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

151–160 of 235 posts

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#151

Post by gonehome »

pseudalopex wrote: post #100
gonehome wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I am doing this because Spotify is spreading fake information about vaccines – potentially causing death to those who believe the disinformation being spread by them ... They can have Rogan or Young. Not both." I read this as if you want me get rid of him, but I’ll paste it here for clarity. Others may see it differently.

You left out the important part. "I want you to let Spotify know immediately TODAY that I want all my music off their platform". Probably he would reconsider if they dropped Rogan. He didn't expect it or ask.

I honestly don’t think that matters? He said pull my music and explicitly said you can have one of us not both.

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#152

Post by rektide »

finite_jest wrote: post #106
mulmen wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> But there is no "freedom of speech" side here. There is. Rogan is not trying to remove Neil Young's music from anywhere. I've heard this unfruitful line of argument too often recently. Besides being unfruitful, I think it is based on a subtle fallacy/diversion. The idea of free expression reasonably includes the right to criticize the principle itself. For example, in the US, you absolutely have the legal right to…

Young wasn't trying to remove Rogan's music. He was exercising his positive liberty, to act as he wanted: which was to not be on a platform with people he perceived as ultra-shitty & socially-ruinous.

Young had (nearly) no expectation of causing change. There's a possibility he thought this really would, right now, have enacted change, but I highly doubt he was so deluded. Young simply knew he couldn't be party to such a system, and said he was unwilling to remain affiliated with it in it's current dangerous fallen state.

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#153

Post by mulmen »

gonehome wrote: post #139
mulmen wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I don't think your principles are sound. We are also participating in a marketplace of ideas. I'm not buying what you are selling. You are free to continue as you are, as am I.

I think private companies/platforms are able to exercise their speech in order to decide who is or isn’t on them. Keeping or removing Rogan is an exercise of their speech and within their right to decide. Still, I think it’s generally a bad idea to remove someone because of this kind of pressure. In Rogan’s specific case I also think it would be the wrong decision. I’m against internet cancel mobs as a general rule.

> Still, I think it’s generally a bad idea to remove someone because of this kind of pressure.

I can't agree with this in general. I can imagine a situation where it may be reasonable so I wouldn't tie my hands. In fact making this decision on a case by case basis is the business Spotify is in.

> In Rogan’s specific case I also think it would be the wrong decision.

Sure but that's just this case, it's not a fundamental question of freedom of expression. This is what I mean when I say "there is no freedom of speech position". Literally everyone involved including Spotify, Rogan, Young, Mitchell, you, me, and anyone who reads and decides to reply or not is exercising their right to free expression.

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#154

Post by ch4s3 »

guerrilla wrote: post #141
ch4s3 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 jus…

Th first article about India not allowing the seed until after people started buying them on the grey market, after Monsanto withdrew an application over a royalty dispute with the Indian government. Monsanto didn't sue any farmer there.

The second article is about farmers intentionally planting the potatoes and refusing to stop as part of a settlement deal that offered them either purchasing contracts or asked them to simply stop.

Neither of these is an example of an agro-tech company suing farmers for accidentally growing patented seeds. Did you read the articles?

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#155

Post by pseudalopex »

baryphonic wrote: post #143
mulmen wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 Spo…

> (how many decades ago were they culturally relevant?)

We're talking about them now.

> threats

They didn't threaten. Young directed his management to remove his music. Mitchell said she decided to remove hers. Is your problem they said why?

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#156

Post by mulmen »

mmcgaha wrote: post #147
mulmen wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

They are not shutting down their speech. They are exercising it by choosing who to associate with. The first amendment does not protect you from the actions of other private parties, it protects you from the government. I realize this is a cliche but it is critical to understand. Freedom of speech means you can say "I don't like what that person says and they shouldn't say it." And everyone else is free to agree with you or not.

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#157

Post by gonehome »

mulmen wrote: post #153
gonehome wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think private companies/platforms are able to exercise their speech in order to decide who is or isn’t on them. Keeping or removing Rogan is an exercise of their speech and within their right to decide. Still, I think it’s generally a bad idea to remove someone because of this kind of pressure. In Rogan’s specific case I also think it would be the wrong decision. I’m against internet cancel mobs as a general rule.

> Still, I think it’s generally a bad idea to remove someone because of this kind of pressure. I can't agree with this in general . I can imagine a situation where it may be reasonable so I wouldn't tie my hands. In fact making this decision on a case by case basis is the business Spotify is in. > In Rogan’s specific case I also think it would be the wrong decision. Sure but that's just this case, it's not a fundamen…

In a strictly technical sense I agree.

In a practical sense, one side is arguing to suppress someone’s ability to speak/express themselves via a popular platform and one side is not.

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#158

Post by pseudalopex »

gonehome wrote: post #151
pseudalopex wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You left out the important part. "I want you to let Spotify know immediately TODAY that I want all my music off their platform". Probably he would reconsider if they dropped Rogan. He didn't expect it or ask.

I honestly don’t think that matters? He said pull my music and explicitly said you can have one of us not both.

So he should pull his music and tell no one why?

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#159

Post by manquer »

porcoda wrote: post #137
manquer wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there good tools which let you manage a catalogue? Either SaaS or self+hosted ? It is hassle to manage your own files on all your devices.I would rather i had app like Spotify but streaming files owned by me.

I use iTunes Match for making stuff available in the cloud (eg, so i can access it all from my phone), and locally store it all on a NAS. Pretty easy.

This looks a good fit for people with Apple devices .

Sadly no clients for android. I have a mix of Linux , OSX Android and iOS, I won't be able to use in half of them! but given podcasts and other itunes features i suppose this best out of the box solution out there.

Re: Joni Mitchell joins Neil Young in protest against Spotify

#160

Post by mulmen »

beerandt wrote: post #131
mulmen wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Using leverage in an attempt to convince a business to silence someone else... is not an argument for free expression. It's free expression arguing against allowing others to exercise free expression. >There is no "free speech position". Who is Rogan trying to silence? Spotify didn't give into demands to censor. Those are free speech positions.

Why not? I can say "dang should ban beerandt or I will stop posting" (I don't believe this and I am not making such a claim). dang can do whatever he wants in response, including nothing at all. HN is free to downvote me or say they disagree, or not. That's the competitive marketplace of ideas. If you offer something unappealing it will fail.

> Spotify didn't give into demands to censor.

Censorship is a loaded term in conversations about freedom of speech, especially in the United States. IMHO Spotify, Young, Mitchell and Rogan are incapable of censorship in the first amendment sense because they are not government entities.

Post reply on HN