35 ms·
Spotify signs ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ to an exclusive multi-year deal
- gherkinnn 6y agoWell that's unfortunate. I just got in to watching his full interviews. Good thing Techcrunch reminded me just how evil he is. That way I avoid downloading Spotify.
- nostromo 6y agoThis seems like short-term thinking from Joe. I'm sure he got paid big time. But his audience will shrink massively and he'll become a niche personality. It'll be similar to what happened to Howard Stern when he went to satellite radio; he quickly faded into relative obscurity.
- bengale 6y agoYeah it’s pretty weird. I watch a lot of his shows in the background while working. But I won’t be downloading Spotify to follow him over there.
- hnrodey 6y ago>he quickly faded into relative obscurity And his bank account exploded in to outer space.
- lonelappde 6y agoWhy would Joe want to be a famous podscaster forever? Maybe he's heading into podcast retirement.
- ryeights 6y agoA looooot of people use Spotify, at least in the US.
- thekyle 6y agoYeah I'm one of them. But how many people use it for Podcasts? I don't know any.
- hombre_fatal 6y agoHe's not shrinking by moving to one of the most ubiquitous apps in the world. You're just going to see some brief internet rage before people type "rogan" into the Spotify app they already have running all day. That is nothing like XM radio where I've never met someone who said they had it.
- im_cynical 6y agoI'm a casual watcher of his show (maybe 1 show every few weeks). Spotify has made no investment into their platform to support podcasts. No notification system for new episodes, no already listened to tracking, no subscriptions or an area where i can find all my podcasts. I like the idea of having my music and podcasts all in one place which working across all my devices (Linux, iOS, Windows) and i gave up on them. Spotify may be ubiquitous but they're not engineered for podcasts.
- PopeDotNinja 6y agoThat sounds like he won't be on YouTube anymore. Shame. I don't really like using Spotify.
- steviedotboston 6y agohe should go back to making people eat bugs on TV
- DevKoala 6y agoI probably will never watch it now since I don’t have a Spotify subscription and don’t need one. Is Spotify free for Podcasts?
- davismwfl 6y agoHe said in the announcement his podcast is remaining free. I don't know if you have to register with Spotify to listen, but I would think you would.
- draw_down 6y agoThis deal doesn't make a ton of sense without that (also that is what "exclusive" means). Rogan = Howard Stern, Spotify = XM Radio.
- xnyan 6y agoThat’s the whole point, killing open podcast distribution. They want the only viable place to get podcasts to be the Spotify app which they control.
- fearingreprisal 6y agoFrom memory, you don't need an account to use spotify. You don't even need to download an app.
- skellera 6y agoSpotify has an ad-supported free tier. This will be available on that, along with all their other podcasts.
- mbalex99 6y agoThis might be Europe’s answer to YouTube.
- polski-g 6y agoSpotify is just as ban-happy as YouTube.
- gganley 6y agoLinks? Much more aware of the YouTube scene
- busymom0 6y agoSpotify was the one who conspired with Facebook, Apple and Google to ban Alex Jones and others. So if Joe is moving off of YouTube because he doesn't like the censorship, he's not getting anything better with Spotify.
- torartc 6y agoHow many times are you going to post this same fear mongering comment.
- throwawaysea 6y ago"Spotify bans R. Kelly from playlists as hate policy announced" https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/spotify-bans-r-kelly-from-playlists-as-hate-policy-announced https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/spotify-bans-r-kelly-fro...
- mark_l_watson 6y agoToo bad, I occasionally enjoy his show, depending on the guest. I don’t use Spotify and I won’t bother with an account just for Joe. I hope he is getting good revenue from Spotify to make up for loss of listeners. I discovered him from Apple’s podcast app.
- nikivi 6y agoBen Thompson & James Allworth had a nice discussion recently on the podcasting space and how Spotify is posed to close over this space. https://overcast.fm/+BihnTujyQ https://overcast.fm/+BihnTujyQ Disregarding over all the negatives of centralizing podcast discovery in one place, I would love to pay one fee and get 0 ads on all the episodes. Where the money is then distributed to the podcast hosts I listen to the most (like Spotify does already with music). It's so bizzare to me how ads are still a thing. I never ever bought anything from an ad (my mind subconsciously ignores everything I hear in an ad & often paints the product in the ad in a negative light). And I lose quite a chunk of my time speeding over (the same ads) in the episodes I listen too.
- r00fus 6y agoSpotify is free with ads though. So it's more like Joe isn't running his own ad program, but instead letting Spotify run the ads, or provide premium ad-free tier.
- nikivi 6y agoSure, I'd love to have a model where if you don't pay a premium fee, you get the ads as part of the episode. However if you do pay, those ads go away. Although it does question who would pay to put ads in the first place if you can skip them. And people that will pay to skip are ones you want to target. I hope there is a model that can work that makes ads worse off than alternatives as they are cancer.
- haihaibye 6y agoSpotify runs intentionally annoying and frequent ads for itself, saying they'll go away if you pay them. I pay, it's very cheap for how much I use it.
- shrimp_emoji 6y agoI just hate how Spotify is trying to bring music back into the pre-download era. As a society, we somehow decided paying for and downloading DRM-free music is acceptable (though strangely not for movies and shows), but now you have albums becoming Spotify exclusives, and (just like with movies and shows) I can either sign up for this streaming service or hope I can download 'em through torrent or YouTube[0]. :T Ech 0: youtube-dl -i -f 140 -o '%(playlist)s/%(playlist_index)s - %(title)s.%(ext)s' https://youtu.be/hzpDOB2JYKc?list=PLXPYMcRIi2fHdvKx6Orw2ux9Lpj3tsBC2 https://youtu.be/hzpDOB2JYKc?list=PLXPYMcRIi2fHdvKx6Orw2ux9L...
- css 6y agoThis makes me incredibly sad: not that we are losing Rogan's show, but that Adtech is finally absorbing the last type of media that was truly Free.
- Exmoor 6y agoI agree, the idea of my podcasts becoming infected with non-stop ads keeps me up at night. But you know what doesn't keep me up all night? My Eliza mattress. You see the folks at Eliza designed a mattress that allows you to create your own website in minutes. Eliza's network of doctors can review your mattress's website and prescribe the best medication to regrow it's natural hair. Don't forget to use the promo-code HACKER at checkout for 3.14% off and free shipping!
- blueberry_47 6y agoLet me finish my Best Fiends game first. It's friends without the r.
