![]() I personally could not do it in clear conscience. In the absence of strong opinions, I certainly do have significant reservations. I don’t have a strong opinion on this dilemma, but I agree it is a dilemma, and of legitimate concern to a thoughtful Christian. These are things upon which we of course agree, and I happen to think that it applies here. We were created to live proper lives of love for others and respect for those with whom we enter into contracts. Moreover, it is in playing such ads, Spotify makes clear, that Spotify tries (in the absence of subscriptions) to be ethical itself in paying proper royalties to those took the trouble to record, market, and produce the music we enjoy.Įthics has never boiled down to a matter of “the one with the best technology wins.” We were not created in order to outsmart the big guy, even if the big guy is rich and powerful. Moreover, Spotify is so bent on your hearing the ads that they refuse to play the ad while your volume is muted or even turned down too low. In fact, going “ad free” is not only prominent, it is likely the most prominent feature of a Spotify subscription. Not only this, but the removal of ads are a prominent feature of Spotify’s paid services. First, the websites one visits that have ad pop-ups often impose those ads without warning and there is no capacity to pay for the content and thereby avoid the ads. In fact, there are significant differences between spotifree and an adblocker. The principle argument here is that it is no different than an ad-blocker. I have never used Spotifree.Īlthough I have not read the end user terms of agreement, I would not be wiling to use spotifree. Maybe not as bad as Xbox music, but pretty close. The volume level, the presentation… everything. Not all the ads are perverse (a lot are from Home Depot, which I certainly don’t mind), but they’re all annoying. Without them, I feel genuinely uncertain as to what to do (I’ll check them later). Give me your thoughts before you check them, and then check them if you like. I wouldn’t doubt if it also went against their terms of agreement. Getting an app that does for free what Spotify expects to be paid for seems unethical. Spotify expects you to become a subscriber to remove the ads. One friend said it’s no different from an ad-blocker in your browser, and he noted that one of the reasons we use ad-blockers is the objectionable content (like the pop music ads on Spotify) that we don’t want to see.Īnother friend said there’s a difference between ad-blocking in the browser and silencing ads in Spotify: ![]() “I hate the work of them that turn aside it shall not cleave to me.” Instead of occasional ads for the latest chart-topping album, I get a few seconds of peaceful silence-thanks to Spotifree.īut the presence of bad ads doesn’t justify stealing, and isn’t that what I’m doing when I listen to Spotify’s music while silencing its main source of revenue? I may be one of only a small number of people doing this, but I never bought that argument from Napster afficionados, and I won’t buy it from myself. No more interruptions to Rachmaninoff from pop stars hawking their latest immoralities and inanities. It’s a little app that basically silences the commercials. I like the amazing free-music player Spoti fy, and Spoti free has made it a more enjoyable experience. So here’s one for you, and I really want to see some careful, scripturally informed wisdom here: is it ethical to use Spotifree? You probably try to think more deeply about your biblical faith and its implications than the average pew-sitter, or you’d be watching TV right now. If you read my blog, you’re probably a Christian.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |