Hit the road Niel

[Jim at Gentex]

I could really care less if Neil Young is on Spotify or not, or if he is a liberal asshat or a conservative asshat.

The point is that HE made this into an issue, and now HE looks like an even bigger asshole, if that is even possible.

Dude canceled himself, which makes me      because it's frickin' hilarious.

Rogan's show is a bit longish for me too, but I do like the fact that he questions everything from a standpoint of reason and logic, and he generally tries to keep it politically neutral. 

The problem is that when you confront liberals with reason and logic it makes their heads explode.
And that leads to whiny little bitches like Neil Young who would rather bitch about it to Spotify than to maybe try to engage someone like Joe Rogan in a rational, logical discussion.

But then that brings us back full circle to liberals' heads exploding, and me laughing my ass off when it happens.  

It's the circle of life, man!

[thad]

Rogan's show is a bit longish for me too...

That's where adjusting the speed comes into play. I'd rather hear them talk for 3 hrs and let me speed it up than to hear them talk for 20 minutes and not hit all the topics.

[gcode]

Hippies for Censorship

Hippies are the most disappointing subculture, aren't they? They always let you down. They cut their hair, become therapists or corporate sustainability advisers, and before you know it these people who wanged on about Woodstock for 50 years are being paid a fortune by The Man to badger me and you. Just look at Neil Young. The one-time cocaine-stained hero of LA's alternative scene, singer of angry songs about Vietnam and the Kent State massacre, participant with Crosby, Stills and Nash in the Freedom of Speech Tour of 2006, is now basically pleading with a huge corporation to silence people he doesn't like. From protest singer to agitator for capitalist censorship? What a fall.

[neurosis]

[Incogneeto]

Ok I quit!!

[Incogneeto]

Watchin the MSM a Handful of Musicians have quit also.

Joni and some Brele....

Thats a handful??    3

Oh and Barry Manilow.

and He said No ...Not me.

[Shazam/TPP]

these dumb asses don't realize that they're giving Rogan free advertising...

[Smit]

Good for Neil. And good for anybody who joins him. He has the integrity to not want his music associated with a site that allows disinformation to be spread and I applaud him for that.

From what I've read Spotify is now labeling the shows with possible misinformation as such so it has brought that attention. Unfortunately labels like that seem to attract conspiracy theorists rather than educate people so that's likely to backfire.

Rogan himself has even responded in a way I thought was very reasonable and thoughtful.

I've a question for the people who think Neil is against the 1st amendment and free speech....which part of the 1st amendment guarantees a person the right to have a platform on the internet to broadcast your conspiracy theories (or anything else)?

[beej]

I've a question for the people who think Neil is against the 1st amendment and free speech....which part of the 1st amendment guarantees a person the right to have a platform on the internet to broadcast your conspiracy theories (or anything els

That is an interesting question. My first thought was that there is no guarantee. But there are multiple guarantees distinguished in the first ammendment.

1) freedom of speech shall not be abridged
2) freedom of the press
3) freedom of peaceful assembly

Social media is so new (comparatively speaking) that I think it is still being sorted out as far as rights go. I don't have a good answer to that question, except to say that I am not crazy about the conspiracy theories going around but I am also worried about the suppression of speech. Social media is a combination of press and assembly. Sort of a hybrid model and both have guarantees. My "go-to" though would be to say that I'd rather hear the crazy conspiracy theories and reject them, than to have conspiracy theories suppressed only to find out they are true.

Let me ask you a question.  would you have preferred that social media companies suppressed the Russian collusion theory with the Trump campaign, or was it better in the long run that it was brought to light, investigated, and discarded as non-sense?

[Del.]

Personally I don't listen to podcast.

As far a mis information, no one spreads more than the CDC.

[neurosis]

As far a mis information, no one spreads more than the CDC.

Neil doesn't play his music on their platform so it's OK. 

[Smit]

That is an interesting question. My first thought was that there is no guarantee. But there are multiple guarantees distinguished in the first ammendment.

1) freedom of speech shall not be abridged
2) freedom of the press
3) freedom of peaceful assembly

Social media is so new (comparatively speaking) that I think it is still being sorted out as far as rights go. I don't have a good answer to that question, except to say that I am not crazy about the conspiracy theories going around but I am also worried about the suppression of speech.  My "go-to" though would be to say that I'd rather hear the crazy conspiracy theories and reject them, than to have conspiracy theories suppressed only to find out they are true.

Let me ask you a question.  would you have preferred that social media companies suppressed the Russian collusion theory with the Trump campaign, or was it better in the long run that it was brought to light, investigated, and discarded as non-sense?

Let's not use snippets.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It doesn't say Neil Young shall make no law, etc etc. Or Smit or Beej or anybody else. It's not really difficult.

Neil isn't saying Spotify must not allow Rogan's podcast to air, he's saying he doesn't want his music associated with them if they do. Not unlike the musicians who object to politicians using their music while campaigning.

There is nothing 1st amendment about any of this "controversy."

Let me ask you a question.  would you have preferred that social media companies suppressed the Russian collusion theory with the Trump campaign, or was it better in the long run that it was brought to light, investigated, and discarded as non-sense?

If I had my way (which I obviously do not) then yes, I would prefer nobody use social media for that (news) purpose.

Ya know, there is nothing inherently bad, or good, about social media. It's how people use it that's bad or good.

When people use it for a news source I think it's bad, for obvious reasons.

[HTM01]

Let's not use snippets.

It doesn't say Neil Young shall make no law, etc etc. Or Smit or Beej or anybody else. It's not really difficult.

Neil isn't saying Spotify must not allow Rogan's podcast to air, he's saying he doesn't want his music associated with them if they do. Not unlike the musicians who object to politicians using their music while campaigning.

There is nothing 1st amendment about any of this "controversy."

If I had my way (which I obviously do not) then yes, I would prefer nobody use social media for that (news) purpose.

Ya know, there is nothing inherently bad, or good, about social media. It's how people use it that's bad or good.

When people use it for a news source I think it's bad, for obvious reasons.

you're getting sucked in again, better to just lurk 

[Smit]

you're getting sucked in again, better to just lurk 

Lol. Right?!?! 

[beej]

you're getting sucked in again, better to just lurk 

no way!  he's right on this. Unless the pressure comes from congress for spotify to limit Joe Rogan's podcast. they are free to do it.