Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spotify reportedly fighting with employees about hosting episodes of Joe Rogan

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 328 posts

Re: Spotify reportedly fighting with employees about hosting episodes of Joe Rogan

#251

Post by whoisjuan »

manquer wrote: post #179
whoisjuan wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But RSS distribution is hard to monetize. That's why a big part of the JRE podcast business model was uploading the videos to YouTube and also create all the highlights and such. But in YouTube they got several videos demonetized, so there's really no escape. This is the distribution problem. If you don't have distribution and rely on others for that you have to play by their rules even if they are ridiculous or brok…

Being on Spotify and being exclusively on Spotify is not the same. Given his reach he can make good money doing commericals within the podcast itself and do perhaps commerical free deal with Spotify. Distribution is not that hard, discovery is hard . Monetization is hard. Distribution is fairly easy today , it is not like 80s or 90s where distribution meant cassette and cd in every retailer. In 2000s the tech was pos…

> Distribution is not that hard, discovery is hard

I think you and I have different definitions of distribution. I'm not talking about being able to "distribute" your content per se. I'm talking about getting enough reach which is a way harder problem.

Just because you can upload videos to YouTube doesn't mean that you will automatically get traffic. Distribution in this context is not only the podcast being able to have content in x or y platform, but rather having prime time treatment so it reaches more audiences.

Re: Spotify reportedly fighting with employees about hosting episodes of Joe Rogan

#252

Post by schwartzworld »

liability wrote: post #133
threeseed wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify has the right to choose what is on their platform. Spotify employees have the right to voice their concerns if the company they work for is alienating them. But I guess that's not the kind of freedom you are interested in.

> But I guess that's not the kind of freedom you are interested in. I do not see a suggestion by anonu that the people they disagree with should be deprived of their freedom. To criticize people for saying something is not the same as saying they shouldn't have the right to say it. That would only be the case if somebody had an absolutely authoritarian mindset. It unnerves me how quick some are to conflate these posi…

> "People shouldn't say mean things" and "People shouldn't have the right to say mean things" are not equivalent statements unless you are an authoritarian.

yup, nothing disingenuous about this analysis.

Re: Spotify reportedly fighting with employees about hosting episodes of Joe Rogan

#253

Post by ithkuil »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #238
dkdk8283 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is completely acceptable. Everyone deserves the chance to talk. You don’t have listen.

No, it’s not. Everyone deserves the chance to talk, but everyone does not deserve to be broadcast to an audience of millions.

But they'll find a way to talk to like minded people; and then you'll be surprised how many of them there are.

BTW, who are those millions you want to protect? Are you afraid otherwise sensible people will be infected by some opinions expressed on media? Isn't this a bit paternalistic?

It's better to fight the enemy in the open field; let's have people talk and show who they are and what they actually mean by what they say. Let's criticize what is wrong with what they say and not just said by somebody that got lumped together in the same camp. Let's have an open a tolerant society, in which intolerance itself is exposed for what it is openly and not given ammunition by being intolerant of any people.

Re: Spotify reportedly fighting with employees about hosting episodes of Joe Rogan

#254

Post by leetcrew »

exogeny wrote: post #138
dkdk8283 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is unfortunate and unacceptable. Joe should have a free and censorship free place to discuss topics. We have lost our minds: the ability to freely and discuss literally any topic was an American staple. Now you don’t dare say something that could potentially offend someone. I could be fired if I said what I really think about some controversial issues and linked it to my identity. That’s not a world I enjoy livi…

Let's say in your heart of hearts that you earnestly thought that, for whatever reason, women couldn't be effective software engineers. If you said that in public, you should be fired because it would immediately call into question your ability to work within your team, your ability to respect your co-workers, and potentially bring negatively adverse financial consequences to your place of work and damage its reputat…

let's say you think capitalism is evil, destroys the environment and the essence of humanity, etc., and you say that in public. wouldn't that also call into question your ability to be an effective employee and work towards the interests of the company? wouldn't we all be very upset if someone got fired over that?

I don't really disagree with your specific example (or that there have always been things that you can't really say in america), but in general it's a shitty way for the world to work. we should seek to change it.

