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

Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 45 posts

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#31

Post by chiefalchemist »

gridlockd wrote: post #18
chiefalchemist wrote: post #12

I don't enjoy being the one to say this but censored is the wrong word. Censoring is something governments do. We can't keep using the wrong words and expect communication and discourse to improve. Words matter.

No, it isn't, please stop repeating this misconception. Censoring and censorship are not limited to governments. Many TV stations literally have censorship departments, whose job it is to decide what is and isn't shown, in line with the agenda of the network, not merely what the law mandates. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_censorship

Context. It matters. It a clickbait-y word in the current sociopolitical environment. It intentionally leads the reader in an unnecessary and biased direction.

Therefore, it's the wrong word. Cencorship laws do not protect this type of "censorship". Now people get confused. And so on.

At best, this is self-sensorship. JRE, at will, entered into a contract. JRE was well aware some shows would not migrate.

It's clickbait. The headline should read: ".Spotify Declines to Migrate Some JRE YouTube Content." Full stop.

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#32

Post by Emphere »

raxxorrax wrote: post #14
mhh__ wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think some of these might just be cleaning up for advertising? e.g. "Sarkon of Akkad" (Carl Benjamin) is an unpleasant liar who once declared "I wouldn't even rape you" to a politician online - not exactly perfect for advertiser's on Spotify Free?

Hm, yes "cleaned up" content for advertisers would fall exactly into that category. I think he should prefer platforms where advertisers cannot make editorial decisions. This should be clearly communicated to users, so that animosity from controversial topics is not directed at advertisers.

But in practice, directing animosity at advertisers and platforms is an effective way to remove content you don't like. It doesn't matter if the platform/advertisers says that they don't necessarily endorse the content--there's nothing stopping users from pressuring them regardless.

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#33

Post by aaron695 »

gridlockd wrote: post #26
aaron695 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, things being put into water were claimed by scientist to be turning frogs gay, which is why he made the comment. "Scientists are continuing to sound the alarm about some common chemicals, including the herbicide atrazine, and link them to changes in reproductive health and development. Endocrine disrupting toxic chemicals have been found to feminize male frogs and cause homosexual behavior. " (2011) https://www.…

I'm picturing some PR people at a major chemicals corporation, upon discovering that their product has the power to turn frogs gay: "This is credible science, let's seed this to Alex Jones, he'll turn it into a laughing stock!" It made the list: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/14/alex-jones-5-most-disturbing...

From your link -

"One of Jones’ most notorious conspiracy theories is that the government is using chemicals in order to turn people gay, using a mysterious “gay bomb” devised by the Pentagon."

Except BBC also pretty much reported on that in 2005 - "The US military investigated building a "gay bomb"" - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4174519.stm

And that's why I want Joe Rogan to interview him.

I want to know why Alex Jones thinks the way he does and how much he is acting and is he manic or something. An attempt at something real about him. Not just shaming dumber people.

CNBC thinks they are clever but the garbage that comes from their site and the BBC is still garbage even if it has glitter on it.

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#35

Post by aaron695 »

gridlockd wrote: post #15
sfgweilr4f wrote: post #3

Now we know which episodes are the most interesting. Also which guests reveal who/what can't be criticised or discussed. That said, I'm not surprised that Alex "they're turnin' the friggin frogs gay" Jones is on that list.

I suspect this has to be more to do with particular things said on these episodes that may make Spotify legally liable, rather than a blacklist of people. Eddie Bravo and Joey Diaz have been on tons of episodes other than the ones listed. I can't even imagine JRE without Joey as a regular. Some people strike me as particularly odd for blacklisting: Louis Theroux, Brian Dunning and Rickson Gracie must be politically u…

The Louis Theroux episode is blocked in some countries for copyright by A+E Networks

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjeV2_hKLao

But most there are censorship not copyright.

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#37

Post by srtjstjsj »

LatteLazy wrote: post #7
1cvmask wrote: post #4

Does anyone know if Joe Rogan allows for censorship on the part of Spotify? Tommy Chong the comedian has managed to make the list of censored folks. Now I feel compelled to look up the others.

