Spotify podcasts that mention Covid-19 to come with content advisory as more musicians...

[midian182]

A hot potato: Spotify has responded to the growing issue of Covid-19/vaccine misinformation being broadcast in podcasts by adding a content advisory to any shows in which the topic is discussed. The controversy, which centers around the Joe Rogan Experience, has seen Neil Young and other artists pull their music from the platform.

The situation began last week when Rock and Roll Hall of Famer Young wrote an open letter promising to remove his music from Spotify if it didn’t drop the Joe Rogan Experience, which he accused of spreading vaccine misinformation. “They can have Rogan or Young. Not both,” he said.

With his weekly audience of 11 million and having signed a $100 million exclusivity deal with the podcaster last year, Spotify chose Rogan and began removing Young’s music. Joni Mitchell on Friday said she stood in solidarity with Young and also wanted her music pulled, and guitarist Nils Lofgren said the same thing on Saturday. Without revealing why, best-selling author Brene Brown said she will not be releasing any more Spotify podcasts until further notice.

Rogan defended his podcast and apologized to Spotify for the situation in a near ten-minute Instagram video.

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Joe Rogan (@joerogan)

Spotify has now responded by making its Covid-19 content policy and general rules available for public viewing. Rules that explicitly mention Covid-19 prohibit assertations that it is a hoax or not real, and bar anything that encourages people to purposely get infected to build immunity. Spotify also doesn’t allow content that suggests vaccines “are designed to cause death.” The Verge writes that Joe Rogan’s podcast did not “meet the threshold for removal,” according to an internal Spotify memo.

The music streaming platform’s CEO, Daniel Ek, posted a message addressing the controversy on the company’s website. He wrote that while there are “plenty of individuals and views on Spotify that I disagree with strongly,” it is important that the platform doesn’t take on the position of being content censor “while also making sure that there are rules in place and consequences for those who violate them.”

Spotify is also adding a content advisory to any podcast episode that includes a discussion about Covid-19. It will direct listeners to the company’s Covid-19 hub that provides information about the pandemic from public health experts, scientists, and physicians.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/93191-spotify-podcasts-mention-covid-19-come-content-advisory.html

 

[NightAntilli]

The ones that hate on Joe Rogan and are trying to cancel him have never actually watched any of his podcasts. I bet they won't even watch this 10 minute video of his. The cognitive dissonance would make their brains explode.
The video he released on Instagram is classy, very reasonable and honest. It shows the difference between the ones willing to openly discuss difficult subjects, and the ones that want to shut down open discussions by throwing hissy fits about things they don't understand.

I also commend Spotify on how they are handling the situation. Their stance and policy are not unreasonable, and the fact that Joe Rogan's podcast did not break any of those rules says a lot as well.

 

[fps4ever]

Joe Rogan does a multitude of topics with all sorts of guests on both sides, not just COVID. Funny thing is he was left leaning on covid/vaccines early in the pandemic (conservatives hated him) and then switched once he was more educated. It's one thing to ask to take down a single podcast of wrong or misinformation but the disconnect the left has is pure vitriol hate cancel culture.

 

[Dimitriid]

The sad part is that none of this matters: Spotify can lose their most popular artists and force users to click an "I accept Joe Rogan is just flat out lying about covid-19" button before allowing the podcast to play and it wouldn't matter: If anything it would *increase* the number of anti-vaxxers floating around and aggravate the situation even more overall.

The problem cuts in far too deeply and it's the same as the one we have in Youtube, in Facebook, in Twitter, in Instagram and Tiktok in all social media: private companies have reach indescribable large audiences and built algorithms with one single solitary purpose: Profit. This means that for the machine, anything is fair, no content is too controversial or damaging of the public at large in fact that content *is better* to create engagement as the more other people try to bury it and speak out, the more attention it brings and teaches the algorithm "Anti-vaxx content generates A TON of engagement, funnel more people into it this is the most profitable content possible right now"

The moment we decided that dissemination of information, even vital information like public service announcements related to public health, was ok to be controlled in full by private companies without oversight or regulation, that's the moment conspiracy theories exploded into an uncontrollable endemic disease which is really a symptom of another uncontrolled endemic disease called Neoliberalism.

