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

Spotify sides with Joe Rogan, removes Neil Young’s music

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 116 posts

Re: Spotify sides with Joe Rogan, removes Neil Young’s music

#41

Post by micromacrofoot »

cronix wrote: post #38
NoLinkToMe wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's 'don't like' and then there's 'dangerous anti-scientific medical advice'. Can you appreciate there's a difference?

> dangerous anti-scientific medical advice' That sounds like an opinion. One that lacks substance and likely couldn't actually be proven as stated, but an opinion I'm happy you can express openly. I'm also appreciative of other opinions I hear on Joe's show, and others. Can you appreciate that building up a false dichotomy and then asking someone if they can spot the difference is disingenuous?

This is the same kind of rhetoric Rogan uses to say nothing and make it sound like it's a worthwhile opinion.

Yeah, taking ivermectin to treat covid despite doctor's advice is objectively dangerous... people have actually died trying to take horse de-wormer. Rogan still spreads this nonsense.

You're appreciative of Joe having Jordan Peterson on to ramble about things like "climate doesn't exist"? In the same episode Rogan says it's "weird" to call black people black because they're not dark enough to be considered black technically. You feel like you've gained something from this exchange?

Re: Spotify sides with Joe Rogan, removes Neil Young’s music

#42

Post by micromacrofoot »

johng wrote: post #37
NoLinkToMe wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's 'don't like' and then there's 'dangerous anti-scientific medical advice'. Can you appreciate there's a difference?

What dangerous, anti-scientific medical advice has Joe Rogan given?

Amateur ivermectin ingestion has directly caused people to die.

Rogan's own words:

“This doctor was saying ivermectin is 99 percent effective intreating Covid, but you don’t hear about it because you can’t fund vaccines when it’s an effective treatment,”

This is objectively false.

Re: Spotify sides with Joe Rogan, removes Neil Young’s music

#43

Post by drcongo »

cronix wrote: post #38
NoLinkToMe wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's 'don't like' and then there's 'dangerous anti-scientific medical advice'. Can you appreciate there's a difference?

> dangerous anti-scientific medical advice' That sounds like an opinion. One that lacks substance and likely couldn't actually be proven as stated, but an opinion I'm happy you can express openly. I'm also appreciative of other opinions I hear on Joe's show, and others. Can you appreciate that building up a false dichotomy and then asking someone if they can spot the difference is disingenuous?

> One that lacks substance and likely couldn't actually be proven as stated

https://twitter.com/joerogan/status/6907616035?s=20

Re: Spotify sides with Joe Rogan, removes Neil Young’s music

#44

Post by holbrad »

NoLinkToMe wrote: post #22
nsxwolf wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he expected them to drop Rogan, I think he just did this out of principal, but it really ended up being embarrassing for him. It was an opportunity to hear a collective "Who?" out of the under-50 demographic, and reminded a lot of fans that they hadn't listened to him in many years. It came off like he was shouting his irrelevancy from the rooftops. I hope he gained some sense of satisfaction or peace f…

Had no clue who he was, but I commend him for this principled stance. How he'd have to be embarrassed for me not knowing who he is, I can't fathom. He also doesn't know who I am. I don't think he expected Spotify to cancel Rogan, I do think he expected to raise awareness of Rogan's dangerous and anti-scientific medical nonsense, and he quite succesfully did that, at his own expense. The embarrassment is with Spotify,…

Like most people under 50, I also had no idea who Neil Young was. But I literally took the opposite message away from it.

Spotify did exactly the right thing, not giving into to arbitrary censorship is a principled stance. They should be applauded for that (Though lets not pretend there isn't also a financial motive as well)

I certainly thing Neil Young should be embarrassed. My person opinion of him is now very low.

Re: Spotify sides with Joe Rogan, removes Neil Young’s music

#45

Post by pseudalopex »

cronix wrote: post #33
snowwrestler wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe not; Spotify is famous for how little they pay artists for song plays. Most artists seem to think of it as a marketing channel like radio, not a revenue source.