- vsdvvsderer 6y agoQuick pause, I just wanted to thank today's video sponsor: SponsorTech! Do you ever get tired of searching for a sponsor for your video? Let SponsorTech deliver the revenue you need to buy ramen noodles, all while connecting your customers with ads that are roughly as annoying as this one. Offer-code GETREKT for 20% off in the description below.
- sida 6y agoAdtech would actually make it free. Arguably this is more like cable / Netflix than adtech
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- css 6y agoNow my podcast player and by extension adtech markets know what I listen to, when I listen to it, how long I listen, when I stop, when I fast forward/skip, etc., with no way to opt out. This is not freedom.
- sdan 6y agoJoe initially said he didn't want to go to Spotify because they don't pay creators. I guess a few million made that thought go away.
- vidar 6y agoMore than a few is my guess
- jakarta 6y agoa few million? I would guess ~$100mm
- ProAm 6y agoMore than that, I think he brings in 30mm a year on his own, for a multiyear deal I bet its way over 200mm
- tylersmith 6y agoSounds like they started paying creators.
- redisman 6y agoThey are paying a handful of creators who have leverage. I don't think they're making any changes to their per-play payouts.
- purple_ferret 6y agoHe also said he's quit when he got bored with it. Hard to do when you're in a multi-year licensing deal.
- pot8n 6y agoJoe "Spotify doesn't make any sense" Rogan
- fuzzybeard 6y agoLet's not forget when Howard Stern went to satellite radio. That deal was worth $500M.
- r00fus 6y agoIf it's on Spotify does it still count as a "podcast"?
- rtkwe 6y agoSo what in the definition of a podcast precludes it being available on one platform?
- r00fus 6y agoMainly the mechanism for discovery & delivery - podcasts used to be RSS or Atom + Audio which allowed for repackaging and offline play. With Spotify you need their specific app to listen. You have offline on premium but not on the free level. Joe is now a feature of Spotify rather than being it's own destination.
- karatestomp 6y agoRSS pointing to audio files versus a closed platform. Same way a WhatsApp message isn't an email.
- rtkwe 6y agoThat's mixing the medium and the content to me like how Art Deco isn't just architecture it's a style.
- karatestomp 6y agoIf they broadcast them over radio, is it still a podcast? Emailed out the audio files to a mailing list? Distributed them on cassette tape? It seems to me the format is part of it. RSS or something equivalent (Atom), feeding audio files to whatever client you bring, is a podcast. Youtube videos aren't podcasts just because I listen to them in the background (though one might also have a youtube video of one's podcasts) or because I could youtube-dl the audio and listen to it. The format is what gave it the name—if you can't consume it in a podcast client, it's not a podcast. My physical mailbox and my email box both contain pretty similar things, but my email reader can't read my physical mail, because it's not email. If you send me a letter, I don't receive an email, because you didn't send one. If you publish your audio interviews in a closed platform, I can't receive a podcast, because you're not publishing one.
- dave84 6y agoThis reminds me of Howard Stern’s move to Sirius. I would love if Spotify would allow podcast creators to set music breaks and play my music in between some of the more segmented podcast episodes.
- icpmacdo 6y agoRogan said in his instagram post the podcast will stay free, I don’t think this will drive down listenership. With spotify hosting the content he will be able to have Jamie pull up lots more because of fair use, YouTube’s ContentId won’t pull the videos and steal the ad revenue. I think this is the biggest motivation for the move as he is often frustrated with that issues. Also continuing to put clips on YouTube will continue to grow the audience. I’d love to know how much the deal was worth, I bet somewhere around 150 million a year for 3-5 years.
- Will_Do 6y agoYeah I suspect Youtube's policies is the main reason to switch rather than any limitations with the audio podcast in RSS. They always have an enormous amount of concern in trying to follow Youtube's policies and not get demonetized/strikes. Given video RSS is not popular, switching to Spotify makes a lot of sense. The RSS feed may have been collateral damage.
- dleslie 6y agoPlatform shifts are enough to lose significant viewership.
- anjc 6y agoIt work the opposite way too, wherein platforms lose users due to undesired changes. YouTube's banning/striking/demonitizatation of high profile channels, something that Joe often says he's afraid of, could be seen as an undesirable platform change.
- whywhywhywhy 6y ago> I don’t think this will drive down listenership I do, I think his podcast has benefited massively from being pushed out by the YT algorithm. Think a not insignificant percentage of his listeners didn't even get into it because they were looking for a podcast but because they were watching a YT video and the algorithm fed them a clip or an episode. His format became so popular on YT that YouTubers started to replicate it.
- wayneftw 6y agoSo I won't be able to watch the full episodes on YouTube any longer? Where will the videos be hosted? Answer to my own question: Spotify began testing video podcasting last year according to The Verge - https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/19/21263927/joe-rogan-spotify-experience-exclusive-content-episodes-youtube https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/19/21263927/joe-rogan-spotif... I guess now I'm wondering if all of his existing clips and episodes will disappear from YouTube? I would think not... but I don't ever recall finding any podcast on Spotify from a Google search result. Findability might take a hit.
- godtoldmetodoit 6y agoThey must be paying him a shitload. He has spoken with multiple guests about how he loves being independent, having full control etc.
- rtkwe 6y agoOr they've put a big enough sweetener in the contract that he's willing to take the risk. A per episode contract with a buyout if he gets kicked off (to cover losses while he reestablishes ad relationships when they kick him off) would be pretty sweet.
- boromi 6y agoDoes this mean it will no longer be on Youtube? That really sucks because I like reading the comments even if they are 90% banter.
- wnevets 6y agoI'm hoping this peak Rogan
- cableshaft 6y agoIf that means he's no longer going to be on YouTube, that's going to suck. That's been the only way I've been watching/listening the show for awhile now. And it's going to be a lot more out-of-sight, out-of-mind for a lot of people if it's not up there with their normal YouTube video browsing. I'm sure they got a ton of money up front for that deal though.
- biesnecker 6y agoFrom his post about it on IG: > We will still have clips up on YouTube but full versions of the show will only be on Spotify after the end of the year. :-(
- bootlooped 6y agoDoes Spotify play video though? I have seen those little looping background animations they have for some songs, but I have never seen a full blown music video or podcast video on there. EDIT: I see a "Podcasts & Videos" category, so I guess there are.
- general_orr 6y agothe video will be on spotify? what does that mean?