When he first announced the move, he expressly stated they would not be censoring future episodes or interfering at all, he would maintain 100% control... Edit, source in case it's relevant: >"It will remain free, and it will be the exact same show," said Rogan. "It's just a licensing deal, so Spotify won't have any creative control over the show. >"They want me to just continue doing it the way I'm doing it right no…

How is that possible? What happened that guarantees every future potential episode is spotifyable yet past episodes weren't?

If he's telling the truth, why aren't his first 10 episodes him an past guests reading the transcript of censored episodes?

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#38

Post by gridlockd »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #31
gridlockd wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it isn't, please stop repeating this misconception. Censoring and censorship are not limited to governments. Many TV stations literally have censorship departments, whose job it is to decide what is and isn't shown, in line with the agenda of the network, not merely what the law mandates. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_censorship

Context. It matters. It a clickbait-y word in the current sociopolitical environment. It intentionally leads the reader in an unnecessary and biased direction. Therefore, it's the wrong word. Cencorship laws do not protect this type of "censorship". Now people get confused. And so on. At best, this is self-sensorship. JRE, at will, entered into a contract. JRE was well aware some shows would not migrate. It's clickba…

What you're saying there now could be said about basically anything. It's your opinion, I somewhat disagree, but also I don't care.

Your original claim is what I care about: "This is not censorship" is what you said (paraphrased). That's wrong. It's a misconception.

Why is that important? Because we should be worried about corporate censorship as well, not just government censorship. In fact, right now, the government is censoring almost nothing, but corporations are using censorship to maintain "good" ideas and narratives in the heads of their viewers while keeping out the "bad" ones. There is no space for "dissident" or "heterodox" views, neither on left-leaning nor right-leaning media. It's polarizing the country. I don't think that's their job.

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#39

Post by gridlockd »

aaron695 wrote: post #33
gridlockd wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm picturing some PR people at a major chemicals corporation, upon discovering that their product has the power to turn frogs gay: "This is credible science, let's seed this to Alex Jones, he'll turn it into a laughing stock!" It made the list: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/14/alex-jones-5-most-disturbing...

From your link - "One of Jones’ most notorious conspiracy theories is that the government is using chemicals in order to turn people gay, using a mysterious “gay bomb” devised by the Pentagon." Except BBC also pretty much reported on that in 2005 - "The US military investigated building a "gay bomb"" - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4174519.stm And that's why I want Joe Rogan to interview him. I want to know why Alex Jon…

To be fair, they admit that a potential "gay bomb project" was real. They didn't report that the "gay frog experiment" was real though.

Most conspiracy theories have some sort of factual basis. What makes them conspiracy theories is the wild exaggerations, unfounded extrapolations and unproven connections to all other conspiracy theories.

I have my own "conspiracy theory", which is that people like Alex Jones are assets to whoever wants to divert attention from the factual basis of all these conspiracy theories. Actual conspiracy theorists usually suffer from paranoid delusions and apophenia, they are incapable of maintaining credibility. The factual basis then becomes less credible by association.

So while all the "clever" people get to have a laugh about that clown and his antics, they forgot asking themselves why the hell taxpayer money might be flowing into gay bomb research, and what other ridiculous secret projects might be underway right now.

Re: Spotify censored Joe Rogan episodes

#40

Post by LatteLazy »

srtjstjsj wrote: post #37
LatteLazy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When he first announced the move, he expressly stated they would not be censoring future episodes or interfering at all, he would maintain 100% control... Edit, source in case it's relevant: >"It will remain free, and it will be the exact same show," said Rogan. "It's just a licensing deal, so Spotify won't have any creative control over the show. >"They want me to just continue doing it the way I'm doing it right no…

How is that possible? What happened that guarantees every future potential episode is spotifyable yet past episodes weren't? If he's telling the truth, why aren't his first 10 episodes him an past guests reading the transcript of censored episodes?

Not sure, we will have to see.

I like Joe, so maybe Spotify thought they could pull this and no one would notice?

Or maybe they're replying on (I heard) $100m being enough money to buy some flexibility? Maybe they're making a show of it so he can make a show of insisting they're replaced so no one thinks he has sold out?

It's sort of confusing because Joe Rogan is Joe Rogan. It's not like he suddenly changes position or he's ever been PC and family friendly or whatever this edit is meant to get to.

Either way, something is dodgy as fuck.

Post reply on HN