this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
242 points (81.2% liked)

Technology

60115 readers
2711 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Spotify has removed offensive imagery associated with a controversial song by Christian rapper Tyson James and his 11-year-old son Toby James, following a complaint by GLAAD.

However, the song “Still 2 Genders,” criticized for its transphobic lyrics, continues to be available on the platform. Meanwhile, no changes have been made to Apple Music’s platform.

Earlier this month, The Advocatereported that the song was accessible on major music streaming platforms, including Spotify and Apple Music, despite its derogatory lyrics towards transgender individuals, including a slur to describe them. The situation caught the attention of GLAAD, which then took up the issue with Spotify’s trust and safety team.

In an updated statement provided to The Advocate, a spokesperson from GLAAD emphasized the importance of enforcing hate speech policies by companies.

“Companies have hate speech policies to protect all users from toxic content and especially from content that incites violence against marginalized people. When these policies are violated, it is important to see companies enforce them,” the statement read.

GLAAD’s statement highlighted the grave real-world implications of hateful rhetoric and imagery connecting it to a tragic incident.

“The terrible murder of Lauri Carlton, an ally who had hung a Pride flag outside her store, is connected to a suspect who had an image of a burning Pride flag pinned to his Twitter profile,” the statement added.

The spokesperson further noted, “Rhetoric, images, and targeting of LGBTQ people encourages real-world harms. Companies and brands must continue to recognize their responsibility to people’s safety and public safety and immediately act to avoid facilitating anti-LGBTQ hate and violence.”

Spotify responded by removing the album cover and video imagery that included a burning Progress Pride flag GLAAD noted to The Advocate. Despite these steps, the song itself, carrying an anti-trans slur and dehumanizing transgender people as “demons,” remains live on Spotify’s platform.

Both Spotify and Apple Music have policies in place to moderate content on their platforms. Apple Music for Artists’ terms of service stipulates that all lyrics provided to the platform must be “correct, accurate, and do not contain hate speech.” On the other hand, Spotify’s Dangerous Content policy bars “content that incites violence or hatred towards a person or group of people based on race, religion, gender identity or expression.”

Despite these policies, Apple Music has yet to make any changes or respond to inquiries regarding the song’s availability on its platform.

In a prior response, GLAAD had stressed the digital sphere’s struggle with hate speech moderation, especially concerning anti-LGBTQ+ content, which extends beyond the realm of music streaming platforms. Their concern was not only about the derogatory lyrics but also the inconsistency in enforcing content policies by these platforms, which undermines the safety and inclusivity of all users.

As the scrutiny continues, both Spotify and Apple Music remain unresponsive to multiple inquiries from The Advocate regarding this issue. This scenario underscores a broader discussion concerning digital content moderation on streaming platforms, especially around anti-LGBTQ+ content.

link: https://www.advocate.com/news/spotify-transphobic-song-glaad

archive link: https://archive.ph/tz9FX

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LemmyIsFantastic@lemmy.world 65 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Yes, censor all the things. It'll certainly never be used against you.

[–] Thranduil@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I met someone who had such a thought about hatespeech and how you should be fined until I pointed out he and his friends call eachother retarded removeds on discord all the time and asked how much he should have to pay in fines. He stopped supporting the idea of fines

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Did you just censor yourself or am I about to change instances?

[–] Thranduil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I did not censor myself it was some retard who didnt like my words

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Unfettered hate speech leads to hate crimes.

[–] Steve@communick.news 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Prohibition doesn't make things go away. It only makes them more sneaky.

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good, let them be sneaky out of the public eye. Let the proper authorities who monitor those channels do their jobs. No need for children or anyone else to listen to garbage.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago

Fun fact: the German military sent someone to monitor the national socialist party to determine if they were a threat to the Republic. His name was Adolf Hitler.

[–] SpezBroughtMeHere@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

That's the end of the thought process. It doesn't need to be removed, it just needs to be removed from their line of sight. As long as they don't know about it, it doesn't exist. Problem solved.

[–] isles@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't disagree necessarily, but people can be intolerant of hate speech without the force of government.

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The government was not in any way involved in this story. Its 2 companies and an anti-hate advocacy group.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Allowing fascism to spread is allowing censorship. Choosing not to censor fascism is choosing to allow intolerance to become mainstream.

You call for a utopia of free speech where even Nazis can live happily alongside the minorities whose deaths they call for. Such a utopia does not exist. It's impossible. The fascists will go around to all other members of this "utopia" and by force coercion and indoctrination convince them to come together to murder the minorities. Then having done so they will censor all thought that does not align with their hatred and their conspiracies.

Tolerating fascism is the same thing as propagating it.

[–] 2ncs@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Holy cow man, chill, this discussion is about censoring a song about 2 genders, not a fascist manifesto.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This song does not exist in isolation. It's creator, the man not the 11 year old singing, spreads outspoken hatred about LGBT minorities. That in and of itself is absolutely a part of the present day neofascist movement.

[–] ComradeBunnie@aussie.zone 7 points 1 year ago

The creator is an awful person and likely to be a future family annihilator. He is truly terrifying.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Tolerating fascism is the same thing as propagating it.

This is literally and factually false.

As bad as propagating it? Go for it. But you should be aware that making statements like you did makes it really easy for people to dismiss you offhand.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 year ago

It is functionally the same. Allowing fascist thought to exist allows it to spread. Fascism doesn't require specific endorsement to spread. Saying "it is alright if someone says something fascist, there's nothing we should do about that" actually does more to spread it in many situations than explicitly endorsing it yourself.

Fascism is esoteric at its fringes. It is religious in its narrative. It spreads in societies that tolerate it. How you prevent fascism is by correctly punishing fascists. Fascists cannot be given the legitimacy of a debate, they can't be allowed to speak in the first place. If fascists are in your government, if they're in your media, if they speak freely in public, then you've already lost.

[–] Si_sierra@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago

To use a trolley problem metaphor, what they are saying is not pulling the lever is the same as allowing five people to die. If fascism is progressing and you do not stop it, you are allowing it to progress. Whether you consider that propagation comes down to your ethical framework, but from a consequentialist view it is accurate

[–] Chozo@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Some things should be censored, and I don't think that's too hot of a take, either. Any material that encourages intolerance of others should not be accepted in any civil culture.