Spotify and Squarespace are cracking down on alleged "hate groups" and "hate bands"

[captain_to_fire]

Looks like tech companies, not just Google are swinging their ban hammers on these alleged "extremists groups". It's basically two articles but instead of splitting them into two threads, I just merged them into one since both Spotify and Squarespace are swinging their trusty ban hammers. This is more of a supplement thread to this existing one by @Implosivetech

Source: The Verge; Squarespace says it’s removing ‘a group of sites’ as internet cracks down on hate speech 

Quote

Squarespace says it will begin dropping some websites from its service, apparently following in the footsteps of several tech companies that have distanced themselves from organizations that produce racist and white supremacist content.

SQUARESPACE DECLINED TO SAY WHICH WEBSITES IT WILL STOP WORKING WITH

“In light of recent events, we have made the decision to remove a group of sites from our platform,” a Squarespace spokesperson told The Verge. “We have given the site owners 48 hours’ notice.”

Squarespace refused to clarify which websites it had targeted, as well as when, exactly, it gave them the 48 hours’ notice. But the website-building service provides websites for groups including the National Policy Institute, a far-right “think tank” where alt-right personality Richard Spencer is president and director. In April, Vocativ noted other white nationalist groups such as Identity Europa and the Foundation for the Marketplace of Ideas also host their websites on Squarespace. The sites apparently violate Squarespace’s stated policy, which forbids advocating for “bigotry or hatred.”

The Verge: Spotify pulls several ‘hate bands’ from its service

Quote

Spotify has removed several bands classified as “hate bands” by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), according to a report from Billboard. The decision comes one day afterDigital Music News published a list of 37 white supremacist musicians still available to stream on the platform. Now, a Spotify spokesperson has confirmed to Billboard that several of the artists have pulled from streaming, while others are under review.

 

In 2014, the Southern Poverty Law Center published a report on racism and digital music titled Music, Money, and Hate. It concluded that there were at least 54 white supremacist bands selling music on iTunes that Apple was profiting from. Apple responded to the report by removing the bands, but SPLC noted at the time that Spotify and Amazon were slow to do the same.

Spotify claims it wasn’t aware these bands were on its platform.

 

“Spotify takes immediate action to remove any such material as soon as it has been brought to our attention,” a Spotify spokesperson said in a statement to Billboard. “We are glad to have been alerted to this content — and have already removed many of the bands identified today, whilst urgently reviewing the remainder.”

The removal of the bands follows a violent rally of white nationalists and neo-Nazis in Charlottesville, VA this past weekend.

 

Spotify hosts millions of bands and musicians, and although many of those come through a label or distributor, licensing companies like TuneCore and CD Baby allow anyone to easily and cheaply put their music on Spotify, with little friction from Spotify itself.

Obviously this incident in Charlottesville has escalated way to quickly. I tried looking for that song on Spotify entitled "Money, Music and Hate" but it's now gone in both Spotify and iTunes.

 

Well, just as I've said in the similar thread, both Spotify and Squarespace can do this because they are private corporations to begin so the US government can't ask them to pull out any songs or shutdown websites as per the 1st Amendment.

Quote

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I can't really comment on the song because I haven't heard it nor heard about the band. I think with Squarespace, I think they created a gray area on this issue. I have opinions about the SPLC but I'd rather not share it here as per CS but I think whenever SPLC demands to have something removed, it should be decided by a team of employees of diverse political opinions (both left, right and center) rather too hastily because an external group says so. I don't think censorship is the solution. If we look at history, a lot of notions and ideas flourished (both good and bad) because of censorship. I'm a believer in free speech. People are free to think whatever they want in the privacy of their own minds and people are free to believe and disbelieve at any given moment as long as it doesn't spill deleteriously on other people. If it does, I think it's right for tech companies like Google, Spotify, and Squarspace to not only swing their ban hammers but also alert local authorities to put these people behind bars.

 

This reminds me of a great quote from the French historian and philosopher Voltaire (1694-1778):

Quote

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities".

-----------------------------------------

Also, on that regard I've included an article written by Garry Kasparov entitled "Fighting Hate and Saving Speech". I encourage everyone to read it. 

