Interesting. Do you apply this to all platforms?
If a supermarket sells products that you like, alongside products you don't like, do you stop shopping there?
If a supermarket sells products that you like, alongside products you don't like, do you stop shopping there?
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.
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.
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".
I eat a plant based diet but I still shop at a grocery store that has a butcher counter, for example.