- sida 6y agoI honestly don’t care. But Spotify podcasting is so shitty compares to overcast. The fact that music is mixed up with podcasts makes search and discovery much much worse
- tobykimmel 6y agoSo it won’t be on YouTube anymore?
- Barrin92 6y agoIt says he has creative freedom but would they seriously let him bring Alex Jones back on the podcast under the Spotify banner? Personally I think that's probably a good thing because I find mainstreaming conspiracy theorists completely awful but I really don't know what it'll do to his fanbase given that they were big on this whole independence and do what you want brand that he had going on
- wayoutthere 6y agoHe has creative freedom until something crazy hits the media. Though given how exhausted everyone is of these battles these days, I'm not sure anything he could do would generate sufficient outrage.
- hackinthebochs 6y agoWhen widespread outrage is measured simply by twitter likes, I feel there is no end to the outrage machine. The cost of participating is zero while the dopamine hit of lending your support to some presumed moral issue non-zero. And therein lies the problem with adjudicating moral issues through social media. There is zero cost to join in the mob and so these tempests appear to be much stronger than they actually are. If there were a tangible cost to signing on to these outrage mobs, there would be much fewer of them and it would also be a more accurate metric.
- wayoutthere 6y agoI think the real problem started in the early '10s, when mainstream journalists got lazy af and just started combing Facebook and Twitter for material rather than doing actual journalism. It started with "crowdsourced" journalism like photos and videos of actual notable events, but devolved into internet drama stuff pretty quickly. Many people saw what was happening and started treating Twitter as a legitimate news source to try and 'scoop' the major news outlets. Once it was obvious that being on Twitter gave you an outsized voice, it attracted all sorts of bad actors. The 2016 election really threw it into overdrive though. Part of me wonders if Trump's whole Twitter strategy is to rile up the left because most of his base is old people on Facebook or Nextdoor. The young edgelords who were already using Twitter didn't take any of it seriously because they were just using it to troll people with 4chan memes about using bleach as eyedrops anyway.
- sida 6y agoIt is weird to me that even gimlet podcasts are not exclusive to Spotify. But JRE will become exclusive
- jccalhoun 6y agothey are starting to release them early on spotify and then a few days later to rss. I think they are also doing "bonus" episodes or something. I think they are boiling the water and we are the frog
- kentf 6y ago100M+, Same with Bill Simmons on the Ringer. His was 86M I think, Joe's is like 100M+
- tams 6y agoWith RSS/Atom, the history so far is that any use case of open feeds that gets popular enough is eventually consumed by platforms, with the feeds discontinued. Same with podcasts: the current open golden age always felt like was going to be temporary and so far Spotify looks like the most likely player to eat the mainstream.
- anoraca 6y agoIf it's not on the Apple Podcasts app I won't be listening to it any longer. Ah well, probably better to support smaller podcasters with my listening time.
- watermelon0 6y agoFree or not, Spotify is still not available in some countries. I know that only a tiny minority of people is affected by this, but I still don't like that they chose geo-restricted service. :/
- arkitaip 6y agoPeople will probably mirror the podcast all over the web.
- baal80spam 6y agoI wonder if SPOT gaining +8.42% today has to do anything with it.
- chaoticmass 6y agoI am guessing Joe didn't learn anything from his recent guest Adam Curry. Episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaPKrZTUoUs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaPKrZTUoUs
- slg 6y agoI don't listen to his show, but as a general podcast fan this is sad. This isn't the first podcast to move away from having a free and open feed of the show, but it is certainly the biggest and it opens the doors for a lot more exclusivity deals in the future.
- AndrewKemendo 6y agoWhen was it free and open? JRE stopped live streaming his shows a year or more ago and they were on YouTube which I wouldn't consider open. They would complain pretty regularly about being demonetized because they played a short clip that Joe or a guest was commenting on. Seems like this deal gives them more ability to have fewer restrictions imo
- slg 6y agoWhen I say free and open, I mean having something like this available. [1] Anyone can listen to this, on any device, using an software they want. [1] - http://podcasts.joerogan.net/feed http://podcasts.joerogan.net/feed
- paulgb 6y agoAgreed. I don't think people appreciate how unique podcasting is as a distribution medium in that it has lasted so long as a completely open ecosystem. Nobody needs anyone's permission to write a podcasting app or launch a new podcast. Sad to see that start to change, but I'm also kind of optimistic for one reason: there's just so damned much audio content out there that it is people's attention, not audio content, that is scarce. I don't think platforms have the upper hand in audio content the way that, say, Netflix does. I think that's why platforms like Luminary haven't really taken off.
- tempestn 6y agoAgreed; that's what keeps me hopeful here too. Looking at my podcast player, I don't think there's any single podcast that I would download a new app for, if they tried this. So hopefully at least for the type of podcasts I listen to, this wouldn't be a winning move.
- zethraeus 6y ago...and this is how podcasting dies.
- karl11 6y agoJust like how TV shows died once they became exclusive to one network or streaming service!
- d_theorist 6y agoOr this is how the Joe Rogan show dies.
- RyJones 6y agoDid radio die when Howard Stern signed with Sirius?
- zethraeus 6y agoI could never set up my own radio station :). The point of spotify moving into podcasts is to make a netflix-like channel that 1) attracts user and so 2) attracts more publishers. In turn, Spotify can do dynamically targeted and unskippable advertising which attracts more advertisers, and so more publishers. As users and publishers leave the open, rss based, podcast world will have significant downwards pressure.
- RyJones 6y agoPoint taken. I am a paid subscriber to Stratechery and Dithering; I hope this model wins. The creators get paid directly. https://stratechery.com/podcasts/ https://stratechery.com/podcasts/
- jpalomaki 6y agoThis might be a big thing. I think audio is kind of underused medium. We have podcasts, audio books and music, but there’s much more that could be done. Like radio theater, documentaries, talk shows. Professionally produced audio content can be really enjoyable experience. Production costs for audio stuff are less than for video. Our busy lives have limits for video consumption, but I think there’s still room for more audio content. Audio you can consume while doing something else. Combine it with taking a walk and you feel good for yourself - compare that to spending a hour on sofa with Netflix.
- raverbashing 6y agoNot disagreeing too much, but I really think podcasts have a limited "parallelism" to them Sure, you can do the dishes or go for a walk and listen to podcasts. But it's impossible to do anything mildly intellectual or that requires some attention
- hinkley 6y agoI was trying to make a Hulu or Netflix simile in my head and then you brought up audio books. I'm trying to decide if I would mind world where 'a Spotify' bought Libro, and focused on doing literary interviews and such.
