mef79

Spotify should be permitted to host what it wants to. But they should also listen to their employees who do the work that makes the platform run. This article isn't about an angry Twitter mob making demands of a private company, it's about workers raising an issue with the company leadership and expecting an appropriate response (which does not necessarily mean removing content)

The article is pretty sensationalized - it does not explicitly cite what the employees were looking for or what the leadership was willing to do. We've got the content of two employees' questions, a comment from the CEO that doesn't seem to be a response to either of them, a canned response from a comms person after the fact, and a rehash of Rogan's latest controversies.

Spotify has already made the decision to exclude multiple Joe Rogan episodes from their catalog, this is just a decision of where they draw their line.

This is getting tangential, but opinion polls on voter ID aren't comparable to opinions on a national popular vote. Replacing the electoral college with a popular vote is the entire policy. Voter ID is complicated - we don't have a required ID nationally, lots of people don't have drivers licenses, state IDs cost money, how are we going to get gov't-issued IDs to people that don't already have one - do we make it any easier/cheaper or do we just tell them "you've got 4 years, figure it out"?

Also disagree on the comments on the popular vote being a mess - why should the population of someone's state factor in to how much their vote matters? Disenfranchisement is someone who lives in California's vote mattering less than a voter in Wyoming. Especially problematic is the winner-take-all way of determining electoral votes. Having a state pledge all of its electors to one candidate when 49% of its citizens voted for the other is an absolute failure of representation.

I'd say that the 2000 election coming down to 540 votes in Florida is a much bigger mess than the idea of a popular vote.