Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Music

Spotify Removes Neil Young's Music After He Objects To Joe Rogan's Podcast (npr.org) 449

Spotify has removed famed singer-songwriter Neil Young's recordings from its streaming platform. From a report: On Monday, Young had briefly posted an open letter on his own website, asking his management and record label to remove his music from the streaming giant, as a protest against the platform's distribution of podcaster Joe Rogan. Rogan has been widely criticized for spreading misinformation about coronavirus vaccines on his podcast, which is now distributed exclusively on Spotify. Late Wednesday, the musician posted two lengthy statements on his website, one addressing the catalyst of his request and the other thanking his industry partners. In the first, he wrote in part: "I first learned of this problem by reading that 200-plus doctors had joined forces, taking on the dangerous life-threatening COVID falsehoods found in Spotify programming. Most of the listeners hearing the unfactual, misleading and false COVID information of Spotify are 24 years old, impressionable and easy to swing to the wrong side of the truth. These young people believe Spotify would never present grossly unfactual information. They unfortunately are wrong. I knew I had to try to point that out."

As of last week, more than 1,000 doctors, scientists and health professionals had signed that open letter to Spotify. According to Rolling Stone, Young's original request on Monday, which was addressed to his manager and an executive at Warner Music Group, read in part: "I am doing this because Spotify is spreading fake information about vaccines -- potentially causing death to those who believe the disinformation being spread by them ... They can have Rogan or Young. Not both." The letter was quickly removed from Young's website. Spotify's scrubbing of Young from its service was first reported on Wednesday afternoon by The Wall Street Journal. His removal from the streaming platform makes him one of the most popular musical artists not to appear on Spotify, where his songs have garnered hundreds of millions of streams.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Spotify Removes Neil Young's Music After He Objects To Joe Rogan's Podcast

Comments Filter:
  • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Thursday January 27, 2022 @10:40AM (#62211427) Homepage Journal

    Rogan gets cred because Young lost. Young loses no appreciable revenue, gets cred because he took a stand. Spotify wins regardless since they hardly pay when they play.

    • The irony here is that Young sold his catalog years ago, he doesn't even own his own songs any more. One of the people he tried to sell it to was.... wait for it.... Donald Trump.

    • by Rhipf ( 525263 )

      I don't know what the pay scheme is for Spotify and how much actually goes to Young but if his songs are garnering "hundreds of millions of streams" I would say he is losing an appreciable revenue stream. I guess if he is only getting $0.0001 per stream it might not be all that significant to him but I would still consider that a rather significant amount.

      • Spotify pays around .004 per play so times 200 million is $800,000. Neil Young has a net worth of $70 to $200 million depending on which web site you read.
    • he's calling attention to what Rogan is doing and what Spotify is allowing.

      Spotify could fix this _and_ keep Rogan just by requiring a fact checker on air to provide another point of view. But they don't want facts messing with Rogan's formula.
    • by dbialac ( 320955 )
      Anybody annoyed by Young's voice wins anyplace that streams him as well. Don't forget us.
  • Let's say you're a huge Neil Young fan and love listening to him on Spotify. Suddenly because of this ridiculous political crap that has nothing to do with the music, you can't listen to him anymore without paying more money (unless you want to go the piracy route).

    And I say this FULLY AGREEING with Neil Young's opinion on the issue. It just shouldn't affect people's ability to listen to his music.

    Streaming was a mistake. Any little petty squabble between rights holders and suddenly your favorite music is h

    • Let's say you're a huge Neil Young fan and love listening to him on Spotify. Suddenly because of this ridiculous political crap that has nothing to do with the music, you can't listen to him anymore without paying more money

      Should have bought the albums then.

      And I say this FULLY AGREEING with Neil Young's opinion on the issue. It just shouldn't affect people's ability to listen to his music.

      So you fully agree, but not completely?

    • Has EVERYTHING to do with music, if you are a Neil Young Fan....
    • by dada21 ( 163177 )

      I cancelled Spotify a long time ago and not over politics.

      If I like an artist, I'll buy a license their music in the form of an MP3 and I'm good to go.

