[Peace-discuss] Censorship

[J.B. Nicholson]

C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> <https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-pressure-campaign-on-spotify>
> 
> I think that’s correct. —CGE


This reliance on private entities is part of what makes these moves so troubling -- 
jumping from one private system to another is not liberation, it's seeking a 
different master in the hopes of not being censored too much or censored in ways that 
don't interfere with one's speech. Greenwald's move to Rumble (while still posting 
some videos on YouTube), Jimmy Dore's transition away from YouTube to Rumble, 
Grayzone's increased postings to Rokfin, and other moves all follow this pattern.

The Internet is a scam of privatization; you can't do anything online without relying 
on private entities who can deplatform you and make it much harder for you to 
speak/write and be heard/read online.

You can't evaluate any particular service provider until after they've been put to 
some tests -- like the US/UK governments and their apparatchiks put YouTube, 
Facebook, and Twitter to (all of those companies have failed those tests because they 
all succumbed to government's calls for increased censorship). Now apparently the 
pressure is on for Spotify to censor. In time, if enough people who speak and are 
heard use Rumble to convey their messages, Rumble too will be pressured.

I think Greenwald recognizes this. He wrote:
> The narrative about Rumble is particular bizarre since its Canadian founder and
> still-CEO, Chris Pavlovski created Rumble in 2013 with apolitical goals[1] — to allow
> small content creators abandoned by YouTube to monetize their content — and is
> very far from an adherent to right-wing ideology

[1] https://rumble.com/embed/v93iql/

But Greenwald seems to know that this is not something one can evaluate until after 
tests have been done:

> That is why other platforms devoted to similar principles of free discourse, such
> as Rumble for videos and Callin for podcasts, continue to thrive. It is certain
> that those platforms will continue to be targeted by institutional liberalism as
> they grow and allow more dissidents and heretics to be heard. Time will tell if
> they, too, will resist these censorship pressures, but the combination of genuine
> conviction on the part of their founders and managers, combined with the clear
> market opportunities for free speech platforms and heterodox thinkers, provides
> ample ground for optimism.


However I'm unsure about Greenwald repeating the claim that enslaved "Uyghur Muslims 
from Xinjiang" are a group to focus on; Greenwald points to 
https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-china-suppliers-uyghur-muslims-forced-labor-report-2021-5#:~:text=Apple%20suppliers%20have%20used%20thousands,on%20forced%20labor%20in%20China 
. I don't have reliable information showing this to be significantly tied to Uyghur 
Muslims. But Greenwald's underlying point is still valid if we make a shift to 
another example -- there is plenty of horrible labor (perhaps slave labor) practice 
under Apple's control in its Foxconn and Pegatron manufacturing plants. My 
understanding of these manufacturers is that all of their assembly workers' lives are 
hell.

It's disappointing to see that Greenwald is using Callin, a service where "live shows 
can be heard only with an iPhone and the Callin app — the app will be very shortly 
available on Androids for universal use" because Greenwald is effectively pushing his 
audience (to some degree) toward getting an iPhone. This is a clear break with the 
sharp and largely correct criticism of Apple he put in the same article.

It's hard to know what to recommend to Greenwald as a replacement until we know what 
he gets out of being on Callin and why he rejected other solutions. Big Blue Button 
(https://bigbluebutton.org/), Jitsi (https://jitsi.org/), and Jami 
(https://jami.net/) are free software chat apps that might be useful instead because 
they work with all of the major OSes (desktop & mobile).

Apple and their supporters like to say that its outsourcing to these firms somehow 
prevents control over working conditions but that's obviously bullshit (and made 
clear in the book "Dying for an iPhone" which I highly recommend reading). Apple gets 
this labor via signed contracts which allow Apple inspectors to review as much of the 
process as they wish. Foxconn's major business is with Apple and this is a long known 
and mostly long-ignored practice by the US. "Dying for an iPhone" covers the reality 
of working at Foxconn well.

PR-wise, well before the publication of that book you can see how poorly Apple has 
handled its response to this crisis dating back to Apple co-founder Steve Jobs (who 
has since died, leaving his position to the current Apple head Tim Cook) in 
https://youtube.com/watch?v=2gOu50HaEvs . For all of Jobs' alleged prowess in 
speaking to crowds, see the reality of his clumsiness in management and PR even with 
a lightweight tech questioner whose interests are never to seriously threaten any 
bigwig in the tech industry. Child labor is another major point of shame for all of 
the major tech firms including Apple. There's a lawsuit 
(https://www.rt.com/business/476110-apple-tesla-congo-child-labor/) in which Apple is 
one of the tech firms being sued by Congolese families.




