Perfect, I have been wanting to get off of Spotify ever since they teamed up with Joe Rogan.
If a supermarket sells products that you like, alongside products you don't like, do you stop shopping there?
I eat a plant based diet but I still shop at a grocery store that has a butcher counter, for example.
It's not that I go around worrying about what's said in every song and podcast on Spotify, it's rather whether I agree with Spotify's business practices or not. I wish Spotify told Rogan to stop having conspiracy theorists on his show (unless they are critically exposed), but I don't consider Alex Jones as being a part of Spotify's business model because he is a guest in one of their pods.
Your analogy is intellectually dishonest and uninspired.
There's a bit of difference between "my grocery store sells seaweed snacks and I don't like them" and "this company gave $100M to someone problematic".
If a supermarket were out there promoting… I dunno, their range of confederate flags or something, I’d probably choose not to shop there.
What about a company that's the largest plastic polluter in the world, that also lobbies to kill regulation to reduce plastic pollution? It's hard to know the full extent of the harm microplastics cause the ecosystem, but it's unlikely to be small.
How far do you have to drive to find a supermarket that doesn't sell Coca-Cola? Or is that not worth the same level of condemnation as interviewing the wrong person?
Sounds like you've identified the key difference on your own?
Spotify can be avoided. Groceries largely cannot.
(There's also a difference in revenue model. You can't subscribe to Spotify without part of that money going to Rogan. You can skip Coca-Cola products at the grocery store and ensure the companies you don't like see $0 from you.)
Can't you? Rogan's compensation isn't based on Spotify's total profits, and if you don't listen to him, you won't be contributing to his audience size either, and Spotify will be able to see that in their metrics. If tomorrow Spotify gains 100 million new users, that then never listen to a single Rogan episode, how would that increase Rogan's compensation?
If I buy a Coke at my grocery store, Coke's getting some of that money. If I buy a Pepsi, Coke gets none of that. I can boycott specific companies while still buying groceries, and again, opting out of food is an issue.
If Rogan were an optional premium paid add-on channel on Spotify, the two would be far more comparable.
And if you subscribe to Spotify but don't listen to Rogan, Rogan also gets none of that. If you believe otherwise, please explain how.
Rogan's not being paid per stream like song artists are.
If I pay for Spotify, my $10/month revenue goes to pay their expenses. One of those expenses is Rogan's $100M contract.
The mere act of shopping at the grocery store doesn't send money to Coca-Cola. I have to specifically buy one of their products.
You have to explain how Rogan would get more money if you subscribe to Spotify, than if you didn't subscribe.
Everybody gets to choose what they are and are not willing to support with their money. Some things I am willing to compromise to avoid; other things I am not. Extremely strange to me how many of you want to perform these weird mental gymnastics to suggest that people should be ashamed of not handing their money over to people or causes they disagree with.
If I had to sum up how Rogan has changed, he reminds me of many older men who just start to become aholes to everyone and everything, and believe that everything always deserves criticism while rarely deserving to be taken seriously. Though age is a factor, I think his FU money and success has completely gotten to his head.
I was a fan for years from about episode 50, but rarely listen/watch now. His exclusivity is not a factor keeping me subscribed if I consider leaving Spotify in the future.
This smacks of ageism AND sexism, all at once! Congratulations, you've violated your own morality code. And you were SO close to the -ism hat trick, had you only referred to him as an "older white man" ;)
It took a while for gay marriage to become broadly accepted. Trans is fighting the same battle now. He's a very typical older cismale and this population segment is, by and large, just not going to "get it" yet.
I'm not sure what there is to "get" about trans. I think everyone deserves to be treated with decency and respect, while also believing there is plenty to discuss about the moral and ethical aspects of hormone treatment (particularly during childhood), genderless bathrooms, etc.
There are questions that are easy to answer that you have touched on such as bathrooms (just make them all solo and genderless), and decency/respect (give it to everyone, obviously).
There are also FAR more difficult questions to answer such as, how to treat the gender separation in sports and where trans fits in there “fairly”? What to do if there is post-surgery regret? Why can a person consent to a drastic and permanent gender/sex change operation (the effects of some hormones at certain ages is irreversible) while being unable to consent to sex itself? (this is not an appeal to pedophilia as much as it is one of non-hypocrisy).
So your argument is basically "this person is somewhere else on the political spectrum than I am, therefore he must be cancelled from Spotify"?
And my argument is that Rogan used to lean left in his own views, but was tolerant overall for the majority of the bell curve. Now, Rogan has shifted rightward personally, but has abandoned giving due time and thought to much of the left side of the bell curve. He's more narrow minded and quick to criticize what were previously ideas and arguments that deserved to be taken seriously (and still do).
Any scenario where critical context is left out, like "some vaccines contain mercury, a deadly neurotoxin!" memes.
> Reading "Mein Kampf" won't turn me into a Nazi, but it might make me understand Nazism better.
There are substantially better ways to understand Nazism than reading Mein Kampf.
Fair rebuttal, although in a population that has been taught how to think critically (not ours, unfortunately), this might be far less of an issue