- peruvian 6y agoGuessing this is the beginning of the end of podcasting being an open medium backed by RSS, at least for "big" shows.
- redisman 6y agoDefinitely. The more passive participants in this space (mainly Apple) have extremely deep pockets to start defending the amount of content on their platform. I wouldn't be surprised if the RSS method will be niche by next year and it's all walled gardens for the top 1000 podcasts.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- pc2g4d 6y agoArticle really goes out of its way to let you know why you're supposed to hate Joe Rogan... I think it's probably a good move for his bank account but will piss off a lot of his fans. I casually follow him on Youtube, just watching clips mostly but occasionally full interviews. I never use Spotify for spoken word or video---and I probably won't follow him there.
- NickBusey 6y ago[deleted]
- gganley 6y ago> at every opportunity This is some The Onion level shit
- fle3ting 6y agoJust asking for some (not totally out of context) quotes would mean you are just as worse as him obviously. In reality his "attacked transgender people" probably only refers to his opposition to trans-women competing as women in MMA, which is a perfectly valid opinion to have and is certainly not "attacking transgender people", thats idiotic.
- mattcaldwell 6y agoHis position on transgender athletes is one thing... his referring to Fallon Fox as a man, saying "that's a fucking man" is disrespectful at the very least... I'd label that transphobic. People seem to forget that he said that.
- throwawaysea 6y agoGiven that Spotify engages in some of the same censorship and control that other bit tech platforms like Google/YouTube/Twitter practice, I don't see why I would trust them and invest in their platform as a fan of such content. See https://www.midiaresearch.com/blog/spotifys-censorship-crisis-is-about-social-responsibility/ https://www.midiaresearch.com/blog/spotifys-censorship-crisi... for a past example where Spotify entered the fray of imposing their own worldviews by censoring content. Yes they ultimately backed off on that but I can't trust that they'll be the best steward for free thinking open minded content like Joe Rogan's. EDIT: see the update at the bottom of the Tech Crunch article. > Update: In response to a question the Rogan show’s history of controversial guests and subject matter, a spokesperson for the company simply responded, “All shows on Spotify are subject to our content policies.” Given their content policies include a vague "hate content" policy (https://artists.spotify.com/faq/music#what-content-is-prohibited-on-spotify https://artists.spotify.com/faq/music#what-content-is-prohib...), I don't see how Joe Rogan can openly discuss controversial topics like "Should transgender athletes compete in women's sports" any longer. Just one more reason to not trust Spotify or other big platform arbiters.
- busymom0 6y agoExactly. Spotify was the one who conspired with Facebook, Apple and Google to ban Alex Jones and others. So if Joe is moving off of YouTube because he doesn't like the censorship, he's not getting anything better with Spotify. HN likes downvoting reasonable comments just because it contains a name people may not like.
- torartc 6y agoIt's because you're spamming.
- ChrisLTD 6y agoThere's plenty of content and creators exclusive to services and often stuck behind paywalls. I can't muster any outrage about one more person joining their ranks.
- overkill28 6y agoThat's too bad, I hope at least the old episodes remain on YouTube. Not only because it is simple and easy and free to find and listen to the episodes, but the associated visual content (clips, reactions) is good too. Would Elon's blunt hit have been nearly as entertaining in purely audio form?
- bb2018 6y agoSpotify is rolling out video podcasts. Clips like that will still make their way to YouTube and other platforms (as they announced). However, you are right that making it harder to find and listen to will shrink its audience even if more economically sustainable. It reminds me a lot of Howard Stern leaving radio for satellite.
- microcolonel 6y agoYouTube really, really didn't deserve his patronage though. As somebody who has had a YouTube Premium membership over the years, the general disrespect YouTube has for the people who make the videos that attract people to their platform is offensive to me. On YouTube, your live stream can be pulled mid-sentence if you say the name "Eric CIAramella", even if you're referring to one of the many people with that name other than the one they're concerned with. Then there is the 共匪 fiasco of the last few days. The history goes back and back and back, it's a history of declining principle, and a complete lack of policy consistency, where the audiences and creators are not only a mere commodity in reality (which is par for the course) but made to feel like it too.
- jumpman500 6y agoReally? They might be able to legitimately compete with Youtube. I watch a lot of podcast clips on Youtube but would much rather view it ad-free on Spotify.
- fernandotakai 6y agoon his announcement[0], he says that he will do his video podcast on spotify. [0]https://www.instagram.com/p/CAYSqQLFP_l/ https://www.instagram.com/p/CAYSqQLFP_l/
- whalesalad 6y agoThe comments here are insane. Why do HN readers have this defeatest attitude about absolutely everything? One prominent podcaster takes his show to one of the most popular music streaming services on the planet and the reaction is really "this is the end of podcasting as we know it" ???
- christophilus 6y agoHe's more than prominent. He's first or second in most podcast lists I see. I don't listen, but it does seem like a precedent I don't want to see.
- chipperyman573 6y agoI think this is because it can't be listend to anywere but spotify. The excusivity is what I see many people are taking issue with
- notJim 6y agoBecause podcasts up till now have been one of the last remaining media types that are not owned and produced by some gigantic tech corporation, and are instead truly independent media. The fear is that podcasts will go the route of blogging, which many lament, because now we are at the whims of Twitter and medium for distribution. For at least 2-3 years, several companies have been trying to "own" the podcast medium, and it's looking more and more like Spotify may came out ahead.
- ihaveajob 6y agoI personally don't care for this podcast, but imagine if a popular website (say HN) were to sign a deal to be available exclusively through a walled garden (say Facebook). The open internet loses overall.
- karatestomp 6y ago> One prominent podcaster takes his show to one of the most popular music streaming services on the planet and the reaction is really "this is the end of podcasting as we know it" ??? It's already been trending that way, it's not like this is the first sign of it. It is an indication that the process of closing up what had been an open ecosystem, which was already underway, is about to accelerate, and yet another open protocol is about to start to wither in favor not of a better open protocol, but closed platforms full of spyware.
- l1ghthouse 6y agoFor me it’s bye bye Joe Rogan and not hello Spotify.
- different_sort 6y agobig exhale Woah.
