4 ms·

I'm sincerely baffled by how many people seem to feel that the exact order of operations in this situation makes a big difference. Let's assume, for the sake o

I'm sincerely baffled by how many people seem to feel that the exact order of operations in this situation makes a big difference. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that Young really did say "get rid of Rogan or I'll leave". How is that any different from saying "I'm leaving because you won't get rid of Rogan"? Or "I'm leaving, but I'll consider coming back if you get rid of Rogan"? In all of those cases, the end result (and the negotiating power of all parties) is essentially the same, so what makes one "free speech" and another "anti-free speech"?

ksec 5y ago
>I'm sincerely baffled by how many people seem to feel that the exact order of operations in this situation makes a big difference. Bias. If they disagree with Rogan in the first place, not on this specific subject but in a multiple different angle, although in modern days that tends to be politics, then they just need to find a narrative to make sure what they are doing is good. Gruber is extremely bias towards Apple. ( USB-C, AirPod sold at Cost, big.LITTLE, Unified Memory etc... ) So a narrative against Spotify wouldn't hurt.
erik_seaberg 5y ago
The principled way to do this is “I’m leaving indefinitely because I don’t approve of your editorial priorities,” not single out one guy and try to bribe or extort the company into breaking their commitments with him. Only customers en masse should be able to demand a change like this, because the company’s duty is to customers rather than competing vendors. And actually conspiring against this guy just fuels the conspiracy theories out there.