The Joe Rogan Experience (1 Viewer)

[Dr. Octopus]

Please clarify for us.

You can start with the source:

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.
 

How does that apply to this situation? It doesn’t - Rogan does have freedom of speech - that’s not being taken away from him even if Spotify were to chose Neil Young over his podcast (which was never going to happen because of capitalism). 
 

There’s also the old trope that “freedom of speech doesn’t give you the right to yell ‘FIRE’ in a crowded movie theater.”  Freedom of Speech doesn’t give some one the right to spread dangerous misinformation (I’m not saying Rogan is doing so necessarily, but that’s what the issue is to some).

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

You can start with the source:

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.
 

How does that apply to this situation? It doesn’t - Rogan does have freedom of speech - that’s not being taken away from him even if Spotify were to chose Neil Young over his podcast (which was never going to happen because of capitalism). 
 

There’s also the old trope that “freedom of speech doesn’t give you the right to yell ‘FIRE’ in a crowded movie theater.”  Freedom of Speech doesn’t give some one the right to spread dangerous misinformation (I’m not saying Rogan is doing so necessarily, but that’s what the issue is to some).

I agree with you on your point, wholeheartedly. I agree that no one’s free speech has been trampled on in this instance.

With that said- In recent years there have been many times where I didn’t say something or post something online that I wanted to (and increasingly so,) - solely because I worry if it will one day be dredged up and used against me out of context. I am not Joe Rogan, I don’t have FU money. 
 

This is the first time in my life I have felt this way and it’s not a good feeling. It’s downright scary. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I agree with you on your point, wholeheartedly. I agree that no one’s free speech has been trampled on in this instance.

With that said- In recent years there have been many times where I didn’t say something or post something online that I wanted to (and increasingly so,) - solely because I worry if it will one day be dredged up and used against me out of context. I am not Joe Rogan, I don’t have FU money. 
 

This is the first time in my life I have felt this way and it’s not a good feeling. It’s downright scary. 

But that’s not a Freedom of Speech issue either - no one is taking away your right to say whatever you want on-line. It doesn’t mean that there’s no ramifications from the private sector.

I have the right to go on-line and trash the company I work for - but that doesn’t mean I won’t get fired over it.

 

[simey]

I certainly hope the conglomerate that bought half his rights don't pull some legal nonsense because of this. 

The company, Hipgnosis, that bought half of his rights supports him in his decision with Spotify. Warner Brothers supports him too. 

Neil is very serious about Covid-19 and safety. I'm not surprised he doesn't want to be a part of a platform that is allegedly allowing the spread of misinformation regarding Covid. Neil bowed out of Farm Aid last year, because he was concerned about Covid and safety. Neil is a co-founder and on the board of Farm Aid, and it was a big deal for him to drop out. You may think he is a has-been, but there are all ages of people that go to Farm Aid, and old and new bands play there, and Neil is one of the biggest draws for all ages. He is also very dedicated to helping farmers. The other board members and guests performed. He talks in this article about his decision to not perform.  Anyway, he isn't pulling stunts when he makes these decisions. It is truly how he feels. It's Neil. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The company, Hipgnosis, that bought half of his rights supports him in his decision with Spotify. Warner Brothers supports him too. 

Neil is very serious about Covid-19 and safety. I'm not surprised he doesn't want to be a part of a platform that is allegedly allowing the spread of misinformation regarding Covid. Neil bowed out of Farm Aid last year, because he was concerned about Covid and safety. Neil is a co-founder and on the board of Farm Aid, and it was a big deal for him to drop out. You may think he is a has-been, but there are all ages of people that go to Farm Aid, and old and new bands play there, and Neil is one of the biggest draws for all ages. He is also very dedicated to helping farmers. The other board members and guests performed. He talks in this article about his decision to not perform.  Anyway, he isn't pulling stunts when he makes these decisions. It is truly how he feels. It's Neil. 

and I checked this morning. He had over $6MM monthly listeners on Spotify alone, as well. Now that's not anywhere close to the Ed Sheerans or Taylor Swifts of the world - but it's also very far away from "irrelevant".