 

[wiyosaya]

The moment we decided that dissemination of information, even vital information like public service announcements related to public health, was ok to be controlled in full by private companies without oversight or regulation, that's the moment conspiracy theories exploded into an uncontrollable endemic disease which is really a symptom of another uncontrolled endemic disease called Neoliberalism.

Personally, I think it is symptomatic of rampant conservatism, or worse yet, the internet making everyone an expert at determining what is truth - especially when that truth has no basis in scientific fact. From what I have heard of Rogan's arguments and the arguments of those who support him, the arguments seem to be based on hearsay, non-scientific subjective observation, people doing stupid things like taking two rounds of the vaccination when it is NOT recommended, and misinterpretation of scientific studies, those studies being twisted to say what the reader thinks they say.

Science, itself, will criticize, anything presented to the scientific community that is factually in error or in which the results of a study are misinterpreted.

If anyone thinks that outright false information should not be criticized in the name of free speech, neoliberalism, or what ever you choose to call it, then, IMO, the rumors of the fall of civilization may have some hard basis in them. Other politicized thinking from history was related to the promulgation of outright lies that the masses believed. If spreading lies is OK for civilization, then Chomsky's quote

“If you assume that there is no hope, you guarantee that there will be no hope. If you assume that there is an instinct for freedom, that there are opportunities to change things, then there is a possibility that you can contribute to making a better world.”

has relevance, and those who think that this is all a scam just to make money are creating their own reality, IMO.

By all means, feel free to flame away. Its your world being burned.

 

[Bl00dyMinded]

I'm glad Spotify sided with Joe. Anyone who's hurt can fly a kite.

On a side note. I believe Covid is very real and can be dangerous to "some" not the average person. But I also do believe Covid has been taken advantage with a political agenda for some. And because of that you have many people pushing back against vaccines and mandates.

 

[someOtherGuy]

Personally, I think it is symptomatic of rampant conservatism, or worse yet, the internet making everyone an expert at determining what is truth - especially when that truth has no basis in scientific fact. From what I have heard of Rogan's arguments and the arguments of those who support him, the arguments seem to be based on hearsay, non-scientific subjective observation, people doing stupid things like taking two rounds of the vaccination when it is NOT recommended, and misinterpretation of scientific studies, those studies being twisted to say what the reader thinks they say.

Science, itself, will criticize, anything presented to the scientific community that is factually in error or in which the results of a study are misinterpreted.

If anyone thinks that outright false information should not be criticized in the name of free speech, neoliberalism, or what ever you choose to call it, then, IMO, the rumors of the fall of civilization may have some hard basis in them. Other politicized thinking from history was related to the promulgation of outright lies that the masses believed. If spreading lies is OK for civilization, then Chomsky's quote



has relevance, and those who think that this is all a scam just to make money are creating their own reality, IMO.

By all means, feel free to flame away. Its your world being burned.

You exposed 2 conflicting ideas in the same sentence:
- the scientific method
- the gate keepers (experts)

You can say that the science proves something, in which case even a layman person can wield the scientific knowledge, such as Newtonian Physics applied to some home fixing, or cooking.

In the other hand you could say that the subject is so complex and convoluted that only "experts" can handle it, in which case it has very limited value to regular people, which only care about results (does the cell phone works in my area?, does a drug helps or harms "me"?).

The problem comes with an extreme adoption of the second way. You need to assume that everyone is dumb beyond help, and only a few enlightened are smart enough to know what's best for the rest, and those enlightened ideas are beyond questioning, becoming basically a religion.

Science is not a religion, and even "settled" subjects are fair game for questioning; see Einstein's General Relativity questioning Newtonian Physics centuries after it had been "proven". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity#General_relativity

In short: the scientific method is humble, you can't categorically prove something with a 100% certainty, it will be conditioned by at least one variable, time (you proved it, for the time being). Some future discovery might prove you wrong, and that's something that you have to account for in EVERY scientific work.

 

[dangh]

Scientific facts as presented in peer revieved publicaations disagrees with him.
He only presents some non - validated personal opinions, which happens to belong to a scientist, and are not properly reviewed and presented as long, as support his agenda.
We can do that either in a scientific way, or we can keep blabling. And, unfortunaltelly, he kinda not doing that in a scientific way.