- klondike_klive 6y ago"you silly goose"
- beshrkayali 6y agoThis is pretty strange coming from a dude who talks about how corporatism and monopolies are bad for us regular humans in every other episode. Either he's planning something or he just sold out. Either way, podcasting will stay as long we keep it alive. Rogan wants to move to a closed ecosystem, fine, that's one less podcast for me to subscribe to! Edit: one thing we can do as consumers is to stop paying for a company that's trying to take over an open medium.
- generalpass 6y ago> This is pretty strange coming from a dude who talks about how corporatism and monopolies is bad for us regular humans in every other episode. Either he's planning something or he just sold out. Either way, podcasting will stay as long we keep it alive. Rogan wants to move to a closed ecosystem, fine, that's one less podcast for me to subscribe to! My guess is he's looking at his stand-up revenue approaching zero so needs to find something to replace it. I've wondered what performance professionals are going to do.
- hinkley 6y agoIs Joe really in charge? The problem with collaborations is that we either treat them as a dictatorship or a democracy and neither works. At some point we give up on certain things because it's too much work versus too many other people, maybe we've vetoed too many other things and we - or others - feel less entitled to keep doing it, so we don't say anything or they try to go around us when we aren't looking. I know some of the stuff I complain loudest about online is motivated by an argument I'm presently losing somewhere else. It's hard to look at what someone says in public and know if that's how they really feel, or them reacting to something that is off balance by leaning farther in the other direction than they would unprompted. That said, where do most people watch the JRE? Is it Youtube? Youtube is Google, and if someone wants to argue that Spotify is the little guy compared to Google, I don't know how to talk someone out of that idea. Are we on a road to "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?" Are we already there?
- lonelappde 6y agoIs Spotify a monopoly?
- troughway 6y agoDoesn't JRE have guests on there with cemented right-wing opinions, and in general controversial figures from which he gains his popularity/notoriety? Is Spotify going to allow those guests or is JRE going to have to censor?
- mcintyre1994 6y agoIs their player anywhere near as good as Overcast? Can you sync them on Apple Watch to listen to without the phone? I quit Spotify because you couldn’t do that with the music, so I’m guessing probably not?
- flixic 6y agoIt’s much more primitive. No silence skipping, no voice boost, and most importantly, show notes are hidden and don’t really support HTML. Spotify is hurting podcasting and a lot of what is good about the open ecosystem with diverse clients.
- tinyhouse 6y agoNever understood why his podcast such a hit. I mean, I like the guy, and he's knowledgeable about MMA. But he's not someone I care to listen to on other topics.
- bengale 6y agoI find the guests pretty interesting most of the time and it tends to be laid back as he doesn’t get confrontational with people. It helps that’s he’s a funny guy and can carry a conversation with pretty much anyone.
- Mikeb85 6y agoPodcasts such as his aren't really about his opinion, rather the opinions of his guests and the conversation that follows. I'm not the biggest Joe Rogan fan but have enjoyed a few of his shows.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- s1artibartfast 6y agoNot a big fan but an occasional listener. He covers a wide range of topics and his content is interesting if you have no prior exposure to them. I think many people find his attitude a breath of fresh air in the face of cancel culture.
- caribousoup 6y agoIt's the unusual guests. Rogan himself is pretty dull, same repetitive talking points about uninteresting things. The best shows are when he gets someone on and lets them talk for hours about a niche topic. He has a large back catalogue of strange guests, some are legitimately interesting. Skip any guests who are comedians or fighters. I unsubscribed a few months back, either I outgrew the show or it has declined in quality. I just find him to be annoying most of the time now. But there are a lot of good episodes in the shows history.
- jccalhoun 6y agoIf this was a podcast that I listened to, I would be mad. I want podcasts to be in my podcast app. I listen to them mostly on my phone and I don't have spotify on my phone. I don't want to install and open a separate program just for one show. It also irritates me off when I see a podcast mentioned online and they only give an itunes link. I am an android user. Yes, most of the shows are in pocketcast's directory if I search for it but only putting an itunes link makes it more work for me and less likely to bother.
- saagarjha 6y agoI'm mad and I don't even really listen to Joe Rogan. Podcasts should be open: they're just RSS!
- m463 6y agoWell the rss does redirect through a bunch of metrics-tracking urls.
- perceptronas 6y agoWhat do you think if Spotify added "buy and download" button for specific podcast episodes?
- RandyRanderson 6y agoNote that the old clips WILL NOT remain on youtube at the end of the year. At least that's what he said in the Patton Oswald intro. He's been a critic of yt's policies for a while. I hope that he comments on whether this is a purely monetary call or, in some part, due to those policies. Maybe he or Jamie-pedia read hn? :>
- mythrwy 6y agoI sometimes listen to Joe Rogan using Rhythmbox audio player. Occasionally I'll check the corresponding YouTube clip to see what the guest looks like. I've never used Spotify and see no need to sign up for anything. If I can't download/stream to open players I probably just won't listen anymore. There are plenty of other good podcasts and books and, although I enjoy Rogan, he does get a bit redundant after a bit so not that big of a loss.
- busymom0 6y agoI agree with JRE leaving YouTube over the censorship but I disagree with him moving exclusively to spotify for following reasons: 1. Spotify was the one who conspired with Facebook, Apple and Google to ban Alex Jones and others. So if Joe is moving off of YouTube because he doesn't like the censorship, he's not getting anything better with Spotify. 2. Currently, Spotify doesn't have video (except album cover clips which occasionally show up). I prefer JRE's video format instead of audio. Think of Elon smoking weed on video vs on audio - very different. Seems like Spotify might be adding video later in the year but until that happens, we don't know what we will be getting. 3. "Exclusive" deals in the podcast world is bad. Podcasts were supposed to be platform independent audio files. Making things exclusive is going backwards. 4. Spotify is not available in many countries. 5. Spotify's desktop player isn't the best imo. Their web player is only for audio so far, so they need to make major changes.
- jhamilton 6y agoI don't see how 1 is an issue when Alex Jones et al were deliberately spreading hateful misinformation. Aiming to CYA by booting someone off of a private platform and others following suit is not the same thing as "conspiring to censor" someone
- symlinkk 6y agoIn my opinion your comment is spreading hateful misinformation about YouTube, and I would like for Hacker News to delete it and ban you permanently.
- vernie 6y agoHeh, got 'em. Can I interest you in some brain supplements?
- TheAdamAndChe 6y agoConspire - To join or act together; combine Censor - prohibit or restrict the use of something Yeah, they conspired to censor.
