8 ms·

I don't understand what motivates a move like this. Is he really that indignant about Joe's views on COVID that he can't sell on the same platform. If so why? B

by xupybd 5y ago

I don't understand what motivates a move like this. Is he really that indignant about Joe's views on COVID that he can't sell on the same platform. If so why? Because he cares about public health initiatives that much?

paulpauper 5y ago
It seems like the ultimate form of virtue signaling or a cry for attention. If that is what he wanted, he succeeded. It is all over the news today. Everywhere. Have to commend Spotify for not backing down despite the heap of criticism they have gotten over the past year about Rogan.
TheCoelacanth 5y ago
Anti-vaccine misinformation is killing hundreds of thousands of people. It is not an unimportant issue.
- funOtter 5y ago
  Worry about yourself.
  - mint2 5y ago
    First off, We live in a society not a free for all dystopia. Second, that poster could be one of the 7 million people in America with immune issues or one of the probably 10x that cares about one of their friends or fsmily who has those health issues, but even if not, people being vaccinated helps keep health care costs down for all and could save the posters life if they got in a car accident tomorrow the local ER may already be overwhelmed due to the unvaxxed. So anyway, thanks for that meaningful addition to the comments.
    - mns 5y ago
      > First off, We live in a society not a free for all dystopia. Well, looking at the past two years, I'm not so sure about that. Locking up the whole world in their apartments, fining people for being on the street, locking up playgrounds, banning outside exercise or limiting your "outside" time to 1 hour or allowing you to go no further than 1-3 miles from your home sounds pretty dystopian to me. My mom died of cancer after being ignored for 1 and a half year (in the EU she couldn't get a CT scan for 6 months because the hospital staff didn't want to disinfect the machine after each use) and I was able to see her only in the last 2 weeks of her life after being forced to stay in quarantine for 10 days, even if I had negative PCR tests before travelling, so yeah, let's all pretend we care about people and health, and not about people like you feeling superior and better than everyone else.
pageandrew 5y ago
Its called virtue signaling.
- breakyerself 5y ago
  Better to signal virtue than a lack of virtue.
  - finite_jest 5y ago
    I think it is more virtuous to send honest signals than to be a hypocrite. Also, "virtue" in these cases usually just means conforming to social pressure and the norms of particularly vociferous factions of society. Even if you happen to agree with those norms (which are seen as Draconian by many), the sanctimonious holier-than-thou attitude probably won't help the cause in the long run.
    - breakyerself 5y ago
      Honesty is better than hypocrisy although the two are not mutually exclusive. More often one has to choose between being honest and hypocritical or being dishonest and consistent. What evidence do you have that this move by Neil Young is anything other than his honest feelings on the subject? A lot of people are sick of Rogan spreading BS. It's not suprising someone like Young would choose to use what little leverage they have to push for him to be removed.
    - p1necone 5y ago
      Engage with peoples points, don't just claim that they're sanctimonious or that there's a lot of them, so you get to ignore them - that's absurd. A lot of people sharing the same opinion doesn't magically make that opinion less valid, engaging with the world as if there's some great conspiracy against you is counterproductive.
      - finite_jest 5y ago
        > that there's a lot of them, I kinda made the opposite of the that claim in my comment :-) I think a lot of people see the norms "virtue signallers" want to impose as Draconian. I don't think a guy having controversial guests on his podcasts is something many people find intolerable.
version_five 5y ago
> I don't understand what motivates a move like this There's been this big shift the last 10 or so years that hasn't got enough attention. People somehow now act like the world has to align to focus all its priorities on exactly what they prioritize, and can't imagine the idea that things matter differently to different people. The way things previously worked, you didn't have to agree with everything someone else did or said, you just had to get along. Now it's like "if you don't drop everything and take my cause as seriously as I do, you're dead to me" I had previously thought it was a "me generation" thing, but Neil Young is like 80 so i guess it's a societal shift.
- rektide 5y ago
  hahaha you surely must be joking. what a ridiculous spin! being political & caring about the world is not new. Young has been a strong advocate, loudly held moral stances for probably longer than many many of the readers on HN have been alive[1]. having backbone, a stance, caring: it's not new. this isnt really that different than asking Young to share a show with someone. our systems and our services have gotten more centralized, more controlled. the connection is not as clear & apparent as sharing a stage. but this is not some new radical new interpersonal cruelty Young has fostered. it's the simple desire to not associate with trash & cruelty, to find better spaces. that's not new. it's just good sense. we dont all have to follow the same code, but we should not be party to those supporting the despicable. obvious, & anything else anything less in madness. [1] https://www.antiwarsongs.org/do_search.php?idartista=224&stesso=1&lang=en https://www.antiwarsongs.org/do_search.php?idartista=224&ste...
  - version_five 5y ago
    Pretending that the current brand of "activism" is the same as previous ones is disingenuous, and disrespectful. Previous struggles for rights, for example by women, blacks, and gays, as well as pushing back against "the man" - conformity with the establishment, were important causes, I don't need to dwell on that. The current need for outrage and attention while simultaneously being ultra conformist brand of slacktivism is nothing like that. Neil Young may have been an important part of past struggles, but he's just another establishment shill looking for attention now if this is the kind of hill he's dying on.
pseudalopex 5y ago
He wrote an open letter if you want to know.
- xupybd 5y ago
jimmygrapes 5y ago
There is an interesting and (imo) humbling take I heard about this from a local radio host who was asking the same question ("what motivates somebody to expose their true value?"). In this case, the host brought up that several (all?) of Neil Young's children suffer from medical maladies, which may cause him to be more sensitive to situations that he believes could cause them undue harm. I still disagree with Neil's position and decision, but I found that this really helped humanize him in ways other pundits have missed.
tstrimple 5y ago
> I don't understand what motivates a move like this. Neil Young was saved from Polio as a child by being one of the early recipients of the Salk vaccine. As someone who is living proof of the effectiveness of vaccines, he likely has very little patience for people who profit off of spreading vaccine misinformation and put his own profits on the line to make the statement. Good for him.
- vaxskeptic 5y ago
- josephcsible 5y ago
  If breakthrough COVID cases were as rare as breakthrough polio cases, then there'd be a lot less opposition to the COVID vaccine.
  - cuteboy19 5y ago
    It is not productive to see antivaxxers as rational actors. They are concerned about vaccine breakthrough cases but have no issue ingesting ivermectin, vitamin D or hydroxyquinone? Even if there was something wrong about mRNA vaccines would it not have been better to campaign for Covaxin or Sputnik to be allowed by the FDA?
  - mint2 5y ago
    Okay that comment is going to be awkward for you to digest in a moment. I think you should know that one of the main polio vaccines doesn’t actually prevent you from getting polio, you still get it and can spread it it just doesn’t paralyze you. And that’s the Salk vaccine, the other vaccine is literally giving people a weakened stain of polio. And it actually causes some paralysis in about 3 in every million so that vaccine isn’t perfect.
    - 1123581321 5y ago
      It was clear from context he was referring to rates of polio-induced paralysis, in an analogous theoretical scenario that doesn’t quite fit the actual history. Your comment was interesting, though. I did some additional reading about the history of those vaccines.
twox2 5y ago
I honestly think it's because he doesn't like Spotify and Joe Rogan is his straw man excuse for leaving.