> Spotify is famous for how little they pay artists for song plays Maybe, but > 60% of Young's streaming revenue comes from Spotify meaning the move is likely to cost him and his record label, Warner Bros[1] So what "little" they paid him was still the majority of what he was making. And I think it will be hard for someone from his genre (1960's/70's) to make a come back. Most people under 35ish-40 have never heard o…

He sold 50% of his music rights for $150 million last year. And he was rich already. His investments should make much more than streaming. He just signed a deal with SiriusXM too.[1] I think he'll be all right.

[1] https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/digital/siriusxm-...

Re: Spotify sides with Joe Rogan, removes Neil Young’s music

#46

Post by cronix »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #41
cronix wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> dangerous anti-scientific medical advice' That sounds like an opinion. One that lacks substance and likely couldn't actually be proven as stated, but an opinion I'm happy you can express openly. I'm also appreciative of other opinions I hear on Joe's show, and others. Can you appreciate that building up a false dichotomy and then asking someone if they can spot the difference is disingenuous?

This is the same kind of rhetoric Rogan uses to say nothing and make it sound like it's a worthwhile opinion. Yeah, taking ivermectin to treat covid despite doctor's advice is objectively dangerous... people have actually died trying to take horse de-wormer. Rogan still spreads this nonsense. You're appreciative of Joe having Jordan Peterson on to ramble about things like "climate doesn't exist"? In the same episode…

> despite doctor's advice

Despite some doctor's advice....

Joe's doctor prescribed him human grade ivermectin, not "horse dewormer." HIS doctor. So HIS doctors advice was to take it, along with monoclonal antibodies, along with vitamins, and other things. He listened to HIS doctor, and recovered, and then told people what HE did. So it's Joe's fault some idiots took horse dewormer after he never mentioned those words? Please show where Joe, actually Joe and not a report of it, once recommended anyone take "horse dewormer" using those words. That was CNN's specific framing and where those words first showed up. They used those words, Joe didn't. Are you aware of that? The first time "horse dewormer" came out of Joe's mouth was in response to CNN's publicly false characterization of what he said.

Haven't heard Jordan's interview yet, but thanks for the heads up. I'm sure there will be something in the 4+ hour interview that I will gain, or will provoke thought, or cause me to go look something up, and some things I don't agree with or learn I was wrong about. Provoking thought is good.

Re: Spotify sides with Joe Rogan, removes Neil Young’s music

#47

Post by holbrad »

NoLinkToMe wrote: post #25
rayiner wrote: post #19

The reaction to Rogan is like the religious right’s reaction to Howard Stern. If you don’t like it don’t listen to his show.

There's 'don't like' and then there's 'dangerous anti-scientific medical advice'. Can you appreciate there's a difference?

'dangerous anti-scientific medical advice' Just a general point, but people really love throwing around "anti-scientific" and other such terms without appreciating that generating accurate scientific knowledge is actually really difficult with a huge amount of disagreement. (Especially in medicine)

It's trivially easy to have two knowledgeable people or groups who have completely opposing views with seemingly strong cases for both.

Re: Spotify sides with Joe Rogan, removes Neil Young’s music

#49

Post by CountDrewku »

chabes wrote: post #26
CountDrewku wrote: post #14

Good. Besides the obvious reason that Rogan draws far more money than washed up Neil, I'm sick of these authoritarians. If you disagree with people then state your opinion and factual objections. This idea that you should whine and cry until they get silenced is getting old. It's one of the most anti-American things I can think of. People are sick of it. Additionally, coming from a dude that based his entire career o…

Authoritarians?

Yep I know this might be hard to understand for people that have been brainwashed into this attitude in the last decade but trying to silence ideas you disagree with is an authoritarian stance. You are on the same wavelength as religious zealots that burn "evil" books when you do this.

Re: Spotify sides with Joe Rogan, removes Neil Young’s music

#50

Post by holbrad »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #42
johng wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What dangerous, anti-scientific medical advice has Joe Rogan given?

Amateur ivermectin ingestion has directly caused people to die. Rogan's own words: “This doctor was saying ivermectin is 99 percent effective intreating Covid, but you don’t hear about it because you can’t fund vaccines when it’s an effective treatment,” This is objectively false.

Ivermectin has widely been used in various countries. You can argue about the actual effectiveness, I think I remember a pre-print study being retracted.

But talking about that doesn't seem to be anywhere near the scale of dangerous public menace and should be banned.

Post reply on HN