- thisisbrians 6y agoReally, a typo in the very first sentence? > Over the past couple of years, Spotify has demonstrating a long-term commitment to the podcasting format . . . I feel like editorial quality has really gone to shit lately, especially at less mainstream outlets like TechCrunch (where I seem to spot at least one mistake in every article I read without trying). I wish I could say it didn't matter, but sloppy writing undermines your credibility, especially with so many voices competing for attention nowadays. Your [sic] doing it wrong.
- busymom0 6y agoI agree with JRE leaving YouTube over the censorship but I disagree with him moving exclusively to spotify for following reasons: 1. Spotify was the one who conspired with Facebook, Apple and Google to ban Alex Jones and others. So if Joe is moving off of YouTube because he doesn't like the censorship, he's not getting anything better with Spotify. 2. Currently, Spotify doesn't have video (except album cover clips which occasionally show up). I prefer JRE's video format instead of audio. Think of Elon smoking weed on video vs on audio - very different. Seems like Spotify might be adding video later in the year but until that happens, we don't know what we will be getting. 3. "Exclusive" deals in the podcast world is bad. Podcasts were supposed to be platform independent audio files. Making things exclusive is going backwards. 4. Spotify is not available in many countries. 5. Spotify's desktop player isn't the best imo. Their web player is only for audio so far, so they need to make major changes.
- tantalor 6y agoThis explanation does not really make sense: > Bringing the JRE to Spotify will mean that the platform’s more than 286 million active users will have access to one of culture’s leading voices. Spotify has podcasts, JRE is a podcast, so I assume those users already have access to JRE before this deal. > By partnering with Spotify, Rogan and his team will enjoy the support of the world’s leading audio platform. Vague. What can JRE do now they couldn't do before?
- moz14015 6y agoMake a lot more money.
- rs23296008n1 6y agoNot having to deal with youtube's nonsense is likely a strong reason. If I was Rogan that reason alone would cause me to regularly evaluate alternatives. Multiple episodes have Rogan himself hitting a Youtube restriction and him verbally expressing frustration. This is something a lot of content creators on youtube are experiencing.
- boolcow 6y agoJoe Rogan is surprisingly greedy. The man has been rich for decades, doesn't need money at all, and yet he's been selling crappy snakeoil products for years, and now he's selling out wholesale. He's taking a boatload of money to kill his show. Maybe he's just tired and this seems like a smart way to end it... Sadly he just doesn't seem to be up to the challenge of seizing his role in history anyway. He could be someone that bridges the left/right political divide. He's the closest we have right now, but just not up to it. There is a deep desire in the US for someone almost like Joe Rogan. Just like there is a deep desire for someone almost like Bernie Sanders. Or even someone almost like Donald Trump. I consider these people the first wave of Great Internet Personalities. And just like the first pancake, they're not quite right. We're living in a Bizzaro World for now. I'm eagerly looking forward to the second wave of Great Internet Personalities.
- weaksauce 6y ago> Sadly he just doesn't seem to be up to the challenge of seizing his role in history to be someone that bridges the left/right political divide. He's the closest we have right now, but just not the person for the job. he brings on pretty much anyone and listens to them spew whatever they want to say without any real pushback. he should stay out of politics. he's not a bright guy.
- 2009guy 6y agoWell said.
- anjc 6y agoIt doesn't take much listening to JRE or similar shows to realise that they're in constant fear of strikes and demonetization, even when talking about mundane topics. Joe's no Alex Jones or David Icke, and he's still afraid of getting more strikes on the channel. If this move means he can talk comfortably then good for him. It's not as if listeners lose any rights in the process. Would this mean he could play artist's music that Spotify are allowed to stream? Or would other agreements be needed for this?
- Ididntdothis 6y agoThis quote caught my eye: "At the time, the Human Rights Campaign said Sanders “must reconsider” the endorsement, stating that Rogan has “attacked transgender people, gay men, women, people of color and countless marginalized groups at every opportunity.”" If they attack somebody like Rogan in this way, it's no wonder that a lot of people are getting tired of political correctness and move the other direction.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- free_rms 6y agoThe kicker is, they got their way, and we've got notable woke icon.. checks notes.. Joe Biden as the nominee instead.
- willis936 6y agoSpoiler effect: rendered. This why it’s important to stick to your own party if you need to keep FPTP. An echo chamber is literally better than being interfered with. Were any good points made? Did anyone learn anything? No. It was just a facade to help their own tribe.
- bencollier49 6y agoIt was another Spotify podcast acquisition which led me to cancel them in favour of Napster earlier this year, and I couldn't be happier.
- ravenstine 6y agoHalf the fun of JRE is watching it! I hope this means that they will be introducing video, but I'm guessing not. If JRE disappears from video form, a part of the goodness of the universe will have died.
- jankassens 6y agoSpotify has been running an exclusive high-profile podcast in Germany for multiple years now. It was previously running on radio and regular podcasts ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fest_%26_Flauschig https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fest_%26_Flauschig ) It's surprising to me that popular, platform exclusive audio content isn't happening faster. All video platforms have it.
- MisterPea 6y agoNot many podcasts have the following and clout of JRE. Seems like the podcast you mentioned in Germany has it as well. But platform exclusive content is the exact opposite of what pretty much every podcast listener wants. Someone in another comment mentioned how podcasts are the last distribution of media thats completely open and this is the first big step in the wrong direction.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- type0 6y agoThe final blow to RSS, podcasting remained one of the last strongholds of free distribution and now even that is being locked down in corporate silos.
- oldsklgdfth 6y agoI listen to the podcast because of the diverse and interesting guests that are on there sometimes. It's interesting to watch how a guy that kinda rambles with some friends mostly, created a following, turned his side hustle into an income and now he's really cashing in. Idk to what extent he worked hard to develop this business. But I suspect it's mostly him making people feels comfortable to table about what they know. If there is someone working on this I would guess the cohost - Jamie - is doing the heavy googling.
- brailsafe 6y agoSo he's ending his podcast and starting a radio show. I mostly watched the clips on YouTube and while I do subscribe to Spotify, I use PocketCasts for Podcasts. Guess I'll be using YouTube less which is fine, and maybe I'll tube in for the occasional really interesting guest.
- olivermarks 6y agoSpotify is the Clearchannel/iHeartMedia of the 2020's. I refuse to use.
- cwhiz 6y agoThat’s too bad. I ditched Spotify because they won’t release a proper Apple Watch app with cellular streaming. I prefer to watch JRE so I guess this is just going to be the end of me being able to legitimately consume this content.
