bickster Posted February 8, 2022 Author Moderator Share Posted February 8, 2022 11 minutes ago, DCJonah said: Is it censoring? He's quite capable of producing and putting out his own show. He's just potentially being removed from a platform. It's not even that. It's a business deciding whose product / opinion it wants to promote. It is nothing more than an editorial decision The whole free speech argument around this issue is rather specious I've never once seen anyone argue that Jeremy Corbyn should have a weekly column in the Daily Mail otherwise freedom of speech is eroded, that would be a little ludicrous would it not? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 36 minutes ago, Mr_Dogg said: Are you serious with this question? There has been distrust of the government in the US since it's inception. I quite like Chomsky's explanation, that people mistakenly think the US is a democracy, when it is in fact a republic, which was been design from the beginning, specifically to protect the political power of the property-owning classes. The more I find out about the political corruption of the judiciary, the more it seems true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 5 minutes ago, bickster said: I've never once seen anyone argue that Jeremy Corbyn should have a weekly column in the Daily Mail otherwise freedom of speech is eroded, that would be a little ludicrous would it not? The Daily Mail would definitely be more palatable, if it did. At present I can only describe it as somewhere between egregious and nauseating. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 8, 2022 Author Moderator Share Posted February 8, 2022 4 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said: At present I can only describe it as somewhere between egregious and nauseating. I agree but that's not really the point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 17 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said: The Daily Mail would definitely be more palatable, if it did. At present I can only describe it as somewhere between egregious and nauseating. Where else are you going to get bikini shots of z-list celebrities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted February 8, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted February 8, 2022 30 minutes ago, bickster said: It's a business deciding whose product / opinion it wants to promote. It is nothing more than an editorial decision Yep. Exactly as when Twitter kicked Trump off, and his supporters screamed about freedom of speech. They're a private company, they can accept or reject whoever they like, for any reason they like. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 8, 2022 Author Moderator Share Posted February 8, 2022 4 minutes ago, Xela said: Where else are you going to get bikini shots of z-list celebrities? The Express? Quote You Never See a Nipple in the Daily Express [...] This paper’s boring mindless mean Full of pornography the kind that’s clean Where William Hickey meets Michael Caine Again and again and again and again I’ve seen millionaires on the DHSS But I’ve never seen a nipple in the Daily Express JCC.com 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 19 hours ago, Mister_a said: Nope, it's my pointing out the hypocrisy of spotify. Its a valid point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 15 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Its a valid point. The difference between i.e lostprophets and Joe Rogan: Lostprophets get 0,002 pence per play of their songs divided between all band members. There's 5 people in the band, one is an extremely bad egg. Joe Rogan gets 100 million dollars of the money that musicians bring in. He's got a platform of 200 million listeners and has a shady past. Spotify is hosting his show which they paid 100 million for. If Lostprophets made a podcast and talked about how to lure kids into your van and spotify paid them 100 million to do it, it would be the same. Right now there's very few similarities. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, magnkarl said: The difference between i.e lostprophets and Joe Rogan: Lostprophets get 0,002 pence per play of their songs divided between all band members. There's 5 people in the band, one is an extremely bad egg. Joe Rogan gets 100 million dollars of the money that musicians bring in. He's got a platform of 200 million listeners and has a shady past. Spotify is hosting his show which they paid 100 million for. If Lostprophets made a podcast and talked about how to lure kids into your van and spotify paid them 100 million to do it, it would be the same. Right now there's very few similarities. Whether they make a penny, pound whatever the amount they shouldnt be on that platform for their despicable crimes. Its up to the owners of spotify if they wish to keep paying him or not. I personally dont have spotify dont plan on ever getting it to be honest Edited February 9, 2022 by Demitri_C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Whether they make a penny, pound whatever the amount they shouldnt be on that platform for their despicable crimes. But it's okay for Joe Rogan to platform people who've been in jail for hate-crimes, disinformation, inciting a riot (Proud Boys), admitting to raping women etc? Joe lets these people talk about their BS, while Lostprophets doesn't really sing about rape. Edited February 9, 2022 by magnkarl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 3 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Whether they make a penny, pound whatever the amount they shouldnt be on that platform for their despicable crimes. Its up to the owners of spotify if they wish to keep paying him or not. I personally dont have spotify dont plan on ever getting it to be honest Their? His, it was Ian Watkins, a member of the band, not the other members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 1 minute ago, magnkarl said: But it's okay for Joe Rogan to platform people who've been in jail for hate-crimes, disinformation, inciting a riot (Proud Boys), admitting to raping women etc? I didnt say that. Im not defending rogan im just saying if your removing rogan remove people that glitter r kelly etc too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 Just now, Seat68 said: Their? His, it was Ian Watkins, a member of the band, not the other members. So lets not remove r kelly then as the producers were not in on it either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 6 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: So lets not remove r kelly then as the producers were not in on it either There is a lot to dissect here. As stated earlier Spotify are hosting the music of the band The Lost Prophets. They have not paid 100 million to do that, the market will dictate if people want to listen to them. R Kelly produced his own music, again market forces will dictate if people want to listen. What do you want? Genuinely as your argument is all over the place. You want Rogan to remain because of free speech, but if he goes then all of the music that ever was made by anyone that has committed a crime, then that also has to go. So that's no Beatles, no stones, no Cash, no dylan, they have all committed crimes or have been arrested. Or are there varying degrees of crime, their music can never be heard if it's a murder, rape means only played on capital. Child molestation it's limited to North Norfolk digital. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 9, 2022 Author Moderator Share Posted February 9, 2022 48 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Its a valid point. It's not, as already explained 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 9, 2022 Author Moderator Share Posted February 9, 2022 22 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: I didnt say that. Im not defending rogan im just saying if your removing rogan remove people that glitter r kelly etc too The only people removing things from Spotify are the people that made the content. That includes Rogan There is no Free Speech element to this as again, already explained 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted February 9, 2022 VT Supporter Share Posted February 9, 2022 I would pretty much guarantee that 90% of rock stars have had sex with (and quite likely supplied illegal drugs to) underage girls and boys. Then there's everybody in the film industry. Where do you stop cancelling? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted February 9, 2022 Share Posted February 9, 2022 It certianly would be interesting to know whether anyone in the know shorted the stock, especially if they were the parties involved. Some companies use such falls in their stock price to buy back their own stock, so Spotify could easily recoup their $100m they paid to Joe Rogan, when the stock recovers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted February 17, 2022 Share Posted February 17, 2022 (edited) Web traffic to Spotify's cancellation page skyrocketed after artists began pulling music over Joe Rogan controversy Quote Spotify's cancellation page was flooded with unusually high traffic after Neil Young announced he would be pulling his music from the streaming platform, according to web analytics company Similarweb. It turns out that this hasn't been a good thing for Spotify. a) They've appeared weak on dubious content. b) They've had their really bad payment structure to musicians highlighted in most big media outlets in the world. Chuffed. Edited February 17, 2022 by magnkarl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts