Freedom Of Speech Explained Simply
- Thread starter The Oracle
- Start date
Freedom of Speech is a non-sequitor.
Spotify is a private company, joe rogan is a private company, Young is a private company. I am using company in a loose term to cover private business transactions. Unless these companies are taking public money then there is no free speech issue.
Terb can ban me or you, and that is their right as Terb is a private business/company.
Spotify is a private company, joe rogan is a private company, Young is a private company. I am using company in a loose term to cover private business transactions. Unless these companies are taking public money then there is no free speech issue.
Terb can ban me or you, and that is their right as Terb is a private business/company.
What about Facebook? They seem to be pressured to uphold a standard of censoring false posts and hateful posts. Shouldn't Spotify be under the same obligation?
Your freedom to swing your arms around ends at my nose.
In other words, an individual is entitled to their opinion and freedom of speech as long as no one else gets harmed. But when guys like Rogan spread demonstrably false information (try this horse de-wormer, it's great!!) the people who end up needing poison control and their stomachs pumped are harmed.
The question is does Spotify (or Facebook or any other company) bear responsibility for amplifying the false and dangerous information, since they are paying Rogan to spew the nonsense and profiting from his audience.
In other words, an individual is entitled to their opinion and freedom of speech as long as no one else gets harmed. But when guys like Rogan spread demonstrably false information (try this horse de-wormer, it's great!!) the people who end up needing poison control and their stomachs pumped are harmed.
The question is does Spotify (or Facebook or any other company) bear responsibility for amplifying the false and dangerous information, since they are paying Rogan to spew the nonsense and profiting from his audience.
If it results in not hearing "Old man look at my life, I'm a lot like you were", mission accomplished.
As I understand it, no one's Freedom of Speech was blocked. Young demanded that Spotify choose between him and Rogan and Spot obliged by choosing the far more lucrative Rogan. No infringement of Freedom of Speech there.
More artists threatened to remove their work from Spot. No one who was a real money-maker, but it signaled a possible growing trend.
So Spot finessed by putting a link on ALL COVID-19 commentaries - not just Rogan's - linking to an accepted neutral, authoritative body of COVID information. So listeners can choose to listen to Rogan, or the better-informed, more intelligent scientific authorities, or both.
AFAI can see. Spot's being very fair in a difficult situation.
Neil young is giving up millions and millions of streams on Spotify!!! and $6.79 in income.
Spotify finally explains its COVID-19 misinfo policy, but hints Joe Rogan is safe
Spotify CEO Daniel Ek responded to Neil Young and others removing their music from the platform over COVID-19 misinformation spread on Joe Rogan's popular podcast.
www.latimes.com
Well, the "irrelevant" Neil Young's stance has made Spotify and Rogan make changes to how they do things.
Rogan responds to Spotify protest, COVID advisories (msn.com)
I can sum this up even better and much more quickly: Freedom of speech is the right for people to espouse their viewpoints without being arrested and imprisoned, provided that the verbiage is not defamatory or is being used to incite violence against others. That's pretty much it.
If a private company like Spotify, Facebook or Twitter bans you for the things you say, your freedom of speech is not being attacked. These are private companies and their users are essentially guests on their property. If my house guest says something I don't like, I have every right to tell that person to take back what they said or get off my property.
Many companies also have code of conduct rules that employees must agree to and sign as a condition of employment. If you sign such an agreement with your employer and then are publicly outed six months later for organizing a racist rally or because you're caught shouting "fuck her right in the pussy" at a female TV journalist covering a story, your employer has every right to fire you for breaching the code of conduct you signed, and your freedom of speech STILL has not been infringed upon.
Free speech is probably the most limited right we actually have. Speaking your mind can still destroy your life if your views are unpopular, but you won't go to prison, so you're protected.
Free speech is not "free" and never has been. It comes with a payment, and that payment is called 'responsibility'.
If a private company like Spotify, Facebook or Twitter bans you for the things you say, your freedom of speech is not being attacked. These are private companies and their users are essentially guests on their property. If my house guest says something I don't like, I have every right to tell that person to take back what they said or get off my property.
Many companies also have code of conduct rules that employees must agree to and sign as a condition of employment. If you sign such an agreement with your employer and then are publicly outed six months later for organizing a racist rally or because you're caught shouting "fuck her right in the pussy" at a female TV journalist covering a story, your employer has every right to fire you for breaching the code of conduct you signed, and your freedom of speech STILL has not been infringed upon.
Free speech is probably the most limited right we actually have. Speaking your mind can still destroy your life if your views are unpopular, but you won't go to prison, so you're protected.
Free speech is not "free" and never has been. It comes with a payment, and that payment is called 'responsibility'.
And yet, he managed to get spotify and Rogan to modify their practises.
Mods should just shut this thread down now because JeanGary Diablo just ended this perfectly. Someone throw the damn towel, this fight's over.
I think you have confused freedom of speech, with freedom of platforms… which does not exist. You have no right to NBC’s airtime to rant.
And you know something else?..... Kindler is actually a shape-shifting space lizard from the Constellation Draconis and they have been running the world since 6000 BC!
Thanks for the link. This is the first time I read about Daniel Ek (haven't really considered Spotify a big tech before) Looks like he's feeling the heat already
When the right (and admittedly some on the left) complain about freedom of speech, they typically mean they should be allowed to speak but no one should be allowed to criticize them.
Didn't NY just sell his entire catalog?
That said, its spotify so he'd be giving up tens to hundreds of dollars, they pay shite.
And that money would now just go to whoever bought his library.
The only surprise from my end is that Spotify listened to him at all, since he doesn't own the music anymore.
edit: Appears he only sold 50% and included some conditions.
Neil Young Sells Catalog Rights to Merck Mercuriadis' Hipgnosis
Neil Young has sold 50% of the worldwide copyright and income interests in his 1,180 song catalogue to Hipgnosis Songs Fund Limited.
www.rollingstone.com
Agreed.
Free speech laws protect people from the police, court and government overreach. That's it. If a person makes comments that are threatening towards others or comments that are defamatory, there is no protection, nor should there be.
If you and I show up at a rally for some cause we disagree with and we start screaming over top of the voice of the person at the podium, we are not denying that person's "right to free speech". We are using our own right to free speech to speak over him, thus, the speaker's right to free speech has not been violated.
If you own a company and one of your employees is making comments you deem racist or sexist on Twitter, you have every right to fire that individual for their conduct. Their right to free speech has not been violated.
If you run a message board like Terb and certain people make comments you strongly disagree with, you have every right to ban their account on the basis of what they're saying. The message board is your property. Their right to free speech has not been violated.
In short, unless the police, courts or government stops someone from making comments that are not threatening and not defaming, no one's rights are being violated.