Re: Spotify reportedly fighting with employees about hosting episodes of Joe Rogan

#255

Post by me_me_me »

srtjstjsj wrote: post #241
me_me_me wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a journalistic podcast but casual conversations podcast. He is a comedian afterall. They google things up and Rogan call people on BS when they contradict themselves, but they are not always right and they fall for some BS themselves.

That's no defense. "I'm joking bro" does not justify spreading harmful lies.

Harmful lies, like what exactly?

You have morons out there saying corona is fake and mask are tool of enslavement + the whole Q mess.

Rogan is saying to wear masks and stay healthy. Only think that he is saying wrong is the amount of vitamins to take (he is actually taking too much).

And he has no "I'm joking bro". As a matter of fact he is quite humble and admits when he is wrong. I don't know what you expect him to do? Fact check every minute of 3h conversation?

Look what you did, you roped me into defending podcast I listen to few time a month...

Re: Spotify reportedly fighting with employees about hosting episodes of Joe Rogan

#256

Post by legolas2412 »

asquabventured wrote: post #19
dragonwriter wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Wrong my issue is with the recent liberal trend that a humans race, creed, sexual orientation, religious preference, outward appearance, etc are an individuals defining characteristic. And if you don't conform to the bucket they want to place you based on that identity they have created for you that you will be cancelled. It's extremely polarizing and destabilizing to society.

I'm not very keen on calling that "liberal". For one, it goes against the very definition of liberalism, which covers equality and liberty. No individual should be judged based on factors they don't control. A liberal would not oppose free speech.

But the main reason I disagree with this "liberal trend", which I'd call "leftist trend", is that I disagree with them and identify as a liberal.

Re: Spotify reportedly fighting with employees about hosting episodes of Joe Rogan

#257

Post by kick »

rjkennedy98 wrote: post #212
loopback_device wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have lost our minds: the ability to freely and discuss literally any topic was an American staple. Sex, breasts, swearwords? As far as I can remember the American staple was and is to bleep every fucking thing that could potentially be connected to a nipple.

Bleeping swearwords and sex is about keeping things innocent and appropriate for children. Has nothing to do with censorship. No ideas are discussed when a breast is blacked out.

Censoring words and topics is literally the textbook definition of censorship; are you trying to be dense?

Re: Spotify reportedly fighting with employees about hosting episodes of Joe Rogan

#258

Post by legolas2412 »

4ggr0 wrote: post #198
asquabventured wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong my issue is with the recent liberal trend that a humans race, creed, sexual orientation, religious preference, outward appearance, etc are an individuals defining characteristic. And if you don't conform to the bucket they want to place you based on that identity they have created for you that you will be cancelled. It's extremely polarizing and destabilizing to society.

These things are literally things which define you as a person, though. Of course there's more, but what makes you think that these things don't define a person? I also don't get the "You have to fit in a bucket" theory. What's an example you've experienced?

I guess the point is that a person should not be discriminated based on things they don't control, like race, sex, gender etc.

But the trend being described here is exactly that. Affirmative action, curtailment of free speech etc. Even many diversity initiatives.

It doesn't matter if it discriminates positively, contrary to society's past regressive discrimination. This positive discrimination goes against liberal principles.

Re: Spotify reportedly fighting with employees about hosting episodes of Joe Rogan

#259

Post by jakelazaroff »

ithkuil wrote: post #253
jakelazaroff wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it’s not. Everyone deserves the chance to talk, but everyone does not deserve to be broadcast to an audience of millions.

But they'll find a way to talk to like minded people; and then you'll be surprised how many of them there are. BTW, who are those millions you want to protect? Are you afraid otherwise sensible people will be infected by some opinions expressed on media? Isn't this a bit paternalistic? It's better to fight the enemy in the open field; let's have people talk and show who they are and what they actually mean by what th…

It has been shown over [1] and over [2] and over [3] again that deplatforming is effective. So yes, they'll still find a way to talk to like-minded people, but you're incorrect if you think there will be nearly as many.

You're coming at this based on the idea that everyone is rational and sensible and (re)evaluates their views based on logic. Our brains don't work like that; literally all it takes for someone to warm up to an idea is being repeatedly exposed to it [4], and that's before you even get into things like confirmation bias/pleas to emotion/peer pressure/etc.

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/11/study-finds-reddits-contro...

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/04/technology/alex-jones-inf...

[3] https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/bjbp9d/do-social-media-ba...

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect

Post reply on HN