by xupybd 5y ago

paulpauper 5y ago

It seems like the ultimate form of virtue signaling or a cry for attention. If that is what he wanted, he succeeded. It is all over the news today. Everywhere. Have to commend Spotify for not backing down despite the heap of criticism they have gotten over the past year about Rogan.

TheCoelacanth 5y ago

Anti-vaccine misinformation is killing hundreds of thousands of people. It is not an unimportant issue.

funOtter 5y ago
Worry about yourself.
- mint2 5y ago
  First off, We live in a society not a free for all dystopia. Second, that poster could be one of the 7 million people in America with immune issues or one of the probably 10x that cares about one of their friends or fsmily who has those health issues, but even if not, people being vaccinated helps keep health care costs down for all and could save the posters life if they got in a car accident tomorrow the local ER may already be overwhelmed due to the unvaxxed. So anyway, thanks for that meaningful addition to the comments.
  - mns 5y ago
    > First off, We live in a society not a free for all dystopia. Well, looking at the past two years, I'm not so sure about that. Locking up the whole world in their apartments, fining people for being on the street, locking up playgrounds, banning outside exercise or limiting your "outside" time to 1 hour or allowing you to go no further than 1-3 miles from your home sounds pretty dystopian to me. My mom died of cancer after being ignored for 1 and a half year (in the EU she couldn't get a CT scan for 6 months because the hospital staff didn't want to disinfect the machine after each use) and I was able to see her only in the last 2 weeks of her life after being forced to stay in quarantine for 10 days, even if I had negative PCR tests before travelling, so yeah, let's all pretend we care about people and health, and not about people like you feeling superior and better than everyone else.

pageandrew 5y ago

Its called virtue signaling.

