And here’s an article from a songwriter’s perspective, focused mostly on Spotify’s treatment of musicians/artists.
https://variety.com/2022/music/opinion/spotify-musicians-revolt-kay-hanley-joe-rogan-backlash-column-1235173047/?fbclid=IwAR2NDo6og7ecfrNLF9ICzcGLhFngrDcemJ_SIgJtmXv6yLfHhklSpt90moU On Sat, Feb 5, 2022 at 3:20 PM 'David Bruggeman' via TVorNotTV < tvornottv@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Unless it can be shown that any company providing this kind of service > would either make money from this approach or not lose money/subscribers > from this approach, it won't happen absent laws or regulations. These > companies have proven consistently that they are either unwilling or unable > to police themselves. > > I'll suggest that the fetishization of capitalism in this country devalues > considerations of free expression. (The expansion of IP laws vis-a-vis fair > use and public domain considerations could be a conversation in parallel > with what we've been hashing out.) The free expression of those with > money, power, or a platform that has either wins out over those that could > benefit from a system that truly values free expression. > > One way to perceive this discussion is about the gap between where things > are and where we think we ought to be. Regrettably, getting to where we > ought to be is more achievable by acting from where we are than from where > we ought to be. > > The last two years have shown repeatedly that money matters most. Our > lives don't matter as much as we want them to, and our ideas and any > connection to the truth matter even less. > > Damn, that's dark. But I'm not in the mood for sugarcoating. > > David > > On Saturday, February 5, 2022, 02:45:22 PM PST, PGage <pga...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > If I had the chance to have dinner with Neil Young, I would suggest to him > that rather than calling for Rogan to be banned from Spotify, he propose > specific guidelines that all speech and music on Spotify should follow > (e.g. 1. Do not misrepresent qualifications; 2. Do not advocate treatments > which have not been supported; 3. Do not misrepresent the evidence about > treatments that have been supported). These guidelines then apply to > everyone equally, not just Joe Rogan. Critics of vaccines could still say > “I wouldn’t get vaccinated because we still don’t know enough about their > long term consequences”, but if a Podcaster repeatedly spreads the message > that Vaccines increase infant mortality, or cause heart attacks, or alter > your DNA, they would be first suspended and then, if repeated, removed. > > I guess that proposal would be harder to fit in a Tweet, but I think it > would be more consistent with core values. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/604969686.160653.1644103215922%40mail.yahoo.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/604969686.160653.1644103215922%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- Kevin M. (RPCV) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4CcmcXeh8SdSnt4EqN-0oH_2UvV%2BU67Pq_jXmf6byyK%2BA%40mail.gmail.com.
