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

Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 235 posts

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#141

Post by guerrilla »

ch4s3 wrote: post #133
guerrilla wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But no one is forcing them to buy those seeds This isn't true. Those seeds produce fertile plants that reproduce with plants from surrounding farms and farmers are prevented for saving those seeds. I don't know what you mean by "one guy" as they do it all the time in India from what I've read.

> Those seeds produce fertile plants that reproduce with plants from surrounding and farmers are prevented for saving those seeds. This isn't true. While they do cross pollinate, farmers aren't being sued for picking up some stray genes, this is a myth.[1][2] They seem like total assholes, but there's no evidence that they're suing people who are accidentally picking up the roundup ready genes. Every case I could fin…

> Every case I could find where a farmer claims that, they're able to show that the farmer in question intentionally selected those crops, replanted entire fields with those seeds, and were often selling them to neighbors.

As I said, there are many cases in India that it seems you're not aware of [1]. Who would have guessed a multinational corporation would win in court against peasants the world over... It's not just Monsanto either [2].

1. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-monsanto-idUSKCN1P5...

2. https://www.rt.com/news/457812-indian-farmers-pepsico-potato...

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#142

Post by jhorogueon »

tomjakubowski wrote: post #7
assttoasstmgr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It literally mirrors the plot to "Caddyshack": A couple of old, out of touch rich people throwing a tantrum because they have to share a club with a loud gregarious buffoon that's wildly popular with others.

In that analogy, who is the gopher?

Jamie

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#143

Post by baryphonic »

mulmen wrote: post #39
gonehome wrote: post #26

Based on the recent Stratechery Neil Young advocates against GMOs which is the “anti-science” position on that issue. I think independent of my views on Rogan personally this kind of ultimatum to silence someone is just wrong. The free speech position is the principled one. Spotify wouldn’t be in this position if they weren’t trying to aggregate podcast ownership and ruin the open ecosystem anyway. Still, if I were S…

Young and Mitchell pulling their music is literally freedom of speech (free expression). Neil Young can do whatever he wants with his content (speech), just like Rogan. This is competition in the free marketplace of ideas. You're absolutely entitled to your opinion on these actions and you're free to support Spotify or Young or Mitchell or any combination of the three. But there is no "freedom of speech" side here.

> You're absolutely entitled to your opinion on these actions and you're free to support Spotify or Young or Mitchell or any combination of the three. But there is no "freedom of speech" side here.

I'm not sure I agree. Young and Mitchell (how many decades ago were they culturally relevant?) are certainly free to participate on Spotify or not. They certainly cannot be forced to. However, if Rogan were booted from Spotify based on their threats (or others), he would certainly be a loser.

Further, if someone demands a second party take some action against a third party by making a quid pro quo threat, that is not clearly protected speech. If the threat involves revealing defamatory information, it constitutes blackmail; if the threat involves criminal harm, it is extortion; and if the threat involves breach of contract, it may be tortious interference, a civil tort. This is not to argue that Mitchell & Young are committing a crime, because they clearly aren't (though they may possibly be perpetrating a civil tort against Rogan depending on his contractual terms with Spotify and their demands), but that threats are not necessarily protected speech in the same category as merely making–or withholding–personal self-expression.

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#144

Post by gonehome »

eej71 wrote: post #126
pseudalopex wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> None. But no one is making that claim. They did. > But, I will never stand behind people wanting to deny him the exact rights they're exercising. Young and others are doing exactly that.

You are half right! (I didn't write the text you challenged). But I did misread the OP's comments. He does make that claim. Clearly Joe could pull his content if he wanted.

pseudalopex is just being a pedant - op clearly meant that Young can use Spotify and Rogan is not trying to stop that.

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#145

Post by ch4s3 »

sorry_outta_gas wrote: post #130
ch4s3 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nor is opposition to GMO technology an immediate grave threat to public health GMO panic is at the heart of a lot of COVID vaccine refusal, so I think it at least has a somewhat negative effect on public health.