      Streaming was a big fat waste of money for me. It caused me to over-consume and find too much "enjoyment" from that form of consumption.

    • Or, you can switch to Pandora or 1.FM and listen to him there. It's not like Spotify has a monopoly on streaming music on the Internet.

    • Yeah. It's not like there isn't plenty of OTHER stuff to listen to.

      First world problems....

    • by Dan East ( 318230 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @11:19AM (#62211553) Journal

      you can't listen to him anymore without paying more money

      Neil Young just happens to OWN his own streaming service called NYA (Neil Young Archives), which is a followup service after his failed Pono [wikipedia.org]. So he's been trying to get a streaming service off the ground for years now to compete with the likes of Spotify (which is literally the competition responsible for the failure of Pono).

      So let's see how strategic this move was...
      Gets Neil Young publicity and in the news (and on Slashdot). Check.
      Forces his fans to use his own streaming service without looking like he's motivated by greed. Check.
      Brings attention to his own personal beliefs that everyone should be vaccinated. Check.

      He'd be a fool NOT to have pulled this stunt.

      • which is that the reason Young has been trying to get a streaming service off the ground is to pay artists more than the pittance the major record companies pay.

        Maybe I'm just too old, but I remember when MP3.com was a serious threat to the RIAA because artists were bypassing the record companies and putting their music out themselves. I remember the RIAA mercilessly crushing MP3.com and transforming it from a great way to find new music to shitty a internet radio and pay service. I remember when we did
    • by franzrogar ( 3986783 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @11:20AM (#62211563)

      Quote: "... because of this ridiculous political crap ..."

      Please, oh God, enlighten me how fighting against people spreading misinformation about a deadly/highly contagious disease is not a fighting against "biological warfare" but "political crap".

    • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      Except that can't really happen because Neil Young's music has ALWAYS been political crap.

      The question is who is counter culture today Rogan or Young - I would say Rogan, but if buy into the messages Young has sent throughout his career than your response should be to stand up the the man and his money and cancel your stupid Spotify account! Except people won't and Spotify knows it, because deep down most Young audience knows he was full of shit and the reason their lives are comfortable enough they can af

    • Let's say you're a huge Neil Young fan

      Do those exist?

    • So you should complain with Young, he is being political. He said âoeThey can have [Joe] Rogan or Young. Not both.â and said he wants his music removed, hoping ofcourse they would rather remove the specific podcast.
    • Let's say you're a huge Neil Young fan and love listening to him on Spotify. Suddenly because of this ridiculous political crap that has nothing to do with the music, you can't listen to him anymore without paying more money (unless you want to go the piracy route).

      And I say this FULLY AGREEING with Neil Young's opinion on the issue. It just shouldn't affect people's ability to listen to his music.

      Streaming was a mistake. Any little petty squabble between rights holders and suddenly your favorite music is harder to listen to.

      You're not the first to call him out on his "ridiculous political crap", perhaps the song Sweet Home Alabama is familiar? He also had polio as a kid and feels strongly about vaccines. I'm not a Neil Young fan but believe it would be completely out of character if he didn't put his beliefs into action as he did when he started his own download service because he dislikes "lossy" audio. (I don’t know why he was on Spotify to begin with, perhaps an actual fan could fill me in?)

  • by cascadingstylesheet ( 140919 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @10:53AM (#62211469) Journal

    Young asked Spotify to remove his music, because he was too pure and right to be there on the same platform with Rogan.

    Spotify complied with his request.

    Whats the problem?

  • by erp_consultant ( 2614861 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @10:56AM (#62211475)

    Neil Young has his own streaming service. Presumably he is getting most or all of the revenue vs. whatever Spotify gives him. So has a financial inventive to have people leave Spotify to listen to his music. Perhaps it has more to do with that than anything Rogan is doing. Just saying.

    • I agree, and internet searches for 'Who is Neil Young?' shot through the roof when this got picked up by MSM.
      • by tsm_sf ( 545316 )
        I remember an old DOS game (Leisure Suit Larry?) had an age verification system that was just boomer trivia.
    • Ehn, people aren't going to be joining his service any time soon, especially since Apple Music does lossless as part of their normal subscription, which was always Young's complaint and caused him to start his own service. I don't think he's going to be making more money this way. Or at least, not a lot more money; he's an artist that may literally be able to make it up in volume on a platform as big as Spotify, despite the fact that they have by far the worst per-stream rate of the major players.

