3 ms·

I think calling this censorship is like saying Applebee's censors beer because they stock Bud Lite over Old Rasputin. Spotify is the owner of the content and p

by xnyan 6y ago

I think calling this censorship is like saying Applebee's censors beer because they stock Bud Lite over Old Rasputin. Spotify is the owner of the content and pulled those episodes for the same reason all mass marketed content gravitates to the bland and benign - bland and benign is easier to sell to a large mass of people. Joe Rogan was free (not just free, well compensated) as an indy and could have kept his lucrative gig, but spotify dumped a truck load of money in his lawn and he decided he'd rather have that. They even told him up front they were going to remove episodes, and the contract made it clear they could keep going. It's not really censorship when the creator decided to pull episodes to make their content more appealing to a mass audience of people in order to make more money.

throwaway3699 6y ago
The real issue is the audience care about those historical conversations. The Alex Jones podcast was probably the most hilarious JRE episode full stop. I'm not going to get outraged but I don't care to watch as many episodes as I did.
input_sh 6y ago
> Joe Rogan was free (not just free, well compensated) as an indy and could have kept his lucrative gig, but spotify dumped a truck load of money in his lawn and he decided he'd rather have that. I mean obviously we can't know for sure without access to his finances, but I remember seeing some estimates that he could've earned the amount of money Spotify gave to him in like two years or so. So his choice was money upfront or earning it via traditional means in a couple of years. In my view, he made the wrong choice. I'm faced with a similar dilemma right now (but with losing money instead of gaining it) by investing in a NAS that would pay off in a little over two years by downscaling the servers I'm renting.
- matwood 6y ago
  > In my view, he made the wrong choice. I agree, but it's his choice to make. Money in the hand today is better than tomorrow. As a very casual JRE listener, he's completely gone from my radar since he moved to Spotify. Reminds me a lot of when Stern went to satellite. The show lost its widespread relevance almost overnight. And when the show loses relevance, it becomes harder to get the best guests and it becomes a slow downward spiral to bland/repetitive.

by xnyan 6y ago

throwaway3699 6y ago

The real issue is the audience care about those historical conversations. The Alex Jones podcast was probably the most hilarious JRE episode full stop. I'm not going to get outraged but I don't care to watch as many episodes as I did.

input_sh 6y ago

> Joe Rogan was free (not just free, well compensated) as an indy and could have kept his lucrative gig, but spotify dumped a truck load of money in his lawn and he decided he'd rather have that. I mean obviously we can't know for sure without access to his finances, but I remember seeing some estimates that he could've earned the amount of money Spotify gave to him in like two years or so. So his choice was money upfront or earning it via traditional means in a couple of years. In my view, he made the wrong choice. I'm faced with a similar dilemma right now (but with losing money instead of gaining it) by investing in a NAS that would pay off in a little over two years by downscaling the servers I'm renting.

matwood 6y ago
> In my view, he made the wrong choice. I agree, but it's his choice to make. Money in the hand today is better than tomorrow. As a very casual JRE listener, he's completely gone from my radar since he moved to Spotify. Reminds me a lot of when Stern went to satellite. The show lost its widespread relevance almost overnight. And when the show loses relevance, it becomes harder to get the best guests and it becomes a slow downward spiral to bland/repetitive.