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Definitely not a funny comedian

Not in the top 5 funniest members of the News Radio cast.

"I never argue comedy. I laughed, you didn't." - Roger Ebert

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

But that’s not a Freedom of Speech issue either - no one is taking away your right to say whatever you want on-line. It doesn’t mean that there’s no ramifications from the private sector.

I have the right to go on-line and trash the company I work for - but that doesn’t mean I won’t get fired over it.

Mostly agree. Me posting memes on my FB account or talking about my political views (when they have nothing to do with my job) should not get me fired from work though. Being fearful of what you say seems like it’s approaching a freedom of speech issue to me. 

I get that I still can post whatever I want. I get that nobody is stopping me from submarining my life but it does seem like it’s inching closer to censorship. 

In the end you are 100% correct and I’m not disagreeing with you, just expressing how it feels to me.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

I get that I still can post whatever I want. I get that nobody is stopping me from submarining my life but it does seem like it’s inching closer to censorship. 

That's because it is. And attempts at censorship - even failed ones - should be condemned regardless of the content.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

So many people have it backwards imo. "Freedom of Speech" is a core American value. We don't value freedom of speech because it's in the Constitution, it's in the Constitution because it's one of our values.

 

[Godsbrother]

That's because it is. And attempts at censorship - even failed ones - should be condemned regardless of the content.

New to this thread because I have never even heard of Rogan up until the Neil Young situation so I am genuinely asking: who was trying to censor who in this situation?

It seems like a case of one guy on spotify not liking what another guy on Spotify was saying and told Spotify to either kickoff the other guy off or remove his music.

Is that this gist here or am I missing something?   

 

[unckeyherb]

You can start with the source:

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.
 

How does that apply to this situation? It doesn’t - Rogan does have freedom of speech - that’s not being taken away from him even if Spotify were to chose Neil Young over his podcast (which was never going to happen because of capitalism). 
 

There’s also the old trope that “freedom of speech doesn’t give you the right to yell ‘FIRE’ in a crowded movie theater.”  Freedom of Speech doesn’t give some one the right to spread dangerous misinformation (I’m not saying Rogan is doing so necessarily, but that’s what the issue is to some).

Actually it does.  And your second point is the whole point.  That is not what Rogan is doing.  He is talking to people that have a different viewpoint when it comes to Covid, vaccines, lockdowns whatever.  When you say, "that's the issue to some", I'd argue that is the whole problem with the bolded.  For the last two years, saying that cloth masks are more or less worthless fell in the accepted camp as dangerous misinformation.  Now its common knowledge that this is the case.  6 months ago, the lab leak theory was racist and misinformation.  Now it is a widely accepted hypothesis that needs further investigating.  

The problem with the curbing of free speech in th name of dangerous misinformation or hate speech always falls to the question of, who is the arbiter of these things?  Who gets to decide what is dangerous?  Who gets to decide what is hateful?  

 

[dawgtrails]

Mostly agree. Me posting memes on my FB account or talking about my political views (when they have nothing to do with my job) should not get me fired from work though. Being fearful of what you say seems like it’s approaching a freedom of speech issue to me. 

Maybe I missed it upthread. Is there a rash of instances of people being fired from their jobs for posting political stuff on facebook? 

 

[unckeyherb]

New to this thread because I have never even heard of Rogan up until the Neil Young situation so I am genuinely asking: who was trying to censor who in this situation?

It seems like a case of one guy on spotify not liking what another guy on Spotify was saying and told Spotify to either kickoff the other guy off or remove his music.

Is that this gist here or am I missing something?   

You got it.  Young doesn't like some of the things that Rogan has said w/r/t Covid and demanded he be kicked off of spotify or he'd (Neil Young) would remove his music from their streaming service.  Spotify called his bluff.  

Seems like a bit of delusion of granduer from NY but sadly very typical in the world we live in today.  "play by the rules that I want or I'm taking my football and going home".  