Quote

Legalistic language that attempts to codify hate speech is not a true solution. Instead, we should aim for broad language that enshrines our overarching principles, which will be much harder for cynical regimes to subvert, and which will keep the door as wide open as possible for free expression and individual freedom—to keep the free world free. The best we can do to protect against truly hateful speech, while retaining the freedom of expression essential to human development, is to define and refine the moral framework of the society we want, online and offline. The specifics of what exactly can be said, where, when, and so on, will always be debated, of course. But it’s not so bad to have the Devil in the details if the angels are painting the big picture. (Emphasis in mine)

 

Edited August 17, 2017 by hey_yo_
Added a related article

[LHJKO]

someone needs to create a 100% open video and song maybe pornhub would be more accepting 

[Notional]

This is the biggest problem with tech companies becoming so large. They get way too much power. Even worse, most of them reside in the Bay Area, so the extremist ideology that flourishes there is now being forced upon the entire world. I guess that is the definition of bigotry: not accepting viewpoints and ideology of others.

 

This is a blatant attack on free speech. People don't seem to realize such a thing isn't a given, and all rights can be removed if they don't stand up for them. This is sickening.

[Tiwaz]

They totally have the right to do that since its their business, i am totally against prosecuting people for "hate speech" aka speech that offends your precious snowflake feelings 

[Teddy07]

2 minutes ago, Notional said:

Even worse, most of them reside in the Bay Area, so the extremist ideology that flourishes there is now being forced upon the entire world.

 

They just have to piss off enough customers with their ideology to make them change. Marvel comics are a good example of how sales go down with their extreme ideology. They don't care so far but we will see in a few years.

[Majestic]

Hate speech, much like Islamophobia, are made up terms that only exist in (((their))) illusionairy world. But being able to speak your mind, or make offensive jokes, is not allowed on any public space anymore, including this orwellian turd of a website. 

 

2 minutes ago, Tiwaz said:

They totally have the right to do that since its their business, i am totally against prosecuting people for "hate speech" aka speech that offends your precious snowflake feelings 

Yes they do indeed, and I'm totally allowed to call them capitulating cowards for it aswell and pull my subscription.

[Notional]

3 minutes ago, Teddy07 said:

They just have to piss off enough customers with their ideology to make them change. Marvel comics are a good example of how sales go down with their extreme ideology. They don't care so far but we will see in a few years.

I get that, but the difference is that there are plenty of alternatives to Marvel. It's also only entertainment. What alternatives are there to Spotify/Apple music, and various social media? Even if there are proper alternatives, we are seeing a tendency for the entire tech community to force their ideologies onto everyone. As such, there won't be any alternatives soon.

[matrix07012]

Spotify and Squarespace are cracking down on alleged "blasphemy groups" and "blasphemy bands"

 

Hate speech is the secular version of blasphemy.

[Majestic]

3 minutes ago, Notional said:

I get that, but the difference is that there are plenty of alternatives to Marvel. It's also only entertainment. What alternatives are there to Spotify/Apple music, and various social media? Even if there are proper alternatives, we are seeing a tendency for the entire tech community to force their ideologies onto everyone. As such, there won't be any alternatives soon.

back to torrents, yarrr

[Tiwaz]

7 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Hate speech, much like Islamophobia, are made up terms that only exist in (((their))) illusionairy world. But being able to speak your mind, or make offensive jokes, is not allowed on any public space anymore, including this orwellian turd of a website. 

 

Yes they do indeed, and I'm totally allowed to call them capitulating cowards for it aswell and pull my subscription.

yeah i agree if enough people stopped using their service then they would be forced to change it back to normal again

[Majestic]

Just now, Tiwaz said:

yeah i agree if enough people stopped using their service then they would be forced to change it back to normal again

You're vastly overestimating the people that give a fuck about this, and even moreso the people who'd give up the convenience of spotify to make a point.

This is just easy marketing/pandering from spotify and it will have no consequences for them, I guarantee it. 

[Notional]

9 minutes ago, Majestic said:

Hate speech, much like Islamophobia, are made up terms that only exist in (((their))) illusionairy world. But being able to speak your mind, or make offensive jokes, is not allowed on any public space anymore, including this orwellian turd of a website. 

 

Yes they do indeed, and I'm totally allowed to call them capitulating cowards for it aswell and pull my subscription.

What's up with the echo tags? You think this is a Jewish conspiracy?

[Mihle]

20 minutes ago, Notional said:

I guess that is the definition of bigotry: not accepting viewpoints and ideology of others.

So not accepting someone else's bigotry is bigotry?

[Tiwaz]

9 minutes ago, Majestic said:

You're vastly overestimating the people that give a fuck about this, and even moreso the people who'd give up the convenience of spotify to make a point.

