten to quit unless that was changed. We see similar things with companies all over the US and it's not usually seen as employees "bawling their eyes out and chanting mantras".
Seems that because this particular instance involves some LGBTQ folks, you assume they're just walking around crying constantly...
In reality this will happen the same way every work place dispute has happened for the last hundred years. Spotify can either tell their employees "sorry, we're keeping it as-is, you can turn your badge in if you are against this decision" or find their employees too valuable and find some middle ground with JRE.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts. Rogan is mostly an opinion guy but he has spread covid disinformation and hosted guests like Alex Jones who say things like Sandy Hook was staged. That's not harmless self-expression. Spotify is under no obligation to host anyone's content and certainly not required to pay $100M for content that is detrimental to society.
He has guests from all spectrums, I believe it's healthy to listen to all sides and debate them on their merits. Regarding your point about "harmful to society" I would argue that there are plenty of individuals (not myself) who would claim vulgar lyrics or promotion of drug use is "harmful to society" but I don't see those individuals having a voice and trying to cancel and deplatform those ideas.
One could easily argue that Joe does in fact not debate many of his guest and instead allow them to use his show as a platform if they so desire.
> Regarding your point about "harmful to society" I would argue that there are plenty of individuals (not myself) who would claim vulgar lyrics or promotion of drug use is "harmful to society" but I don't see those individuals having a voice and trying to cancel and deplatform those ideas.
Those individuals are still alive and loud depending on where you live.
Identity politics will destroy our country. Whatever happened to freedom of thought? Shameful
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts. Rogan is mostly an opinion guy but he has spread covid disinformation and hosted guests like Alex Jones who say things like Sandy Hook was staged. That's not harmless self-expression. Spotify is under no obligation to host anyone's content and certainly not required to pay $100M for content that is detrimental to society.
Spotify isn’t obligated it chosen too, those employees can either do their job or find another one.
I’m curious what his contract with them stipulates on these matters. As for the employees, they could contact Rogan and either ask to come on the show to discuss what they find so offensive. Joe will talk to anyone, let them have their say and explain their point of view. Arguing to censor his episode history only sends the message that Spotify isn’t a platform for intellectual curiosity and free speech.
Does Spotify market itself as those things?
Identity politics will destroy our country. Whatever happened to freedom of thought? Shameful
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts. Rogan is mostly an opinion guy but he has spread covid disinformation and hosted guests like Alex Jones who say things like Sandy Hook was staged. That's not harmless self-expression. Spotify is under no obligation to host anyone's content and certainly not required to pay $100M for content that is detrimental to society.
Many people would consider[0] (not without zero justification) that Sanders is the most prominent USA representative of an ideology that has killed more people in the last century than any other ideology.
Do you really want to go down the path of mutual assured cancellation?
[0] no, I am not saying Sanders is a homicidal maniac, just in case people want to take that inference.