- runawaybottle 6y agoSounds a little bit like when Howard Stern first signed a deal to move from terrestrial radio over to satellite radio. If this brings in a lot more subscribers for top podcasts, then Spotify will do what SiriusXM did with radio hosts, or what Netflix did with comedy specials.
- vincentmarle 6y agoI’ve long wondered why Spotify hasn’t done this for music itself? Spotify is in a great position for vertical integration: own the artist, own the content, own the subscriber.
- fareesh 6y agoUnfortunate to see in the discussion that Americans are so disturbed by one Alex Jones that there seems to be an eagerness to empower quasi-government entities to a dystopian, Orwellian degree. If I wanted to create more Alex Jones characters, this is one way to guarantee it.
- dilandau 6y agoExactly. If anything, it's the insane cancel culture that pushed me to the right.
- raptortech 6y agoAmericans aren't disturbed by Alex Jones. They're disturbed by the number of Americans who actually believe Alex Jones
- fareesh 6y agoJones is no more ridiculous or dangerous than your average holy book though. Furthermore his vision of the future is coming true by being sympathetic to the idea of an all-powerful tech platform.
- null0pointer 6y agoTime to archive all clips from Youtube and all old episodes from his website.
- kixkin 6y agoThis is a place where the JRE technical ignorance (or disregard) screws the audience despite the recent episode with Adam Curry. The beauty of 'podcasts' is the open RSS publishing and subscription. The content creator controls their feed with ease. Forcing people to get the show through a corporate infrastructure is completely contradicting the feeling and (what I thought) the philosophy of the show is (was). I discourage people from having apps like FB and other apps that pretend to be one thing and do a whole helluva lot more. The pirate ship that was JRE will now be another shill/cog in a bigger grinder. Will the market hold them to any particular standard? I say the thing that brought you over 8M subs should be enough. Grinding and squeezing all the pennies out of it seems unreasonable here. Just an example of ONE problem being part of the lefty corporate structure is the question: How many 'questionable' or 'offensive' references will be self-censored going forward?
- clircle 6y agoIs different than when Howard Stern signed to Sirius XM? Seems like there is some precedence.
- plainbrain 6y agoThe way I see it, some positives to come out of this: -Will be fun again to hear "Jamie pull that up" and actually be able to see the content in question on video without any awkwardness. -Competition for Youtube is needed. This is a massive channel moving ship, may lead others to follow. -Having controversial guests/topics won't be such a big deal (Assuming Spotify is less beholden to advertisers than youtube because of its premium memberships - for now) -A smaller audience is not a such a bad thing for Joe, esp if $ is still guaranteed in this exclusive deal. Slightly less eye balls on him, and in turn, less social responsibility, scrutiny and pressure from pseudo justice warriors. Negatives: -Exclusivity is in itself a form of censorship. Spotify is yet another company silo that relies on a proprietary ecosystem and pay-walling content. -You may have to sit through 20 spotify ads in a 3hr podcast (if you don't have premium). Or worse, maybe spotify is not even available in your country. -Sets a bad precedent, especially given that JRE was always at the forefront of promoting accessibility and openness. This is a move in the other direction, supporting a pay walled, ad-infested solution that is known to underpay artists. A platform that Joe himself was criticizing heavily just a year or two ago...
- throwaway122378 6y agoAny ideas on how much the deal was for?
- multifasciatus 6y agoMakes sense, the success of bringing the Joe Budden Podcast no exclusively last year opened the way for this. Very interested to see how video will be on Spotify.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ioseph 6y agoOne of my favourite podcasts recently went exclusively to Spotify. Despite paying for premium I've stopped listening. The podcast experience is awful on Spotify, by far the worst fault is progress gets forgotten, which is completely unacceptable.
- willis936 6y agoSelling quackery wasn’t paying off his mansion mortgage fast enough? Now here’s a guy who sells out as fast as he possibly can. Fuck the message. Fuck the medium. Just get the guy some money.
- RaleyField 6y ago"Spotify is currently not available in your country." Take my euros goddarnit. Probably fights involving licensing agreements, or competition buying whole markets. I don't know if I should play at being an international spy and buy VPN just for Rogan or just pirate it out of the general principle.
- mikemotherwell 6y agoDoes anyone have any inkling of what he was offered? Gimlet got hundreds of millions for a barely breakeven business - what is the Howard Stern of Podcasting worth on an exclusive deal?
- sfgweilr4f 6y agoMore likely Youtube are too difficult to work with and their ever-present-but-arbitrary ban-hammer is becoming increasingly high friction.
- 2009guy 6y agoSo joe Rogan says it’s going to be the same show but at the bottom of the article they list a statement from Spotify saying that the show will be subject to community guidelines. Which means that if he says anything politically incorrect he will be gagged. This is the end of the joe rogan podcast as we know it, the cultural meme/institution. I feel a sense of loss.
- fergie 6y agoMaybe a stupid question, but does this mean that the podcast will be audio-only from the 1st september or will the videos still be published somewhere?
- dolguldur 6y agoWSJ estimates this deal to be worth more than $100M. I hope Joe Rogan has a plan for how to invest a good chunk of this for greater good. IMHO this kind of sum comes with a responsibility to do something with it that goes beyond your family and friends. (Like Tim Ferris does now for psychedelics research). Judging by how I perceive him from the show, I don’t think he’s just greedy and wants that much for himself. Either there’s some detail in the contract that allows him to break free in case Spotify tries to censor too hard. Or he already has some longer-term thing in mind that he needs the capital for. One nice detail is that they’d be free to play music.
- TheUndead96 6y agoHe should just go self-hosted. If anyone has the resource to make that happen it is him.
- ecmascript 6y agoSad, I don't have a spotify account I am for sure not gonna get one just to listen to JRE. I hate this kind of shit in the podcasting world. Right now, the overwhelming majority of podcasts are open and if it were to change that would be a dark and sad day.
- heinrichhartman 6y ago“attacked transgender people, gay men, women, people of color and countless marginalized groups at every opportunity.” What a gross misrepresentation. Have the listened to any of his shows?
- jackric 6y ago> every opportunity There's your bullshit indicator
- sambe 6y agoWho started this "exclusive" nonsense? This article suggests Spotify made some moves before Apple started: https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/16/20696666/apple-podcast-exclusive-funding-bloomberg-spotify https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/16/20696666/apple-podcast-ex...
