So the Spotify-Rogan debate isn’t about policy on its face - but zoom out, and that changes. Spotify is a private company and can kick anyone off its platform for any reason. “Censorship” means a lot of things to a lot of people, but only government entities are blocked by the Constitution from doing it. People use the First Amendment as shorthand for protecting open discourse, but that’s not what it actually says. This also has nothing to do with the First Amendment. Critics are upset at Rogan for giving those guests a platform and for entertaining their ideas, but that’s a matter of values, not law.

It’s far more simple: Rogan has said ugly things, including racial slurs, and several of his guests expressed views on COVID-19 outside the scientific consensus. But neither Spotify nor Rogan are in legal trouble.230 applies to internet services that can host third-party content, and grants them legal immunity to host almost any content. That said, Spotify could still terminate Rogan’s contract if it doesn't like what he produces. Spotify CEO Daniel Ek dismissed the characterization of Spotify as a publisher during a town hall last week, claiming Rogan's podcast counts as “licensed content” since Spotify has no creative control.It is his distributor, and no amount of shouting about supposed distinctions between “platforms” and “publishers” matters. Spotify gave Rogan over $100 million for exclusive rights to his podcast. So even if you couldn’t care less about the fate of a podcaster with a penchant for DMT and elk meat, you should be paying attention - at least this once.įirst: This has basically nothing to do with Section 230. Both sides see only what they want to see: We’re living through a nightmare Rorschach test conducted on the front pages of every media outlet and social network. Which is to say, a debate that isn’t really about free speech at all, but the consolidation of market power. It’s like having to listen to a screaming match between two of the most obnoxious Little League parents - except the game ended two weeks ago, and they’re still going at it.Īs it so happens, the Spotify-Joe Rogan affair also perfectly encapsulates the debate over free speech and tech platforms.

It’s exhausting, it’s boring and if you say the wrong thing, you’ll be shoved in the virtual pillory and spat on by an angry mob (i.e., ratio’d on Twitter). I don’t blame you if you’re tired of hearing about Joe Rogan and Spotify - I am, too.

Spotify support under from angry fans