Spotify’s Platform Rules and Approach to Covid-19 | Hacker News Reader

Spotify’s Platform Rules and Approach to Covid-19

newsroom.spotify.com

33 pointsTigeriusKirk19 comments

Spotify is in the same situation like Facebook is in the recent times; Spotify end up being content curation platform not platform which empowers creators and connects people. I think free speech is very important and problematic content should not be flagged and removed instead it should be labeled with something like "not fact checked", "controversial" etc.

I don't think it should even be labeled as that would cause similar problems with little benefit.

Or at least label it adequately: "Don't watch if you are stupid."

The text of "What happens to rule breakers" from the rules:

> We take these decisions seriously and keep context in mind when making them. Breaking the rules may result in the violative content being removed from Spotify. Repeated or egregious violations may result in accounts being suspended and/or terminated.

Which doesn't seem to include the new content advisory:

> We are working to add a content advisory to any podcast episode that includes a discussion about COVID-19. This advisory will direct listeners to our dedicated COVID-19 Hub

except in that the policy just says "may".

(I don't have any interest in this outcome as I don't use Spotify, but it seems unlikely that this change addresses the issues that people are complaining about)

> Today we are publishing our long-standing Platform Rules

https://newsroom.spotify.com/2022-01-30/spotify-platform-rul...

The relevant section:

>Content that promotes dangerous false or dangerous deceptive medical information that may cause offline harm or poses a direct threat to public health includes, but may not be limited to:

>asserting that AIDS, COVID-19, cancer or other serious life threatening diseases are a hoax or not real

>encouraging the consumption of bleach products to cure various illnesses and diseases

>promoting or suggesting that vaccines approved by local health authorities are designed to cause death

>encouraging people to purposely get infected with COVID-19 in order to build immunity to it (e.g. promoting or hosting “coronavirus parties”)

> encouraging the consumption of bleach products to cure various illnesses and diseases

Imagine you told someone from 2010 that this would be an internet rule at some point... He maybe would have advised you to drink to bleach to clean your head.

It doesn't mention vaccines as sterilizing vectors as being prohibited so he could talk about this with impunity:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12346214/

I don't have the ability to unflag this, but it shouldn't be flagged. It's a formal post from an important computer company about an ongoing topic relevant to HN.

1. Someone arguing against hosting Joe Rogan on their platform could easily interpret that COVID misinformation is violating their first rule.

“Content that advocates or glorifies serious physical harm towards an individual or group includes, but may not be limited to:”

2. I wonder if any younger current artists will follow Neil and leave the platform. I think Neil and Joni are unlikely to lose listeners as fans will simply migrate to other platforms. This could decrease Spotify’s strong position as a music platform and drive a perception that they are becoming a podcast platform.

>This could decrease Spotify’s strong position as a music platform and drive a perception that they are becoming a podcast platform.

Spotify isn't without fault for that perception; they've been shoving podcasts down everyone's throats.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com