      Anyway, if

  • OMG (Score:5, Funny)

    by ktakki ( 64573 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @10:56AM (#62211477) Homepage Journal

    Neil Young stands to lose dozens, maybe hundreds of dollars.

    k.

  • And this is going to cost Mr Young about $24,000 a month based on published rates. It's probably actually more since if he's got that many plays he probably could negotiate a better rate. He's worth around 200 million apparently so it's not like he's hurting but it is actual real money.

    I'm sure he never once thought they would take Joe Rogan off the air but the point is to draw attention to the vaccine misinformation and rogan's unwillingness to have fact checkers on or even someone who disagrees with h
    • Isn't listening to a podcast a choice? I personally do not have the free time to listen to podcasts but anytime I consume 'opinion' pieces on the internet, If I find something ridiculous I basically turn it off. I don't understand why we have reached a point where we need to have thought police out there.
      • I don't understand why we have reached a point where we need to have thought police out there.

        It's the natural result of compromising education [cnn.com].

      • With any of my points? Are you just trying to piggyback on my comment? I don't mind you making that point but don't make it on an unrelated thread. There's a post button at the top of the page just under the article summary. If you're going to make a comment on related to mine that doesn't address any of the points I raised use that. Especially if it's just an incendiary troll post.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by SmaryJerry ( 2759091 )
      Joe Rogan actually had fact checkers on his podcast and people with completely opposite opinions. You can’t get more balanced than that. And yet, people still claim he “spreads misinformation” just for discussing a side of a topic that goes against popular opinion. The problem with cancel culture is that people don’t even want an opposing view to be heard at all, even if there are only fractions of truth to it, there are still things to be learned from both sides. For one there is no
      • by noodler ( 724788 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @01:22PM (#62212163)

        You can’t get more balanced than that.

        'Balanced' does not mean that you should give every opinion the same treatment.
        Anyway, nothing Rogan does is balanced. He's usually going for the things that dumb people like to speculate about because they read about it on the internet.

      • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @02:55PM (#62212623)
        from Futurama? And no, he doesn't have people with opposing opinions on. What he does is after having 10 or 20 people who agree with him on and taking some flake for it he has 1, very weak and milquetoast person on on a different show. At no point does anyone refute his B.S. in real time.

        Go look up when Sanjay Gupta was on his show and see what I mean. The whole time Dr Gupta was walking on eggshells trying not to upset Rogan, and it was pretty clear he was afraid of Rogan ending the interview and storming off like a petulant child. Meanwhile Rogan let's Robert Malone on to spew nonsense unchallenged for as long as he wants.

        It's like when Fox News used to have that token liberal (Combs?) that everyone made fun of. It was so obviously an act. Fox dropped the act decades ago, Rogan won't be far behind.
      • by serviscope_minor ( 664417 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @02:56PM (#62212633) Journal

        Joe Rogan actually had fact checkers on his podcast and people with completely opposite opinions. You canâ(TM)t get more balanced than that.

        This is like insisting CNN isn't balanced because they don't bring on a flat-earther as a counter opinon every time they talk about "global" news.

        It's not "balance" to present known misinformation plus fact checkers.

        • > This is like insisting CNN isn't balanced because they don't bring on a flat-earther as a counter opinion...

          I want to see that, actually, at least for the entertainment value.

          CNN: "So you are saying every astronaut is bribed to lie?"

          Flattie: "No, they are screened for their opinion before they are allowed to be astronauts. NASA can be very selective."

          CNN: "Do you know if any astronaut candidate who was rejected for their flatness opinion?"

          Flattie: "I was. See, I even have the letter here."

          CNN: "Okay, b

      • This is sort of true for other positions Rogan holds but not when it comes to this vaccine.

