No, Spotify has decided that Joe Rogan's spreading of factually incorrect misinformation that could let to material harm is not the type of content that they want to platform. Not equivalent at all.
It was never much of a thing. If your social media posts cause a financial or reputational risk to your employer, they'll take action to resolve that risk regardless of a disclaimer in your bio.
Art isn't born in the mind of the creator. It's born in the mind of the consumer.
People are moved everyday by music created by machines. That's enough to put artists out of business because the output is the same even if the input is different.
So you see art as an emotional response in a bottle?
I never really accepted that. Otherwise, the response I've gotten to a hypothetical man under a rock perfectly replicating the Mona Lisa without having witnessed or heard of it before would be as great and worthy of celebration of artistic work as the original; many of more artistic inclinations I've spoken to balk at the very suggestion. Man that was a fun day in Philosophy of Art class.
Most of the artistic I've gone back and forth with do not see the end product alone as Art, but also the process, from ideation, to execution, and finally display. The reason behind the creation of that particular work and not another even has a place in the Art-Ness of the work-of-art.
Just because something is moving to someone, somewhere can be said to be necessary, but not quite sufficient to bestow the quality of being Art. It's a rather perplexing problem to discuss. I tend to approach it like linguists do language. Descriptive, not prescriptive. Though I haven't mingled in artistic circles recently to reconduct a census with regard to generative music/art. Most of those I do run into though tend to be non-committal on the subject and just treat it as just what I've described. A pleasant, and surprisingly novel sensation from an unexpected origin.
