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

Technology

58092 readers
2941 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 1 year 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
[–] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 41 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (4 children)

Guys, I hate it too. But we can't just remove every single piece of art we find objectionable. Yes, I am using the word Art liberally. Do you really want to live in that world?

[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 40 points 10 months ago (6 children)

We can remove hate speech though, and conflating hate speech with "every single piece of art we find objectionable" is dodgy af.

[–] Pirate_lemmy_arrrrR@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Eminem has a lot of homophobic lyrics. Think you're going to get him removed? Music has always pushed the boundaries of what's acceptable. Sometimes that's a good thing, other times it's not. But I think an artists freedom of expression overrides your feelings.

[–] Jonna@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

There's homophobic remarks and there are songs that are nothing but homophobia from start to end.

[–] Hobo@lemmy.world -3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes but MTV was never obligated to play Eminem's videos and quite often censred them. Hell Walmart is responsible for at least two decades of CD censorship. Is Spotify obligated to host offensive songs/images? I don't think there's a great answer to that question, but it bugs the crap out of me trying to figure it out. The only thing that I've seen that sort of hoodwinks the issue is the fediverse, and I don't think there's a federated music platform.

[–] toobeyonewing@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

They can host it. I'm just not going to pay them to do so.

[–] AWittyUsername@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Having an opinion (even a controversial one) isn't hate speech. Does the song actually call for anything hateful?

[–] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago (3 children)

It's only two genders, you're parents are jackin' you up

They might as well put some crack in your cup

You came out innocent, now you're corrupt

Now, you stand on the bridge, and you just wanna jump, heh

Got these pink-haired devils

Teachin' the kids in the school, they are vessels

Used by the enemy, he's just a rebel

Let's turn up the kettle

When God gets ahold of 'em, he won't be gentle (he won't be gentle

Yes, it does.

[–] AWittyUsername@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

How are people so knowledgeable on a song that they dislike. Don't listen move on...

[–] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It took me a minute to read through the lyrics so that I could be informed about exactly what's in the controversial song.

It's easy to have an informed opinion.

[–] AWittyUsername@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Or don't read and then you don't get outraged. Move on.

[–] abuttifulpigeon@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's no call to action, all those lyrics are saying is that the author believes God will punish them, he's not telling everyone else to do the same.

[–] RGB3x3@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The problem is that there are people who think that God has called to them to punish the "sinners," so lyrics like that can very easily be the encouragement those people need to commit to action.

It's dangerous to talk about a group of people that way. It's dehumanizing.

[–] glockenspiel@programming.dev 2 points 10 months ago

This is legit a similar argument to the satanic panic or attempts to ban metal and violent video games.

Hold bad doers responsible.

[–] Jonna@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Quoting from the song, "LGBTQ, Let God Burn Them Quickly" Does that qualify?

[–] AWittyUsername@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

No. You can't call god to incite violence. God doesn't exist, if they did I'd like to think that they'd be inclusive.

[–] JewGoblin@lemmy.world -3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I hear China is lovely this time of year

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

this is just a slightly repackaged version of the typical "If I cant say the N word then its a slippery slope and before you know it its 1984" argument freeze peach absolutists use.

[–] JewGoblin@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

China's first speech law was about racism, y'all want to kill free speech, it just Boggles the mind. it never stops with "Hate speech"

"hate speech" is just a Trojan horse

[–] gmtom@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

it never stops with “Hate speech”

Except for every time it does stop with hate speech. Like do you think Germany arrests people that insults its politicians?

[–] UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Sucks to suck. Imagine not getting into art school