 

[Godsbrother]

You got it.  Young doesn't like some of the things that Rogan has said w/r/t Covid and demanded he be kicked off of spotify or he'd (Neil Young) would remove his music from their streaming service.  Spotify called his bluff.  

Seems like a bit of delusion of granduer from NY but sadly very typical in the world we live in today.  "play by the rules that I want or I'm taking my football and going home".  

I can definitely see it that way on the other hand if NY doesn't want his stuff on Spotify I think he should be able to tell them to  yank it.    

I don't think there is anything sad about it. NY gets to make his point and anyone that wants to listen to his music has about 1000 different ways of doing it.

ETA:  Spotify also got a chance to make a point: no one is going to tell them who they will have on their platform. 

 

[simey]

You got it.  Young doesn't like some of the things that Rogan has said w/r/t Covid and demanded he be kicked off of spotify or he'd (Neil Young) would remove his music from their streaming service.  Spotify called his bluff.  

Neil Young was not bluffing. He asked his record company, Warner Brothers - Reprise (who own the licensing rights to his music), to help him get his songs removed from Spotify. They did. 

 

[unckeyherb]

I can definitely see it that way on the other hand if NY doesn't want his stuff on Spotify I think he should be able to tell them to  yank it.    

I don't think there is anything sad about it. NY gets to make his point and anyone that wants to listen to his music has about 1000 different ways of doing it.

Oh I agree, Young can do whatever he wants.  What is sad is that he thinks his opinion is so superior to Rogan's that Rogan should be de-platformed for discussing a topic which Young feels is "dangerous".  Most of these are three hours of Rogan interviewing highly trained, accredited professionals who have a different opinion than the accepted orthodoxy.  The horror!

 

[unckeyherb]

Neil Young was not bluffing. He asked his record company, Warner Brothers - Reprise (who owns the licensing rights to his songs), to help him get his songs removed from Spotify. They did. 

Its a turn of phrase.  He obviously wasn't bluffing.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The problem with the curbing of free speech in th name of dangerous misinformation or hate speech always falls to the question of, who is the arbiter of these things?  Who gets to decide what is dangerous?  Who gets to decide what is hateful?  

There are always going to be seemingly arbitrary lines in the law (or otherwise) that can not be crossed. Why can someone drink at 21 but not 20?

I'm sure you wouldn't say everyone has a 100% right to say anything they want at all times.

Would you be ok with one of your neighbors going around telling the rest of the neighborhood that they suspect you may be diddling little boys in your basement? Is it ok if your son's teacher told the class that they shouldn't trust the Jews? I mean FREEDOM of speech, am I right? There's a dangerous slippery slope either way to be honest.

 

[unckeyherb]

There are always going to be seemingly arbitrary lines in the law (or otherwise) that can not be crossed. Why can someone drink at 21 but not 20?

I'm sure you wouldn't say everyone has a 100% right to say anything they want at all times.

Would you be ok with one of your neighbors going around telling the rest of the neighborhood that they suspect you may be diddling little boys in your basement? Is it ok if your son's teacher told the class that they shouldn't trust the Jews? I mean FREEDOM of speech, am I right? There's a dangerous slippery slope either way to be honest.

Right, like you said though, you are free to say what you want but not free from repercussions.  My kid's teacher telling the class not to trust Jews will find himself out on the street being shunned by anyone who knows him.  I'd not be okay with a neighbor spreading lies about me, but there's nothing illegal about that.  Its not really a slippery slope.  Freedom of speech is just that.  Freedom to speak.  You are still responsible for your words.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Right, like you said though, you are free to say what you want but not free from repercussions.  My kid's teacher telling the class not to trust Jews will find himself out on the street being shunned by anyone who knows him.  I'd not be okay with a neighbor spreading lies about me, but there's nothing illegal about that.  Its not really a slippery slope.  Freedom of speech is just that.  Freedom to speak.  You are still responsible for your words.

But now it seems you're agreeing with my the premise that Freedom of Speech doesn't mean you can say anything you want without any potential ramifications. It's not absolute "free speech".

