The Left Is Not Going to Be Happy With Spotify’s New Remarks on Rogan Controversy – Opinion

We found out that Neil Young and Joni Mitchell were still alive when they threw tantrums and said they wanted to remove their music from the platform because they didn’t like what Joe Rogan was saying on his Spotify podcasts about COVID. Next, Prince Harry & Meghan Markle made it clear that they joined the liberal brigade attempting to silence Rogan via putting pressure upon Spotify.

Now, we’re finally hearing officially from Spotify. They’re officially weighing in on the subject, although they don’t refer by name to Rogan or any of the folks throwing tantrums about him. The left isn’t going to like it, and I’m not sure the right is either.

Co-founder and CEO of Spotify Daniel Ek issued a statement saying that they don’t want to censor people.

You can find opinions and people on both sides of almost every issue. Spotify has many people and perspectives that I don’t agree with. While we recognize that the role of Spotify is crucial in supporting creator expression, while also balancing safety for our users, In that role, it is important to me that we don’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.

Ek said they would be adding a “content advisory” label to any COVID discussion on their platform. They said this advisory “will direct listeners to our dedicated COVID-19 Hub, a resource that provides easy access to data-driven facts, up-to-date information as shared by scientists, physicians, academics and public health authorities around the world, as well as links to trusted sources.”

What are their “rules,” and what happens if you violate them? They claim they have “longstanding rules,” which they are now making easier to see.

What are the other rules?

The following content may be harmful, false, or deceptive and could cause harm offline or pose a threat to the public’s health:

-claiming that AIDS and COVID-19 are a hoax, or not real
Encourage the use of bleach products for various diseases and illnesses
• promoting the notion that vaccines approved locally by health authorities have been proven to be fatal
To encourage people to deliberately get infected (e.g. Promoting or
hosting “coronavirus parties”)

How are rule-breakers treated? They claim that their judgment will depend on the context. “Breaking the rules may result in the violative content being removed from Spotify. Repeated or egregious violations may result in accounts being suspended and/or terminated.”

Ek ends his letter by praising COVID panic with obligatory praise. He said that Spotify had contributed to education, and also donated to vaccine awareness.

Ek is trying placate tantrum throwers. It also sounds like he’s putting creators on notice that they could get winged in the future by the rules. That’s sad, and when you do that, don’t lead your letter saying you care about not censoring, when you start kowtowing to radicals who think they get to define what “misinformation” is for the rest of the world. But I would note there’s a big thing that’s not said in the statement — that is, that they’re not tossing Rogan.

The content advisory would satisfy those who were only concerned with misinformation. But the problem is that isn’t what they’re after, because this isn’t really about “misinformation” — it’s about getting rid of Rogan. So, they’re not going to be happy with this response, and the fact that they caved at all to give a response like this may make them believe that they just have to push him a bit more to get Spotify to dump Rogan.

This is where the company will realize they have fallen on a steep slope. Spotify could sink if they continue down the same path and follow the lead of the left.

About Post Author

Follow Us