Of course this is much more expensive and out of reach for many people in terms of meeting the amount of content that Spotify and so on have at hand, which is why it's not something a lot of people choose to do. I think, ultimately, if you don't want to participate in the corporate machine or passively support bad shit, the best thing to do is to track down the artist's work and buy it either directly from them or from a brick and mortar store, or one of the more ethical platforms listed above, and then construct your own music library from that with a media player. (The list is at the end and tl dr, Amazon pays the best.) There's a good guide here on how much many of the major platforms pay artists, which seems to be the metric by which most people consider a streaming/podcast platform to be 'ethical' or not.

I’d love a better choice so could use some advice. Posted by tonycpsu at 9:12 AM on January 29 There's a special place in hell for whatever lawyer reverse-engineered these guidelines from the first principle of 'how can we protect our most profitable podcaster?'

Similarly, they allow podcasters to say wearing a mask is ineffective, just not that wearing masks will cause imminent, life-threatening harm. These guidelines seemingly allow podcasters to say the vaccines cause death - just not that they are designed to cause death. Promoting or suggesting that the vaccines are designed to cause death Suggesting that wearing a mask will cause the wearer imminent, life-threatening physical harm Suggesting that consuming bleach can cure various illnesses and diseases The Verge: Here is the Spotify COVID content policy that lets Joe Rogan slide Content that promotes dangerous false or deceptive content about healthcare that may cause offline harm and/or pose a direct threat to public health such as:ĭenying the existence of AIDS or COVID-19Įncouraging the deliberate contracting of a serious or life threatening disease or illness

Plans follow neil young spotify citing