 

[nodfor]

For a political movement to try to censor its opponents - that is nothing new, it has happened again.
But usually it takes place carefully so the censorship doesn't become too apparent.

But not for the liberal, he takes great pride in his effort to deny free speech to others and does so as publicly and shamelessly as it is possible.

 

[hahahanoobs]

Political mouth breathers are the worst.
I don't have time for any of them.

 

[mcclurken]

What I've learned from Neil Young: Question authority! ...unless that authority has convinced you through fear that the other people are worse.
What I've learned from Joni Mitchell: Oh, you're still alive! Neat?
From Nils: Who?
From Brene Brown: Shame is toxic and has no useful function.....except when someone shares an unfavored interpretation of a shared experience.

I see folks writing comments of logical discussion but clearly there's no logic involved here. Just emotional reactions based on fear causing self-censorship and the crying out for someone else to take over the burden of said censorship. It is an exhausting responsibility, after all.

 

[Dimitriid]

Personally, I think it is symptomatic of rampant conservatism, or worse yet, the internet making everyone an expert at determining what is truth - especially when that truth has no basis in scientific fact. From what I have heard of Rogan's arguments and the arguments of those who support him, the arguments seem to be based on hearsay, non-scientific subjective observation, people doing stupid things like taking two rounds of the vaccination when it is NOT recommended, and misinterpretation of scientific studies, those studies being twisted to say what the reader thinks they say.

Science, itself, will criticize, anything presented to the scientific community that is factually in error or in which the results of a study are misinterpreted.

If anyone thinks that outright false information should not be criticized in the name of free speech, neoliberalism, or what ever you choose to call it, then, IMO, the rumors of the fall of civilization may have some hard basis in them. Other politicized thinking from history was related to the promulgation of outright lies that the masses believed. If spreading lies is OK for civilization, then Chomsky's quote



has relevance, and those who think that this is all a scam just to make money are creating their own reality, IMO.

By all means, feel free to flame away. Its your world being burned.

A lot of interesting point and overall I generally agree with most of what you said here.

So first to agree & concede with you: I agree that imo there is a clear incentive from the GOP side to deny science overall and present as anti-establishment paragons. In their world view, any authority they cannot control for their main clients, huge corporate lobbyists, is to be subservient to them alone. It doesn't matter if science is right and through consensus refutes their points, to them the point is to be anti-science simply because it affects their authority.

The other side however is well, not really a disagreement but just a different perspective as to why my post wasn't as partisan focused and that's because well, the DNC only quotes science when it suits them as well. And it should be pretty clear than Biden's administration 100% contrary to all campaign promises, doesn't cares about effective pandemic control: returning people to offices and schools in the present of the Omicron variant was a mistake but it's a continued mistake by refusing to enact new lockdowns there's literally a million people infected every day and just by numbers alone, science tells us that it will and is killing people specially vulnerable people that might get better odds with vaccination but are still at a greater risks with any of the long list of risk factors.

Ultimately however, their key strategic decision from the DNC right now is promoting the idea of 100% personal responsibility when widespread temporary restrictions and not lifting moratorium on rent, student loans, etc. Could do a hell of a lot more to get the pandemic under control than saying "We got vaccines, we're ok with you risking infection and widely spreading you did the right thing, get back to work"

This is also widely spread on social media as the "team liberal" basically uses the same ferocity as "team conservative" in the opposite perspective: "It's the fault of the science denying, barbaric conservatives that's going to kill us all!" is the general sentiment.

The truth is the Biden administration could get the pandemic under control, easily, with mandates. They just choose not to because they're more interested in serving their main customer which much like the GOP is the same people: corporations and their economic pursues. Public health and eugenic policies of "We're ok with vulnerable people dying and hospitals collapsing" is effective, mostly because the same social media platforms really like pushing these ideas of personal responsability that just put people in fighting petty wars against each other when both of their prespective issues go far deeper into policy issues of making sure billionaires become trillionaires while working people keep dying in record numbers, might soon become disable due to the wilful ignorance of "long covid" enduring side effects and worst of all creates an environment that pretty much guarantees the covid family of viruses will become endemic to the population and will just be accepted as one of the leading causes of death or worst, ignored and just attributed to the risk factors themselves that would otherwise be perfectly manageable.