If a private company like Spotify decided that they do not want to be associated with someone giving a platform to Dr. Malone (for example) because his message is potentially very dangerous and they did drop him they have not infringed on Rogan's Freedom of Speech. They made a personal and/or business decision. And in this case particularly, Rogan's show would be picked up somewhere quickly and he can continue to express himself so he continues to have that Freedom.

It is a slippery slope because there can't be absolutes to Freedom of Speech. You can't have it both ways. If we go too far one way, we are allowing for complete chaos. If we go too far the other way, we are trampling on one of the core concepts of our Country. 

 

[CletiusMaximus]

You got it.  Young doesn't like some of the things that Rogan has said w/r/t Covid and demanded he be kicked off of spotify or he'd (Neil Young) would remove his music from their streaming service.  Spotify called his bluff.  

Seems like a bit of delusion of granduer from NY but sadly very typical in the world we live in today.  "play by the rules that I want or I'm taking my football and going home".  

Maybe its semantics, but I didn't view it as an ultimatum. Young directed his management company to have his music removed from Spotify and they complied. I think some folks want to cry about "censorship" (which this obviously isn't) and are twisting it a bit. This is just Neil Young being Neil Young - making a statement, drawing a line in the sand, making demands and getting his way. I've always loved his music, but also always thought he's probably a guy who is difficult to get along with, even if I admire him for it.  Very opinionated, stubborn and more than a bit arrogant.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

What is sad is that he thinks his opinion is so superior to Rogan's that Rogan should be de-platformed for discussing a topic which Young feels is "dangerous".  

Here's the thing - nearly everyone does that, even you in this thread.

You're in here saying your opinion is more valid than Neil's by criticizing him and implying he's some big baby for taking his ball and going home while others may applaud him for taking a stand. 

I'm not picking on you - we all do it every day on these very boards. We only don't like it when it's the "other side" doing it though.

 

[beer 30]

New to this thread because I have never even heard of Rogan up until the Neil Young situation so I am genuinely asking: who was trying to censor who in this situation?

It seems like a case of one guy on spotify not liking what another guy on Spotify was saying and told Spotify to either kickoff the other guy off or remove his music.

Is that this gist here or am I missing something?   

I find the bolded oddly fascinating but I suppose there are millions & millions who have no idea who Rogan is.

Carry on!

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

New to this thread because I have never even heard of Rogan up until the Neil Young situation so I am genuinely asking: who was trying to censor who in this situation?

It seems like a case of one guy on spotify not liking what another guy on Spotify was saying and told Spotify to either kickoff the other guy off or remove his music.

Is that this gist here or am I missing something?   

That' the gist. Rogan supports free speech, Young gave Spotify the ultimatum for censorship.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The original impetus behind "freedom of speech" was to allow people to protest and criticize the government without fear of being imprisoned - it wasn't to allow everyone to say whatever they wanted in every situation. That's just not very realistic. 

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Maybe its semantics, but I didn't view it as an ultimatum. Young directed his management company to have his music removed from Spotify and they complied. 

He did that because his ultimatum failed.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

The original impetus behind "freedom of speech" was to allow people to protest and criticize the government without fear of being imprisoned - it wasn't to allow everyone to say whatever they wanted in every situation. That's just not very realistic. 

I disagree. But I'm not going to ask that you get banned and your posts deleted simply because I disagree.

 

[unckeyherb]

But now it seems you're agreeing with my the premise that Freedom of Speech doesn't mean you can say anything you want without any potential ramifications. It's not absolute "free speech".

If a private company like Spotify decided that they do not want to be associated with someone giving a platform to Dr. Malone (for example) because his message is potentially very dangerous and they did drop him they have not infringed on Rogan's Freedom of Speech. They made a personal and/or business decision. And in this case particularly, Rogan's show would be picked up somewhere quickly and he can continue to express himself so he continues to have that Freedom.

