Who exactly gets to decide who deserves a soapbox? You and the wolk folk?
You realise the list of "health professionals" trying to get Rogan taken down includes non doctor podcasters and dentists right?
You realise the list of "health professionals" trying to get Rogan taken down includes non doctor podcasters and dentists right?
Yes, maybe others are also speaking out, as they should. Most yapping about antivax aren't doctors anyway, to match your comparison.
Edit - can't reply, so here: Who decides? The people paying for the soapbox. If spotify wants to support it, no one is stopping them, but their customers sure are going to speak out, and take their money elsewhere. Welcome to America.
Who gets to decide who deserves a soapbox?
I worked at a media company and we had a substantial reach and liberal bias. We were a propaganda machine.
And its not censorship. Its their soapbox, they can do what they want. You can always start your own soap box. Per my example above, you shouldn't have to pay money to support voices that you fundamentally disagree with, nor work for.
There is no expectation or obligation of free speech on a private platform. Censorship arguments ring hollow when outright lies are weaponized and causing measurable, real harm.
I’m not going to bite on the ivermectin/ventilator stuff because it’s just completely absurd. BTW the way you used the “it’s easy to argue” construction backwards.
If your desire is to ignore the facts and instead yell into the void a position without substantiation (“no deplatforming! carry All The Speach Regardless of Content!), that sounds unlikely to persuade. I mean, you know they moderate this place too? Simply turn on “showdead” in your profile to see the deplatformed.
You have to jump through an extra hoop to see them at all, and you can't interact with them.
Customers also are free to tell Spotify they aren't happy with the service before they leave. And then its Spotify's choice to either make their current customers happy, or try to welcome new ones to replace their cash.
But that's not enough. In their ideal world, I would be not allowed to pay for "misinformation" because their position wouldn't be limited to Spotify. Spotify is really just a pointless implementation detail.
That's absolutely a fascist attitude. They actually think they and their club know better than everyone else, and their best argument is apparently along the lines of "well you're not a doctor either".
You are more than welcome to pay for misinformation anywhere else, on someone else's platform, or even start your own, but I'd prefer you do it not in my music app please.
People disagree with your position because it's counter to their interests. A group of people is advocating for the removal of voluntarily accessible material because they believe they know better, and many would beg to differ because, guess, what, nobody is infallible or can know everything.
> or even start your own [platform], but I'd prefer you do it not in my music app please.
That's fine, but that doesn't mean people can't find this philosophy insufferable. If they find it insufferable, that doesn't mean they believe you have no right to be insufferable. They just don't want you to succeed.
It's one thing to say that vaccines cause autism, or make your sperm into zombie sperm. Stupid, but fundamentally something I can understand.
"Wolk [sic] folk" I cannot.