 

[Thretosix]

The ones that hate on Joe Rogan and are trying to cancel him have never actually watched any of his podcasts. I bet they won't even watch this 10 minute video of his. The cognitive dissonance would make their brains explode.
The video he released on Instagram is classy, very reasonable and honest. It shows the difference between the ones willing to openly discuss difficult subjects, and the ones that want to shut down open discussions by throwing hissy fits about things they don't understand.

I also commend Spotify on how they are handling the situation. Their stance and policy are not unreasonable, and the fact that Joe Rogan's podcast did not break any of those rules says a lot as well.

Joe Rogan is a cancer to society like iiTrump.

 

[Squid Surprise]

I strongly suggest everyone actually listen to the 10 minute "apology" from Rogan.

He doesn't exactly apologize... but he DOES state that he should be hosting actual experts after he allows the non-established people on his show (like the quack, Dr. Malone).

If and when he actually does that - ideally on the SAME show - I would be prepared to believe that he actually means what he says...

But it behooves anyone to do some research on anyone one invites onto your show. Dr. Malone, for instance, has been pretty much proven to simply be out for his own publicity and a few bucks... he did NOT invent mRNA - despite his wife's website claiming it - and his views are NOT peer-reviewed, nor are they accepted by anyone with any actual knowledge on the matter.

Being a "Doctor" does not qualify you as an expert on Covid... you actually need to specialize in infectious diseases AND have worked with Covid!!

 

[ScottSoapbox]

Other musicians? Plural?

One other musician pulled her music. One.

Kinda weak sauce as a cancel attempts go really.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Other musicians? Plural?

One other musician pulled her music. One.

Kinda weak sauce as a cancel attempts go really.

2 others... that is plural... Joni Mitchell and Nils Lofgren...

Spotify’s Joe Rogan controversy deepens as more artists leave (Update: Joe Rogan responds)

Spotify prioritizing its star podcast could spiral out of control for the company

www.tomsguide.com

And Nils Lofren is calling on others to leave as well... will be interesting to follow this... I wonder if Bruce Springstein follows suit (Nils is part of his e-street band)

 

[Bl00dyMinded]

I strongly suggest everyone actually listen to the 10 minute "apology" from Rogan.

He doesn't exactly apologize... but he DOES state that he should be hosting actual experts after he allows the non-established people on his show (like the quack, Dr. Malone).

If and when he actually does that - ideally on the SAME show - I would be prepared to believe that he actually means what he says...

But it behooves anyone to do some research on anyone one invites onto your show. Dr. Malone, for instance, has been pretty much proven to simply be out for his own publicity and a few bucks... he did NOT invent mRNA - despite his wife's website claiming it - and his views are NOT peer-reviewed, nor are they accepted by anyone with any actual knowledge on the matter.

Being a "Doctor" does not qualify you as an expert on Covid... you actually need to specialize in infectious diseases AND have worked with Covid!!

Good, he did nothing wrong why should he apologize. This country has turned so soft that everyone now a days has to apologize for disagreeing with the media or society. And if you disagree they want to cancel you or label you a racist etc. His statements were on point and clear, doesn't need to say anything else or bend over for anyone.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Good, he did nothing wrong why should he apologize. This country has turned so soft that everyone now a days has to apologize for disagreeing with the media or society. And if you disagree they want to cancel you or label you a racist etc. His statements were on point and clear, doesn't need to say anything else or bend over for anyone.

Well, he DID do something wrong... he allowed people on his show that he didn't personally vet (or have anyone else vet them) nor did he put out any disclaimer stating that their views might not be true (or at least generally accepted).

He DID say, in his "apology", that he would be doing that from now on.

When you have a guest on your show, you need to do stuff like that...

 

[Bl00dyMinded]

Well, he DID do something wrong... he allowed people on his show that he didn't personally vet (or have anyone else vet them) nor did he put out any disclaimer stating that their views might not be true (or at least generally accepted).

He DID say, in his "apology", that he would be doing that from now on.

