- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Who’s the first artist under 45 to pull their music from Spotify?
Posted on 2/3/22 at 8:31 am to Pisgah Pete
Posted on 2/3/22 at 8:31 am to Pisgah Pete
quote:This describes pretty much every single boycott, protest, "ultimatum", or any other action which opposes something or someone else. All of which are free speech.
They are not pulling their music to express themselves they are pulling their music in an effort to manipulate a company/country to suppress someone else's voice they disagree with
quote:You have to be really dense to still not understand that choosing either side here is not the same as choosing "freedom of speech".
Someone has to be really dense to see this any other way.
0
Posted on 2/3/22 at 8:31 am to Hobnailboot
quote:
Jason Isbell
Yeah, he pretty much has never missed a chance to signal his virtue.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 8:37 am to tigerpimpbot
quote:Calling for someone's removal from a particular platform is not "suppression of speech". It's a business deal, a private matter, and it happens all day, every day. That's what freedom affords us.
Artists expressing their freeeom of speech to support of suppression of speech. Interesting.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 8:42 am to tigerpimpbot
quote:The White House is free to speak, as well. Just like when the White House spoke out against Goodyear, Oreos, numerous news outlets, Harley Davidson, etc.
So the White House issuing a statement saying Spotify needs to do more in relation to censoring Rogan’s content is just a convenient work around then?
Posted on 2/3/22 at 8:42 am to Tbonepatron
Good. I won’t have to skip their songs. I get tired of reaching for the button.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 8:44 am to pankReb
quote:Ok what's the threshold for number of people required to turn against someone before we can call it being "canceled"? Is it a fixed number, a percentage of former supporters, or what?quote:That's not what "canceling" means...
So you're choosing freedom of speech by "canceling" the band who is exercising their freedom of speech?
Posted on 2/3/22 at 9:12 am to TDTOM
quote:
Taylor swift
Doesn’t Scooter Braun own Taylor’s library?
Posted on 2/3/22 at 9:20 am to Korkstand
quote:
quote:
quote:
So you're choosing freedom of speech by "canceling" the band who is exercising their freedom of speech?
That's not what "canceling" means...
Ok what's the threshold for number of people required to turn against someone before we can call it being "canceled"? Is it a fixed number, a percentage of former supporters, or what?
Who's being canceled? Not agreeing with any of the artists decisions is not canceling them. If I like an artist, and they remove themselves from the platform that allowed me to listen to them, because of ther own personal beliefs, that is not anyone canceling them, but themselves. I wouldn't call any of this freedom of speech issues except for the government encouraging censorship, but that's not the topic of discussion here.
If I can no longer listen to an artist because they chose to remove their music for their own reasons, then they have effectively canceled themselves.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 9:30 am to Tbonepatron
Failure's good shite is still on Spotify. They must only own the rights to the last couple of albums. No loss there.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 9:38 am to Steadyhands
quote:The poster I replied to didn't just not agree with them, he used phrasing which strongly indicated that he is no longer a fan and will not support them in the future. My question is how many people have to do that before we can call it being "canceled"? Surely you aren't saying that the public ditching an entertainer en masse isn't "canceling", right?
Not agreeing with any of the artists decisions is not canceling them.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 9:49 am to Korkstand
quote:
The poster I replied to didn't just not agree with them, he used phrasing which strongly indicated that he is no longer a fan and will not support them in the future. My question is how many people have to do that before we can call it being "canceled"? Surely you aren't saying that the public ditching an entertainer en masse isn't "canceling", right?
No longer being a fan isn't cancelling someone. Trying to deplatform them is.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 9:53 am to Korkstand
There’s a massive difference in exercising my right to not consume things I don’t agree with and trying to convince everyone else to do the same. If many many people come to the same conclusion that’s not cancelling, that’s someone making a decision that lots of people don’t agree with. If Michael Jackson would have suddenly switched genres to death metal at the height of his career, millions of people would have stopped listening. But they’re not cancelling him.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 9:56 am to LNCHBOX
quote:Trying to deplatform is an attempt at cancellation in the more traditional sense. Today's "cancel culture" is just ostracism.
No longer being a fan isn't cancelling someone. Trying to deplatform them is.
But you know that.
So again, my question is how many former fans have to turn against an entertainer before it crosses the "canceled" threshold?
Posted on 2/3/22 at 9:57 am to Korkstand
quote:
Trying to deplatform is an attempt at cancellation in the more traditional sense. Today's "cancel culture" is just ostracism.
But you know that.
So again, my question is how many former fans have to turn against an entertainer before it crosses the "canceled" threshold?
You really are a dumbass.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 10:00 am to Korkstand
Why is this so difficult to understand?. Cancel culture is not a result of people losing fans by those fans making their own decisions based on their beliefs. Cancelling someone is eliminating their ability for anyone to consume their “product”. Similar to what Neil Young is trying to do Rogan.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 10:02 am to VanRIch
quote:Please explain the difference. Specifically, how is one free speech and the other not?
There’s a massive difference in exercising my right to not consume things I don’t agree with and trying to convince everyone else to do the same.
quote:This is exactly the way "cancel culture" is used.
If many many people come to the same conclusion that’s not cancelling, that’s someone making a decision that lots of people don’t agree with.
quote:Switching genres is not a sociopolitical decision.
If Michael Jackson would have suddenly switched genres to death metal at the height of his career, millions of people would have stopped listening. But they’re not cancelling him.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 10:02 am to Korkstand
quote:
quote:
Not agreeing with any of the artists decisions is not canceling them.
The poster I replied to didn't just not agree with them, he used phrasing which strongly indicated that he is no longer a fan and will not support them in the future. My question is how many people have to do that before we can call it being "canceled"? Surely you aren't saying that the public ditching an entertainer en masse isn't "canceling", right?
It is canceling, but again it is the artist canceling themselves. The artist's opinion of this matter was not asked, rather they chose to throw it out there. If someone chooses to no longer support that artist because they don't like the artists opinion, so be it. That falls back on the artists and if they effectively get canceled, they can only blame themselves. What's the issue with that? I would say once an artist goes under/isn't part of any significant shows/concerts because of not having fans...that's canceled, in this case....self-canceled.
This post was edited on 2/3/22 at 10:05 am
Posted on 2/3/22 at 10:03 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
You really are a dumbass.
Feel free to prove that by making a valid point at any time.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 10:05 am to VanRIch
quote:That's what I'm wondering about you guys.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
quote:This is exactly the way the term is used when the issue is sociopolitical.
Cancel culture is not a result of people losing fans by those fans making their own decisions based on their beliefs.
Posted on 2/3/22 at 10:05 am to Korkstand
quote:
Feel free to prove that by making a valid point at any time.
\
You're inventing meaning to words to sit here and keep arguing. There will be no proving anything to you.
Just think about how I'm viewed on this site and realize everyone that clicked the upvote/downvote button thinks I'm more witty and intelligent than you. How fricking dumb must your posting be for that to happen
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News