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.