Antonio Salgado Borge: Neil Young vs. the Hydra

Neil Young, a legendary 76-year-old Canadian musician, has given Spotify an ultimatum: They can have either podcaster Joe Rogan or Neil Young, but not both.

Joe Rogan currently hosts the most listened to podcast on Spotify, and in 2020 alone he received 100 million dollars from that company. Recently, this driver has chosen to spread misinformation about vaccines against the virus that caused Covid-19.

In an open letter, Young explained his reasoning forcefully of himself: “With approximately 11 million listens per episode, the Rogan show is the largest podcast in the world and has tremendous influence. Spotify has a responsibility to mitigate the spread of misinformation on its platform, but the company does not currently have a policy to do so."

This musician put it with all his lyrics: “This is not just a matter of scientific or medical concern; it is a sociological issue of devastating proportions and Spotify is responsible for allowing this activity to flourish on its platform.”

Neil Young's action shows how, regardless of official provisions, all people, each in their corresponding field of action, can socially sanction anti-vaccines.

Broadly speaking, the idea is as follows: the decision not to be vaccinated transcends personal boundaries, since those who take this option are more easily infected and have a greater chance of infecting third parties.

Not getting vaccinated is, then, an act of selfishness. Those who decide so do not think about the proven damage in terms of human, economic, psychological and social lives that derive from extending the time of the pandemic. Based on conspiracy theories, misleading publications, or brittle logic, they think it's best to “not risk it” to be vaccinated.

In other areas, society usually establishes mechanisms of social sanction for those who show similar selfishness. For example, if someone insists on taking a dangerous dog around on the pretext that the dog guarantees his safety, that person would probably not be invited to social gatherings. One would also not attend a meal at the home of someone who invites this person.

Young's action constitutes a form of social and public punishment for Spotify. The punishment is for giving a megaphone to a man who spreads misinformation and panic about vaccines; that is, for letting someone into his house who, with his words and influence, ends up causing damage to third parties, both anti-vaccine and vaccinated.

It is important to note that Neil Young is not calling for the unvaccinated to be locked up in isolated camps—as China is doing. He is not even publicly requesting that certain groups be obligatory to be vaccinated – as is the case in Italy, Austria or Australia.

The only thing this musician has done is show that it is a mistake to pretend that it is innocuous to be anti-vaccine and that, given the effects that those not vaccinated against SARS CoV-2 generate, the least an individual can do is socially sanction them. .

Someone could argue that all of the above is trivial, since Neil Young's removal from Spotify will be inconsequential for that company. Certainly this is an idea that has been repeatedly repeated by people who don't care about Young's music.

It has also been mockingly repeated by those who note that for that company the retirement of a 76-year-old musician cannot mean much in economic terms.

If I had Spotify, the withdrawal from the catalog of Neil Young, without a doubt one of my favorite musicians, would be enough to leave this platform. However, I can perfectly understand that it would be naive to think that it will be for enough people for Spotify to end up removing anti-vaccine content.

To this we must add a point recently noted by the well-known journalist Kara Swisher. It is a fact that Young's action is destined to fail; In the world of music streaming, as in most areas involving Big Tech, there is not enough competition.

It is therefore evident that Spotify can afford to receive the media impact that Young's departure represented because it monopolizes a large part of the market. Neither those who upload his music nor those who listen to it have many additional options.

I use Apple Music because I don't like the way Spotify milks data and because the audio quality of the former is superior to the latter. However, I am aware that the possibility of a "free" service, the interface, the ease of use and the interaction with social networks of Spotify put Apple at a serious disadvantage.

It is important to note that we are dealing with a case analogous in a sense to that of Facebook. If you close that social network, what do you replace it with? There are certainly a handful of options, but moving to them means sacrificing the features and reach currently only offered by Meta's social network.

@heysauwhy I'm trying to use the same content to achieve 3 different goals: - give value to people (tips, sharing e… https://t.co/TCXMqlsTpw

— Kilian Poulin Sun Jul 25 06:28:23 +0000 2021

The above is, unfortunately, difficult to dispute. But that doesn't make Neil Young's move inconsequential or ridiculous. And it is that, despite all these considerations, there are at least two ways to respond to those who mock the convinced action of this musician.

The first is that if all the bands and people who have catalogs on Spotify and who consider it important that the population that has access to vaccines use them adopted the same position as Young, then that company would probably have ended up closing its doors to Rogan and other diffusers of toxic lies.

This can be illustrated by referring to a famous exercise. The idea, broadly speaking, is as follows.

Imagine a group of ten people kidnapped by an armed individual. It is clear that if all the prisoners pounced on their captor at the same time, he would end up being subdued. But it is also well known that when there is no certainty that others will do the same, each prisoner ends up remaining in his place motionless.

Neil Young's action is equivalent to that of that person who gets up and does what he should do without thinking about what others are doing. That is to say, to that of an individual who does the part that corresponds to him morally without reservations and without waiting for others to do the same.

The second way to respond to those who ridicule Neil Young is to put into context the recent motivations behind the actions of this Canadian musician.

Given that Spotify has the largest share of the music streaming market, by turning its back on this platform, Young will be losing a significant part of its income.

But it is not the first time that this musician has done something similar. For example, Young fought for years for streaming platforms to increase the quality of their audio. His argument was that people who listened to digital music were missing out on a huge chunk of depth and detail in the recordings.

Consequently, those who criticize or ridicule Young are criticizing or ridiculing an individual who shows consistency and adherence to principles even when this results in loss of personal benefits.

Despite his apparent failure, Neil Young is unlikely to back down at this point. And it is that the idea that it is necessary to push consistently to move people, even when the result is disappointing, is a frequent theme in the music that this 76-year-old man makes in the final part of his life; a theme that is beautifully portrayed in “Welcome Back”, one of the songs from his most recent album:

"I'll sing you an old song right now, one you've heard before, it might be a window to your soul that I can slowly open."

Indeed, Neil Young's decision to socially penalize Spotify for harboring and empowering anti-vaccines is unlikely to change the way this company conducts itself.

Those of us who have followed Young in recent years know that we are facing yet another repetition of a story that we know very well. Before one more of his persistent attempts to make us sensitive to issues that, despite being obvious, we have lost sight of. A window into our souls that Young hopes to eventually open.—Edinburgh, UK.

asalgadoborge@gmail.com

Antonio Salgado-Borge

@asalgadoborge

Doctor of Philosophy (University of Edinburgh).