4 ms·

Hardly any rogan advocates are saying young shouldn’t be able to do this, at least according to my Twitter feed. In fact people are happy with young being able

Hardly any rogan advocates are saying young shouldn’t be able to do this, at least according to my Twitter feed. In fact people are happy with young being able to do it and basically laughing at him. So I don’t think anti young people are somehow not understanding what free speech is. What they are critiquing is someone who spent his life being anti power and establishment doing the bidding of an establishment who’s also spread plenty of misinformation about Covid and many other things. (And on a side note, rogan actually had opposing sides on as well, the CNN health guy. I don’t see anyone on the public health side actually being willing to engage with any of the people questioning their judgement, they just dismiss them as anti science. And it turns out a lot of things they were right about. Cloth masks being the most recent example, but you can count the lab leak hypothesis and many other things among them)

sanderjd 5y ago
That may be true of your Twitter feed but it does not seem to be true on this site.
denton-scratch 5y ago
> doing the bidding of an establishment I doubt he's doing anyone's bidding. He has good reason to oppose anti-vaxxers; he's a polio victim.
danaris 5y ago
I've seen, in the multiple discussions on this topic that have shown up on HN since it broke, a significant percentage of posts arguing precisely that Young shouldn't be able to do this, because, in their view, it's "censorship" and "violating free speech".
- josephcsible 5y ago
  I've seen a ton of people saying Young shouldn't have done it (which I agree with), but not a single one saying he shouldn't have been able to do it. There's a big difference.
  - sanderjd 5y ago
    About 80% of the top comments here are "this infringes on free speech".
    - josephcsible 5y ago
      I think there's an important distinction between infringing on free speech and being anti-free speech, and that Young only fell into the latter. Now had Spotify caved, then a lot of people would call that the former. As another example, imagine a group of protesters arguing for the repeal of the Bill of Rights. Since that includes the First Amendment, their position is clearly anti-free speech, but they're not infringing on anyone's free speech by having their protest. (And in fact, if someone tried to ban that protest, they'd be the ones infringing on free speech.)
      - sanderjd 5y ago
        His stance is not anti-free-speech at all. It is "I don't think Spotify should associate with this specific person and I don't want to associate with them if they do". It would not be anti-free-speech for me to refuse to go to a dinner party where I know they've also invited someone I don't want to associate with, or to tell the hosts why I don't want to be there.
        josephcsible 5y ago
        Young's stance is more like "I don't think Spotify should associate with this specific person because he exercises his freedom of speech to say things that I disagree with, and I don't want to associate with them if they do". Not wanting to associate with Spotify isn't in and of itself anti-free speech, but it is when that's your reason why.
        sanderjd 5y ago
        No his problem is pretty clearly with the content itself, not the meta-issue of his ability to express it. And it's totally fine to not want to associate with people you don't want to associate with or with people who associate with those people. We all do this picking and choosing of associations all the time; it's ordinary.
- suslik 5y ago
  Young quitting Spotify is in itself not an act of censorship. However, it is an act in support of censorship as a principle; in executing his rights to free expression Young aspires to facilitate censorship of ideas he doesn’t like.

sanderjd 5y ago

That may be true of your Twitter feed but it does not seem to be true on this site.

denton-scratch 5y ago

> doing the bidding of an establishment I doubt he's doing anyone's bidding. He has good reason to oppose anti-vaxxers; he's a polio victim.

danaris 5y ago

I've seen, in the multiple discussions on this topic that have shown up on HN since it broke, a significant percentage of posts arguing precisely that Young shouldn't be able to do this, because, in their view, it's "censorship" and "violating free speech".

josephcsible 5y ago
I've seen a ton of people saying Young shouldn't have done it (which I agree with), but not a single one saying he shouldn't have been able to do it. There's a big difference.
- sanderjd 5y ago
  About 80% of the top comments here are "this infringes on free speech".
  - josephcsible 5y ago
    I think there's an important distinction between infringing on free speech and being anti-free speech, and that Young only fell into the latter. Now had Spotify caved, then a lot of people would call that the former. As another example, imagine a group of protesters arguing for the repeal of the Bill of Rights. Since that includes the First Amendment, their position is clearly anti-free speech, but they're not infringing on anyone's free speech by having their protest. (And in fact, if someone tried to ban that protest, they'd be the ones infringing on free speech.)
    - sanderjd 5y ago
      His stance is not anti-free-speech at all. It is "I don't think Spotify should associate with this specific person and I don't want to associate with them if they do". It would not be anti-free-speech for me to refuse to go to a dinner party where I know they've also invited someone I don't want to associate with, or to tell the hosts why I don't want to be there.
      - josephcsible 5y ago
        Young's stance is more like "I don't think Spotify should associate with this specific person because he exercises his freedom of speech to say things that I disagree with, and I don't want to associate with them if they do". Not wanting to associate with Spotify isn't in and of itself anti-free speech, but it is when that's your reason why.
        sanderjd 5y ago
        No his problem is pretty clearly with the content itself, not the meta-issue of his ability to express it. And it's totally fine to not want to associate with people you don't want to associate with or with people who associate with those people. We all do this picking and choosing of associations all the time; it's ordinary.
suslik 5y ago
Young quitting Spotify is in itself not an act of censorship. However, it is an act in support of censorship as a principle; in executing his rights to free expression Young aspires to facilitate censorship of ideas he doesn’t like.