- dkobia 6y agoI absolutely love Spotify, but for some reason I just can't get with it on podcasts. I'm not sure if it's the interface or maybe I just like to keep my music and podcasting separate? They're both audio yes -- but completely different somehow.
- Balero 6y agoI agree. I find i don't always finish a podcast in one sitting, say half of it on my way in to work. Then I want to listen to music during the day/at the gym etc. But if I use the same thing, then I lose my place in the podcast, and I can't start up again.
- toofy 6y agoRogan’s claim to be doing this as message to Youtube is silly. He’s signing a contract to do a “podcast” with spotify where his “podcast” will not be a podcast at all. Podcasts are not platform specific. They’re open and distributed to any app which can read the RSS file. This is nothing but an act on his part to appeal to the outrage brigade. Re spotify, theyve been heavily ramping up their podcasts lately and doing exclusive/semi-exclusive content all over the place. If you care about the health of our podcast ecosystem, fight this any way you can–podcasts need to remain open. Our current trajectory is a straight line path to paying for podcasts which will have forced ads to go along with paying for them. That’s the road we’re on.
- coding_lobster 6y agoI've never heard about the "podcast" quality being conditioned on platform availability.
- afiori 6y agoIt is likely not in the definition, but "Spotify-exclusive podcast" sounds a lot like "Chrome-only website". They are podcasts and websites respectively, they just go against the effective spirit of the medium.
- iterati 6y agoDo they? Podcast, to me, is a talk show on the internet.
- afiori 6y agoThe distribution model of podcast has always been peculiar. A podcast is a radio show live or not distributed on the internet. Its distribution model mimics that of radio shows archives, that for the internet means RSS-like
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- aww_dang 6y agoSpotify always asks me to sign in or tells me that I can't listen to embedded media in a given country. I've never successfully played any media they've hosted. Easier and simpler to download or stream elsewhere with no signup or red tape. I suspect this is more about the money for Rogan. His content isn't essential for me. He often has contradictory takes as he seeks to placate his guests. That's fine for his particular interview format, but his inconsistency combined with censorship grandstanding and an exclusive contract strikes me as opportunist. He's never been known as someone who speaks truth to power. If anything he's a conformist who wears his derision of conformism on his shirtsleeves. Feels like this is mostly to placate his audience. Good on him, I hope he continues to earn money with his brand.
- _Mark 6y agoThis is a huge changing of the guard play. You have to give credit towards Spotify for this move, and what could signify a pivotal point in changing history. The fact there is a paying subscription model behind Spotify, I can see a future where all podcasts move towards this platform.
- MaxBarraclough 6y agoTo be clear you don't need to subscribe to Spotify to use it to play podcasts. They don't even play ads. From their point of view it's presumably a loss-leader that gives them brand awareness.
- codecamper 6y agook. well i certainly won't be use Spotify now to see this thick necked, horrible tattooed moron douchebag. Spotify giving him 100M in the middle of a crisis seems particularly tone deaf.
- icebr9 6y agoIt's 2020 and I can't set the content language in Spotify to other language than my native. It's literally impossible for me in Europe to discover any american podcast becasue I all the categories for podcasts are full of my native language only content. Same with music playlists by spotify - they are mix between English and my Native language -> shite.
- wooger 6y agoRegardless of what you think of Rogan ,this is horrible news for podcasts and independent internet culture in general. Podcasts can easily be entirely free of platforms, networks, editorial control and reliance on advertising, and many of them still are. I hope that at some point we can stop calling anything that doesn't have an rss/atom feed pointing to audio files a podcast, as they don't deserve that name. I've already abandoned one podcast which moved to Spotify exclusive (The last podcast on the left) out of principle. Re the view of Rogan, I find it fascinating that Joe is viewed as some kind of right wing chauvinistic demagogue because he has a few controversial guests, and states views in line with 99.9% of the worlds population. Contrast with someone like Louis Theroux, who has repeatedly visited and palled around with all sorts of controversial people, including white supremacists, Joe Exotic & the Westboro baptist church, all while holding onto an entirely neutral reputation.
- st1ck 6y agoOTOH it's kinda good news for podcasters, because it frees up a spot in the itunes top.
- thorin 6y agoI always download JRE as an MP3 rather than use a podcast platform or streaming service (or Youtube). Is this going to change that or is the MP3 still available? Joe must be making a frickin mint!
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jokit 6y agoI hope and doubt this will change JRE much. On the topic of libertarianism.. Almost all statists share some libertarian perspective on some issues. No libertarian has statist perspective on any issues. There are a lot of self proclaimed libertarians, Christians, Muslims, or people of any principle, who are incorrect. Unlike "Republican" and "Democratic" which don't mean anything, "libertarian" means something. You can claim you are "libertarian" just like you can claim you're a "martian", but it doesn't make it so. Joe Rogan and Adam Carolla are not the only two who mistakenly call themselves "libertarian" at times. They just don't know what it means. "A libertarian is a person who believes that no one has the right, under any circumstances, to initiate force against another human being for any reason whatever; nor will a libertarian advocate the initiation of force, or delegate it to anyone else. Those who act consistently with this principle are libertarians, whether they realize it or not. Those who fail to act consistently with it are not libertarians, regardless of what they may claim." — L. Neil Smith
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y agoThis is a little "no true Scotsman," no? Self-identification is probably the best indicator we've got for whether a label applies to a person. If enough new people label themselves a thing, and use the word to mean something different, I'd argue the word itself has begun to change, or at least has aquired multiple definitions. Coopting a label in the political sense sucks (see: "liberal"), but from a linguistic perspective it's silly to pretend language doesn't evolve.
- jokit 6y agoLike "Literally" "evolving" to mean "metaphorically"? When "X" becomes "Not X", that's not evolution but coopting. It's degradation, and it's often purposeful. "Libertarian" means something, which is why the "Libertarian Party" required an oath to adhere to the non-aggression principle. The fact that statists moved in to ruin the "Libertarian Party", take the oath and betray it, may make them "Libertarian Party" members, but doesn't make them libertarian (in fact, the opposite). Are you a Christian if you're not Christian but call yourself "Christian"? Are you an atheist if you believe in a god? Are you "blind" if you have perfect vision? I realize that this assault on reality/truth is at the heart of many issues today.. We have no language if things can mean both a thing, and/or the opposite of that thing. ...which is the point. You may have a libertarian perspective on an issue, or a group of issues (as almost everyone does), but that doesn't make you libertarian, which means liberty in all issues. There is a line between minarchist and anarchist, and a reason for both terms.