It is a slippery slope because there can't be absolutes to Freedom of Speech. You can't have it both ways. If we go too far one way, we are allowing for complete chaos. If we go too far the other way, we are trampling on one of the core concepts of our Country. 

Free speech as a legal concept is absolute.  You are free to say what you want, l;egally.  That does not preclude you from potentially suffering consequences based on what you say.  Similar to the right to assemble.  You can march peacefully froma legal standpoint.  However, if you are marching with the kkk, you may be fired from your job.  These are not mutually exclusive ideas.  

 

[unckeyherb]

Maybe its semantics, but I didn't view it as an ultimatum. Young directed his management company to have his music removed from Spotify and they complied. I think some folks want to cry about "censorship" (which this obviously isn't) and are twisting it a bit. This is just Neil Young being Neil Young - making a statement, drawing a line in the sand, making demands and getting his way. I've always loved his music, but also always thought he's probably a guy who is difficult to get along with, even if I admire him for it.  Very opinionated, stubborn and more than a bit arrogant.

No, he didn't direct his management company to remove his music.  He told Spotify to remove Rogan, othewise he would remove his music.  That is definitely an ultimatum.

 

[unckeyherb]

Here's the thing - nearly everyone does that, even you in this thread.

You're in here saying your opinion is more valid than Neil's by criticizing him and implying he's some big baby for taking his ball and going home while others may applaud him for taking a stand. 

I'm not picking on you - we all do it every day on these very boards. We only don't like it when it's the "other side" doing it though.

Not really.  I've said more than once he is more than within his right to do what he did.  I'm making a point to support my viewpoint which is in opposition to his.  I'm not seeking to silence him, merely pointing out the problem with his goal of deplatforming.  I do think he is  a big baby, its got nothing to do with sides-I have no idea what "side" he is on.  I'm merely criticizing his viewpoint that deplatforming people we disagree with is ok.  Its not ok.  Its authoritarian and has become more and more of a problem in this country over the last 5 years.

 

[unckeyherb]

Well this isn't true at all.

with exception of the very slim example of yelling fire in crowded theater, yes it is.  

 

[unckeyherb]

The original impetus behind "freedom of speech" was to allow people to protest and criticize the government without fear of being imprisoned - it wasn't to allow everyone to say whatever they wanted in every situation. That's just not very realistic. 

Of course it is.  What are you talking about?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

with exception of the very slim example of yelling fire in crowded theater, yes it is.  

There's a lot more examples, including defamation and "inciting a riot".

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Of course it is.  What are you talking about?

I already gave you examples which you agreed with. 

 

[unckeyherb]

I already gave you examples which you agreed with. 

you seem to be conflating free speech with free from consequences speech.  I agreed with your examples from a standpoint that they come with social reprercussions.  I disagree that you are not free to say such things, because of course you are.

 

[simey]

No, he didn't direct his management company to remove his music.  He told Spotify to remove Rogan, othewise he would remove his music.  That is definitely an ultimatum.

He absolutely did ask his record label and management company to pull his music from Spotify. He said it in an open letter a few days ago, and that letter also stated that Spotify can't have both Rogan and himself. He was already working on getting his music pulled.

 

[unckeyherb]

He absolutely did ask his record label and management company to pull his music from Spotify. He said it in an open letter a few days ago, and that letter also stated that Spotify can't have both Rogan and himself. He was already working on getting his music pulled.

If Spotify dropped Rogan would he have pulled his music?  Because that was the opening gambit, a choice.

 

[wikkidpissah]

the 1st Amendment exists solely to allow speech to find its impact AND consequence without governmental interference. its obligation to art & entertainment ends as soon as that output freely meets  public forum. nufced

 

[dickey moe]

Maybe its semantics, but I didn't view it as an ultimatum. Young directed his management company to have his music removed from Spotify and they complied. I think some folks want to cry about "censorship" (which this obviously isn't) and are twisting it a bit. This is just Neil Young being Neil Young - making a statement, drawing a line in the sand, making demands and getting his way. I've always loved his music, but also always thought he's probably a guy who is difficult to get along with, even if I admire him for it.  Very opinionated, stubborn and more than a bit arrogant.