When you have a guest on your show, you need to do stuff like that...

Of course.. I forget we are living at an age where you need a disclaimer for everyone to feel better. Warning jumping of the the bridge causes death.
Warning driving might cause to an accident.
Warning eating food might make you choke.

How can I forget. Everyone has to be tailored. I'm guessing now with the disclaimer, and if he does it again you will feel better and no one will mentioned Joe Rogan again and attack his show. Lets sit back and see.

 

[NightAntilli]

I strongly suggest everyone actually listen to the 10 minute "apology" from Rogan.

He doesn't exactly apologize... but he DOES state that he should be hosting actual experts after he allows the non-established people on his show (like the quack, Dr. Malone).

If and when he actually does that - ideally on the SAME show - I would be prepared to believe that he actually means what he says...

He already did that... Multiple times. Did you actually LISTEN during those 10 minutes, or were you anticipating and trying to nitpick everything he says...?

Also... Calling Dr. Malone a "quack" doesn't exactly add to your credibility. But discussing these subjects is generally useless... Just leaving this here. It starts at around 40 minutes. The information is available for those that actually want to have it and are open to it.

https://rumble.com/vt62y6-covid-19-a-second-opinion.html

 

[Squid Surprise]

Of course.. I forget we are living at an age where you need a disclaimer for everyone to feel better. Warning jumping of the the bridge causes death.
Warning driving might cause to an accident.
Warning eating food might make you choke.

How can I forget. Everyone has to be tailored. I'm guessing now with the disclaimer, and if he does it again you will feel better and no one will mentioned Joe Rogan again and attack his show. Lets sit back and see.

No... I still feel its irresponsible to give liars a platform... period... but if you MUST do it (I'm sure the real reason was ratings and profit, not "having all views", regardless of what he claims) then have the decency to at least give a counterbalance...

 

[Squid Surprise]

He already did that... Multiple times. Did you actually LISTEN during those 10 minutes, or were you anticipating and trying to nitpick everything he says...?

Also... Calling Dr. Malone a "quack" doesn't exactly add to your credibility. But discussing these subjects is generally useless... Just leaving this here. It starts at around 40 minutes. The information is available for those that actually want to have it and are open to it.

https://rumble.com/vt62y6-covid-19-a-second-opinion.html

No... did YOU listen to it? He said that he WOULD do it in the future.... and I strongly suggest you do some research on Dr. Malone... while he certainly did work on mRNA technology, he did NOT invent it. And his views are dangerous - and he spouts them solely to give himself notoriety and money... Quack is probably too generous a term for that scumball...

 

[McMurdeR]

I don't agree with Joe Rogan's views about Covid vaccinations, indeed I think they're very foolish. Having said that, I think that the worst part of this affair is the manner in which Neil Young and company have attempted to coerce another party into gagging him. It's a classic example where someone who thinks they're doing the right thing is actually doing more harm than good.

It doesn't matter if Joe Rogan is wrong - silencing people is not the path to truth. If you get used to doing it too many times, then eventually the good people will be silenced too.

Perhaps Mr Young would have better spend his efforts on a proper counter-arguement to anti vac sentiment, which isn't too difficult to be honest.

 

[Bl00dyMinded]

I don't agree with Joe Rogan's views about Covid vaccinations, indeed I think they're very foolish. Having said that, I think that the worst part of this affair is the manner in which Neil Young and company have attempted to coerce another party into gagging him. It's a classic example where someone who thinks they're doing the right thing is actually doing more harm than good.

It doesn't matter if Joe Rogan is wrong - silencing people is not the path to truth. If you get used to doing it too many times, then eventually the good people will be silenced too.

Perhaps Mr Young would have better spend his efforts on a proper counter-arguement to anti vac sentiment, which isn't too difficult to be honest.

Someone gets it!

 

[p51d007]

Boy how I long for the day when people would mind their own business.
If someone had a record, tv show, movie or what not you didn't like...you simply IGNORED IT.
But now, regardless of your political position, if someone does, says, or produces something you don't like, it's time to have them "canceled".
There are a TON of things on the web, tv/movie shows, books, news outlets I can't stand.
Do I want them canceled? Nope. I simply IGNORE THEM.