3 ms·
For me there is a cultural question of - what kind of heterodox should be considered normal as part of a broad based distribution service. For example, there a
by eej71 5y ago
For me there is a cultural question of - what kind of heterodox should be considered normal as part of a broad based distribution service.
For example, there are a number of artists who seem to glorify killing police. Should we consider it normal that big time artist XYZ would feel the need to remove their music from the service? Yes, it would be their right (I don't think anyone disputes that)... but... is that a good cultural trend?
To my eyes, this looks more like tribalistic posturing than some sort of principled stand for something.
- least 5y agoIt's hard to call it a cultural trend when it's a couple famous people removing their library of music from one music service. I don't think it's unethical for a musician to stop working with a distributor if the terms of that stop being acceptable, that's wholly reasonable. But to try and answer your question; no, I think it's kind of silly. Someone like Neil Young can only do this sort of thing once and trying to use it to deplatform another entertainer doesn't seem to be the most useful (removing Joe Rogan's podcast or whatever won't make a dent in the cause he supposedly is fighting for) and also not particularly effective unless there is a cataclysm of high profile musicians removing their music from Spotify.