        I've been listening to his podcast for quite some time. For the last year the pattern I've seen is a lot of pushback against guests who promote the vaccine and call out pseudoscience. These guests also don't get invited back. He allows people like Malone, Weinstein and Pierre Kory to spread nonsense without any fact checking. This is bad enough but I don't think he's gone through an entire podcast without going on

    • I'm sure he never once thought they would take Joe Rogan off the air but the point is to draw attention to the vaccine misinformation and rogan's unwillingness to have fact checkers on or even someone who disagrees with his stance on vaccines.

      Neil didn't even say what he objected to in particular. Just some vague handwaving stuff.

      • I'm sure he never once thought they would take Joe Rogan off the air but the point is to draw attention to the vaccine misinformation and rogan's unwillingness to have fact checkers on or even someone who disagrees with his stance on vaccines.

        Neil didn't even say what he objected to in particular. Just some vague handwaving stuff.

        I doubt he even knows what he's objecting too,

    • What I find interesting about people who complain about "cancel culture" are the same people who complain about their "choices being taken away". In this case, Neil Young made a choice about where he wants his music to be streamed with a private company. He gave Spotify a choice. Spotify chose Rogan over Young. The issue is those complaining about these things mean only their choices should be entertained and no one else's.
  • by awwshit ( 6214476 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @11:09AM (#62211509)

    Musicians from Neil Young's generation took a stand and had something to say through music. Seems like there is no modern protest movement, modern musicians seem to be about the money and fame (if they can find it) and have really nothing to say. Whether I agree with Neil or not, I can appreciate Neil's passion.

  • by beheaderaswp ( 549877 ) * on Thursday January 27, 2022 @11:16AM (#62211541)

    Young's stance on this is reflective of a larger issue in our society:

    We're at the point where a significant portion of the American public raise every disagreement or issue to the level of either "Nazi's at the front door" or "A complete constitutional meltdown".

    This is insanity. And it isn't partisan in it's nature.

    The first issue is the idea of ideology. We could do well to not have that. You know... those knee jerk absolutes pulled out in the press and general discourse (Socialism!!! Fascism!! ad nauseum). But once politics becomes religious in nature it almost always follows that a massive conflict has to ensue- with enough suffering for the participants to ask "Is this really worth it?"

    Then add in the fact that ideologies are inherently incomplete because they cannot solve all problems. So when they are applied it leads to more conflict over areas in which they have failed.

    Then there's actual religion. Like the political counterpart they have "dogma" which dictates what is "right or wrong". The dogmas are incomplete, in dispute, and the institutions promoting them do not even agree on what they are.

    Then.... there's the press. It's for profit. The news that is amplified is news which gets the most viewers. Do the math there. How much outrage can be generated? How much news contains nuanced and complicated analysis of real issues?

    Add in a weak educational system....

    And the output of this massive failure of a society is a large number of confused, ignorant, outraged, and materialistic citizens who have raised disagreements to the level of Absolute Moral/Dogmatic/Ideological Absolutes- give those idiot social media and see what you get.

    Congratulations Mr. Young: you have declared victory and departed the field- while allowing a brain damaged cage fighting comedian to take moral high ground. All while damaging your brand which has a great deal of value to society.

    Yup... we all won here. Assuming we find it entertaining. Are we not entertained?

  • He apparently believes strongly in censoring opinions with which he does not agree..., but would he then acquiesce to censorship of his own music if people did not like the message.

  • by jessethepro ( 1374565 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @12:03PM (#62211771) Homepage
    I love Joe and I love Neil but I could not care less what two obnoxiously rich people do. Neil isn't really risking anything, he has plenty of money and plenty of places to peddle his music. I am sure Joe could care less about what Neil does with his music. Please keep these politically motivated stories out of the geek news.
  • by mitchy ( 34242 ) on Thursday January 27, 2022 @01:06PM (#62212101) Homepage

    Tons of comments here from folks that clearly never took the time to read the actual letter.The letter is not that long or hard to read, and although the list of names is long, it is also painfully obvious whether someone backing this letter likely had any relevant expertise or not.

    The letter: https://spotifyopenletter.word... [wordpress.com]

    I'm astonished and saddened that so many folks would have such loud-but-clueless reactions to this letter without even bothering to casually scan the contents.

To err is human, to moo bovine.

Working...