TBH I can't blame people for being weary of GMO in general after the decades of pumping people full or garbage hormones and whatever else it's a trust issue not a "science" one

GMO crops are exactly not "garbage hormones", and people consume them all of the time without complaint. I don't see anyone picketing the yogurt cases in their local super markets. Lot's of hormones survive intact through digestion and can enter the blood stream, but your body doesn't absorb the genetic material of food[1]. DNA is fragile and it's really hard to get foreign DNA into a cell, much less the nucleus. Our cells evolved a lot of specific defenses to prevent that. This is why DNA vaccines are so hard to develop and administer. Conflating things like rbST or rBGH in milk with novel genes in corn is nothing but scientific illiteracy.

TL;DR it's really hard to get DNA into eukaryotic cells (yours) and you definitely can't do that with food.

[1]https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/02/170223102128.h...

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#146

Post by vesinisa »

systemvoltage wrote: post #84
unfocussed_mike wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean in the interests of free speech, artists who you think have an inflated sense of their own importance should necessarily sacrifice their freedom of speech for someone who is parroting dangerous untruths? Pulling their music from Spotify is speech. Why can they _not_ do it? What makes what they are doing a "horrible precedent"?

This needs to be drilled harder: People can express their views until cows come home. Knock yourself out. But, that's precisely what Young is not doing. He wants to silence (and deny the FoS) Rogan. That is the distinction that keeps being ignored in this thread and elsewhere.

Nobody's FoS is under threat here. FoS does not entitle access to a broadcast medium, i.e. Spotify or YouTube. FoS simply means being able to publish your views without government censorship.

If you create your own newspaper, Spotify or YouTube you also control its editorial policy (what gets selected for publication, what gets taken down). But you can not demand that the New York Times, Spotify or Google change their editorial policy to let you publish your views. Access is a privilege, not a right.

What Young is doing here is calling in question Spotify's editorial policy for giving Rogan such a visible position on the platform. He is within his rights to do so. IF Spotify had removed Rogan instead, Rogan would need to find a new publisher but his FoS would not have been violated at any point.

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#147

Post by mmcgaha »

mulmen wrote: post #87
School-Cotton wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course anyone who believes in freedom of speech would agree that Young and Mitchell have the right to pull their music. That doesn’t change the fact that one can disagree with that decision.

> That doesn’t change the fact that one can disagree with that decision. Obviously, but that's not the topic at hand. > I were Spotify the move is to take the free speech position There is no "free speech position". Spotify, Rogan, Young, and Mitchell are all exercising their right to free expression here.

Sure there is; Young and Mitchell have made an active decision to shutdown their own speech or the speech of another. The difference is taking an action against another vs taking an action against yourself.

I am sure that you will agree that determining your own outcome is freedom but forcing an outcome for others is oppression.

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#148

Post by [deleted] »

mulmen wrote: post #51
torstenvl wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps you didn't know, but Neil Young tried to get Spotify to deplatform Joe Rogan (i.e., to cancel his Spotify distribution deal), and used his repertoire as an ultimatum. EDIT: I'm being downvoted to oblivion for stating an objective fact. This is unbecoming of HN. I'm out.

Is he not free to do that? I mean you can agree with it or not but how is that not a perfectly valid thing for a private individual to do? I don't have a philosophical objection to this. Young is saying "I have some number of people who listen to my content and if you want to distribute my content you have to do this thing". Spotify said "no thank you". Where's the problem?

[deleted]

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#150

Post by fortran77 »

unfocussed_mike wrote: post #132
fortran77 wrote: post #47

I like Joni Mitchell and Neil Young. However, if I didn't, I simply wouldn't listen to them. Which is exactly what I do with Joe Rogan. I tried his show, it wasn't for me. It's interesting that Joni Mitchell also promotes controversial and unrecognized medical information, such as "Morgellons Disease" See: https://www.billboard.com/music/music-news/morgellons-diseas... > The 71-year-old singer first discussed her bat…

Just a side note to say that absolutely everyone who claims to suffer from Morgellons Disease, as she at one point did claim, is struggling with significant mental illness and should probably be treated with some kindness on that point. It's not news that Joni Mitchell has had significant mental health challenges in her life. It doesn't make her wrong about the benefits of vaccination. It's not really comparable with…

Agreed. How do we know that Joe Rogan doesn't also have significant mental illness?
Post reply on HN