Except Neil himself presented this as an ultimatum: “They can have [Joe] Rogan or Young,” Neil Young wrote in a letter to his manager and label. “Not both” - if you want to argue semantics, fine, but that's essentially an ultimatum, IMO. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

you seem to be conflating free speech with free from consequences speech.  I agreed with your examples from a standpoint that they come with social reprercussions.  I disagree that you are not free to say such things, because of course you are.

that was the point.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

BTW, Barry Manilow is also removing his music from Spotify over Rogan. If I were on Spotify, this would hit me harder than Neil Young.

 

[unckeyherb]

that was the point.

ok, I don't think we're getting anywhere.  You want to conflate the two, have it.  

 

[dickey moe]

And agreed this isn't a First Amendment issue, this is an issue as to the role and to what degree censorship is appropriate in private discourse. Neil Young has a right to have his music distributed as he sees fit. Spotify has a right to tell Neil, "Sorry to see you go" and continue with Joe Rogan podcasts. 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

ok, I don't think we're getting anywhere.  You want to conflate the two, have it.  

My original point was that people were conflating the two when I said most people don’t understand the concept of “Freedom of Speech”. A lot of people were making statements that people (Joe Rogan) should be able to say whatever they want without consequence because “Freedom of Speech”. It’s all right here in the thread.

 

[jwb]

You got it.  Young doesn't like some of the things that Rogan has said w/r/t Covid and demanded he be kicked off of spotify or he'd (Neil Young) would remove his music from their streaming service.  Spotify called his bluff.  

Seems like a bit of delusion of granduer from NY but sadly very typical in the world we live in today.  "play by the rules that I want or I'm taking my football and going home".  

If you followed Neil's career, this is par for the course. He didn't want to be on Spotify anyway (this is not the first time he's pulled his stuff from there). He's very impulsive, and always does what he feels/wants, sometimes to the detriment of his wallet and others. But he does not care. Not one bit.

It really wasn't "Rogan or me" and made them choose / call a bluff. He basically said "I'm going - they can't have us both". His decision was already made - he wanted out (again). I don't think he'll be back there until he's gone.   

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I disagree. But I'm not going to ask that you get banned and your posts deleted simply because I disagree.

If you really disagree with what I said then you should go back and actually read the first amendment or try calling your boss an ####### and claim you have “freedom of speech” if he tries to discipline you.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

If you really disagree with what I said then you should go back and actually read the first amendment or try calling your boss an ####### and claim you have “freedom of speech” if he tries to discipline you.

OK, but if you're only looking at the first amendment you should go back and read my post.

The idea of freedom of speech is bigger than criticism of the government. 

 

[CletiusMaximus]

No, he didn't direct his management company to remove his music.  He told Spotify to remove Rogan, othewise he would remove his music.  That is definitely an ultimatum.

I guess I don't know the entire background and honestly don't care that much.  I'm sick of idiots on social media whining about being "cancelled" or "censored" or whatever buzzwords they are using this week.  Here's the quote I saw on Twitter:

“I want you to let Spotify know immediately TODAY that I want all my music off their platform … They can have Rogan or Young. Not both."

I understand from your reply there's more to it than this? 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

OK, but if you're only looking at the first amendment you should go back and read my post.

The idea of freedom of speech is bigger than criticism of the government. 

Is it your contention that anyone should be able to say anything they want with no repercussions? I’ve already addressed that with uncle Herb. I don’t think you’d really be ok with that.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Is it your contention that anyone should be able to say anything they want with no repercussions? I’ve already addressed that with uncle Herb. I don’t think you’d really be ok with that.

No. My point is people frequently define freedom of speech and censorship too narrowly. 

The reason Rogan is so popular is because people are hungry (maybe starved) for thorough nuanced conversation with honest questions. People who want to counter (using free speech) what he (or his guest) says are the good guys. People who want to silence (or deplatform) him are the bad guys.

What Young attempted to do was un-American imo.