breakyerself 5y ago
Better to signal virtue than a lack of virtue.
- finite_jest 5y ago
  I think it is more virtuous to send honest signals than to be a hypocrite. Also, "virtue" in these cases usually just means conforming to social pressure and the norms of particularly vociferous factions of society. Even if you happen to agree with those norms (which are seen as Draconian by many), the sanctimonious holier-than-thou attitude probably won't help the cause in the long run.
  - breakyerself 5y ago
    Honesty is better than hypocrisy although the two are not mutually exclusive. More often one has to choose between being honest and hypocritical or being dishonest and consistent. What evidence do you have that this move by Neil Young is anything other than his honest feelings on the subject? A lot of people are sick of Rogan spreading BS. It's not suprising someone like Young would choose to use what little leverage they have to push for him to be removed.
  - p1necone 5y ago
    Engage with peoples points, don't just claim that they're sanctimonious or that there's a lot of them, so you get to ignore them - that's absurd. A lot of people sharing the same opinion doesn't magically make that opinion less valid, engaging with the world as if there's some great conspiracy against you is counterproductive.
    - finite_jest 5y ago
      > that there's a lot of them, I kinda made the opposite of the that claim in my comment :-) I think a lot of people see the norms "virtue signallers" want to impose as Draconian. I don't think a guy having controversial guests on his podcasts is something many people find intolerable.

version_five 5y ago

> I don't understand what motivates a move like this There's been this big shift the last 10 or so years that hasn't got enough attention. People somehow now act like the world has to align to focus all its priorities on exactly what they prioritize, and can't imagine the idea that things matter differently to different people. The way things previously worked, you didn't have to agree with everything someone else did or said, you just had to get along. Now it's like "if you don't drop everything and take my cause as seriously as I do, you're dead to me" I had previously thought it was a "me generation" thing, but Neil Young is like 80 so i guess it's a societal shift.

rektide 5y ago
hahaha you surely must be joking. what a ridiculous spin! being political & caring about the world is not new. Young has been a strong advocate, loudly held moral stances for probably longer than many many of the readers on HN have been alive[1]. having backbone, a stance, caring: it's not new. this isnt really that different than asking Young to share a show with someone. our systems and our services have gotten more centralized, more controlled. the connection is not as clear & apparent as sharing a stage. but this is not some new radical new interpersonal cruelty Young has fostered. it's the simple desire to not associate with trash & cruelty, to find better spaces. that's not new. it's just good sense. we dont all have to follow the same code, but we should not be party to those supporting the despicable. obvious, & anything else anything less in madness. [1] https://www.antiwarsongs.org/do_search.php?idartista=224&stesso=1&lang=en https://www.antiwarsongs.org/do_search.php?idartista=224&ste...
- version_five 5y ago
  Pretending that the current brand of "activism" is the same as previous ones is disingenuous, and disrespectful. Previous struggles for rights, for example by women, blacks, and gays, as well as pushing back against "the man" - conformity with the establishment, were important causes, I don't need to dwell on that. The current need for outrage and attention while simultaneously being ultra conformist brand of slacktivism is nothing like that. Neil Young may have been an important part of past struggles, but he's just another establishment shill looking for attention now if this is the kind of hill he's dying on.

pseudalopex 5y ago

He wrote an open letter if you want to know.

xupybd 5y ago

jimmygrapes 5y ago

There is an interesting and (imo) humbling take I heard about this from a local radio host who was asking the same question ("what motivates somebody to expose their true value?"). In this case, the host brought up that several (all?) of Neil Young's children suffer from medical maladies, which may cause him to be more sensitive to situations that he believes could cause them undue harm. I still disagree with Neil's position and decision, but I found that this really helped humanize him in ways other pundits have missed.

tstrimple 5y ago

> I don't understand what motivates a move like this. Neil Young was saved from Polio as a child by being one of the early recipients of the Salk vaccine. As someone who is living proof of the effectiveness of vaccines, he likely has very little patience for people who profit off of spreading vaccine misinformation and put his own profits on the line to make the statement. Good for him.

vaxskeptic 5y ago
josephcsible 5y ago
If breakthrough COVID cases were as rare as breakthrough polio cases, then there'd be a lot less opposition to the COVID vaccine.
- cuteboy19 5y ago
  It is not productive to see antivaxxers as rational actors. They are concerned about vaccine breakthrough cases but have no issue ingesting ivermectin, vitamin D or hydroxyquinone? Even if there was something wrong about mRNA vaccines would it not have been better to campaign for Covaxin or Sputnik to be allowed by the FDA?
- mint2 5y ago
  Okay that comment is going to be awkward for you to digest in a moment. I think you should know that one of the main polio vaccines doesn’t actually prevent you from getting polio, you still get it and can spread it it just doesn’t paralyze you. And that’s the Salk vaccine, the other vaccine is literally giving people a weakened stain of polio. And it actually causes some paralysis in about 3 in every million so that vaccine isn’t perfect.
  - 1123581321 5y ago
    It was clear from context he was referring to rates of polio-induced paralysis, in an analogous theoretical scenario that doesn’t quite fit the actual history. Your comment was interesting, though. I did some additional reading about the history of those vaccines.

twox2 5y ago

I honestly think it's because he doesn't like Spotify and Joe Rogan is his straw man excuse for leaving.