This is just easy marketing/pandering from spotify and it will have no consequences for them, I guarantee it. 

guess then we will have to accept it, but i dont see a point in using such a service anyways when you can easily donwload music ffrom youtube 

[mr moose]

24 minutes ago, Notional said:

This is the biggest problem with tech companies becoming so large. They get way too much power. Even worse, most of them reside in the Bay Area, so the extremist ideology that flourishes there is now being forced upon the entire world. I guess that is the definition of bigotry: not accepting viewpoints and ideology of others.

 

This is a blatant attack on free speech. People don't seem to realize such a thing isn't a given, and all rights can be removed if they don't stand up for them. This is sickening.

 

Denying spotify or squarespace the right to decide who they work with is not a free speech issue.  They have the right to express their ideals just as much as anyone else.

[Tiwaz]

10 minutes ago, Majestic said:

You're vastly overestimating the people that give a fuck about this, and even moreso the people who'd give up the convenience of spotify to make a point.

This is just easy marketing/pandering from spotify and it will have no consequences for them, I guarantee it. 

and btw. if you went in a bigger city of your  country and would say "hate speech is still free speech" you would get at least punched by some triggered snowflake

[Mihle]

I personally think the line of allowing or not allowing a site to exist should be if it encourages people to do something criminal or not.

Thats probably the most clearly line you could do.

(For example encourages to killing someone, or beating up someone, raping someone)
 

[matrix07012]

Just now, mr moose said:

 

Denying spotify or squarespace the right to decide who they work with is not a free speech issue.  They have the right to express their ideals just as much as anyone else.

That's absolutely true. The issue is that companies like Google, Apple, Spotify hold a big monopoly and it would be impossible to convince a big amount people to switch.

[abazigal]

26 minutes ago, Notional said:

This is the biggest problem with tech companies becoming so large. They get way too much power. Even worse, most of them reside in the Bay Area, so the extremist ideology that flourishes there is now being forced upon the entire world. I guess that is the definition of bigotry: not accepting viewpoints and ideology of others.

 

This is a blatant attack on free speech. People don't seem to realize such a thing isn't a given, and all rights can be removed if they don't stand up for them. This is sickening.

But at what price to maintain your vaunted “free speech”? 

 

If that makes me a bigot, then it’s a term I will proudly bear. I just want my loved ones to stay safe and sound and if doing so means trampling on the rights on a few degenerates whom I really couldn’t care a crap about, let’s just say I will lose no sleep tonight over this. 

[Mihle]

4 minutes ago, Tiwaz said:

guess then we will have to accept it, but i dont see a point in using such a service anyways when you can easily donwload music ffrom youtube 

Spotify have much better sound quality than Youtube.

[RagnarokDel]

censorship is a good idea. 

 

/s

Edited August 17, 2017 by wkdpaul
cleaned up

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, matrix07012 said:

That's absolutely true. The issue is that companies like Google, Apple, Spotify hold a big monopoly and it would be impossible to convince a big amount people to switch.

 

So the question is, do people have a problem with free speech or just who is allowed to use it?   If we are going to gag big companies because they have "reach" then should we also gag celebrities? what about about anyone who has access to a radio station?   Maybe next we should ban posting on facebook because that has the potential to reach 100's of 1000's of people.

 

As majestic pointed out,  most people just don't care, so for the few that do have a different opinion to SS or spotify, they will probably keep using the service anyway.

[Majestic]

10 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

Denying spotify or squarespace the right to decide who they work with is not a free speech issue.  They have the right to express their ideals just as much as anyone else.

So their free speech is to deny it for someone else? Who pays them to be moral arbiters? Was this a customer demand or mere pandering and the fact silicon valley is a giant echo chamber? I didn't see any polling taking place on whether this carried weight with their paying customers.

 

THis is the same type of logic that the antifa's have, they feel it's their right to free speech to crash events and deny other people a voice. The fact of the matter is, Spotify should not feel morally pressured into removing them, since they're not a government funded organisation nor are they meant to act as moral arbiters or hold any sense of political office. And this is a slippery slope. Now it's extremists, but what becomes the new extreme afterwards?

[matrix07012]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

 

So the question is, do people have a problem with free speech or just who is allowed to use it?   If we are going to gag big companies because they have "reach" then should we also gag celebrities? what about about anyone who has access to a radio station?   Maybe next we should ban posting on facebook because that has the potential to reach 100's of 1000's of people.

 

As majestic pointed out,  most people just don't care, so for the few that do have a different opinion to SS or spotify, they will probably keep using the service anyway.

Neither. I just don't like what they are saying, that's it.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Majestic said:

So their free speech is to deny it for someone else?

 

They are denying the platform not the ability to speak. .