Getting back to who is currently pressuring Spotify and related notes:

Neil Young pressured Spotify to choose between Neil Young and Joe Rogan (per 
https://www.rt.com/pop-culture/547308-neil-young-spotify-rogan/ and 
https://www.rt.com/pop-culture/547463-neil-young-spotify-rogan-choice/) for alleged 
"misinformation" Rogan gave on Rogan's Spotify show. Young has yet to identify 
precisely what language qualifies as misinformation here; nobody working with Young 
on this or supporting Young's call to kick Rogan off Spotify is quoting anything 
Rogan said that strikes them as misinformation.

Jimmy Dore in https://youtube.com/watch?v=dTn9cHGPmUw points out that Young does not 
need Spotify's money because in January 2021, Variety reported that Young sold 50% of 
his song copyrights to Hipgnosis Song Management[1] which is now owned (at least 
partially) by The Blackstone Group since October 2021 (known for buying up 
single-family homes after the financial crisis of 2007-2008 to "devastating 
consequences" per a 2019 UN report). Blackstone allegedly abused tenants with 
"exorbitant fees, rent hikes, and aggressive eviction practices" which had a 
"disproportionate impact on communities of color, in part because the company 
targeted foreclosures resulting from subprime loans". In April 2020 the Wall St. 
Journal reported that Blackstone invested $2 billion in Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, a 
Massachusetts biotech firm[2]. This, more than Dore's unbacked allegation that Young 
is trying to get more sex from his wife Daryl Hannah, strikes me as being a more 
likely reason why Young would run defense for Blackstone's interest in the pharma 
company by issuing his ultimatum about deplatforming Joe Rogan to Spotify.

[1] 
https://variety.com/2021/music/news/neil-young-sells-copyrights-publishing-hipgnosis-1234879122/
[2] 
https://www.wsj.com/articles/blackstone-invests-2-billion-in-alnylam-pharmaceuticals-11586774701



Later, news of Joni Mitchell came to light; she is removing her music from Spotify 
because Spotify hosts the Joe Rogan show (per 
https://www.rt.com/pop-culture/547730-joni-mitchell-spotify-rogan/).



Perhaps in an effort to be relevant to younger people, we see a vague call for 
censorship or deplatforming Rogan come from Prince Harry & Meghan Markle who demand 
unspecified "changes" to Spotify:

> Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have called on Spotify to alter its platform to 
> better address alleged Covid-19 misinformation, according to a statement released 
> through their group Archewell, which works to combat disinformation. The two have 
> a reported $25-million deal[1] with Spotify.
> 
> “Last April, our co-founders began expressing concerns to our partners at Spotify 
> about the all-too-real consequences of COVID-19 misinformation on its platform,”
> a statement, released Sunday through an Archewell spokesperson, explained.
> 
> The controversial royals claim they have continued to express concerns and have 
> demanded that Spotify “meet the moment” by making “changes.”
> 
> “We look to Spotify to meet this moment and are committed to continuing our work 
> together as it does,” the statement reads.
> 
> The two did not specify what “changes” they would like to see nor did they name 
> Rogan, whose podcast ‘The Joe Rogan Experience’ has come under heavy fire from 
> liberal activists and even some in the Joe Biden administration, for allegedly 
> helping to spread Covid-19 misinformation. Rogan has promoted alternative 
> therapies to Covid-19 vaccines and invited[2] on vaccine skeptics and critics for 
> longform discussions.
> 
> Musicians like Neil Young[3], Joni Mitchell[4], and Nils Lofgren have all pledged
> to remove their music from Spotify in protest at the platform exclusively hosting
> his podcast, a deal which was reportedly[5] worth around $100 million.

[1] https://www.rt.com/uk/509768-prince-harry-spotify-exclusive-podcast/
[2] https://www.rt.com/news/544762-twitter-suspends-robert-malone/
[3] https://www.rt.com/pop-culture/547701-young-spotify-responds-rogan/
[4] https://www.rt.com/pop-culture/547730-joni-mitchell-spotify-rogan/
[5] https://www.rt.com/op-ed/489388-joe-rogan-spotify-youtube/


Not only are the "changes" Harry & Meghan want unspecified, so too are any quotes 
indicating what they find to be "COVID-19 misinformation". The lack of specificity 
about the alleged 'misinformation' makes all of these claims from any of these 
celebrities entirely specious.

I'm reminded of the #MeToo so-called "movement" -- allegations are apparently 
sufficient cause for media companies to take action. Allegations vague or specific 
fly around social media but there's no evidence to evaluate, no opportunity for 
review or debate following rules of evidence, punishments are inconsistent and 
undocumented. There's nothing like a trial going on in those cases (with the notable 
exceptions of Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein).