Who morally runs the world? –

A miracle and a steal – They are not the rapper Nesya Levy and the rapper the producer Soroker generation – were crowned as Israel’s “People of the Year” last Rosh Hashanah and their hysterical hit “Harbo Darbo” was chosen as the song of the year at Galgaltz, among others. “Harbo Darbo” is a rhythmic and energetic rap song that was released in November 2023, shortly after the events The horrors of October 7. The song, according to the artists’ testimony, was created out of rage and a feeling of helplessness following the events of Black Saturday, which Soroker described as a feeling of defeat and national humiliation. According to him, the piece was intended to raise the morale of the people, and he even believes that the mission was successful. Indeed, the song was played on the radio stations and even led the company partner to purchase the rights to use it in an advertisement for a considerable sum.

However, the dizzying success of “Harbo Darbo” was accompanied by quite a bit of controversy. The criticism of the song, which was defined as “aggressive” and “aggressive”, was mainly heard outside of Israel.

This time, Spotify behaved in a strange and secretive manner and did not inform anyone of its decision to remove a dominant song from the past year without explanations or apologies. In addition, we all know that the streaming service still contains plenty of misogynistic, sexist and violent songs that are simply played peacefully and without interruption.

Following the lyrics of the song – like: “We have brought the whole army against you and we swear there will be no forgiveness Are all the units ready??!… All the units in the IDF are ready for their swords, they are beating you on the head. – Many claimed that it was a hate song aimed at all Palestinians. These claims even led to an internal turmoil inYouTubewhen workers on the platform called for the removal of the song on the grounds that it constitutes “incitement to genocide”.

On the other hand, Soroker described in the media in the past the threats he received following the song and quoted what was written to him: “We know exactly who you are, we know where your family is, you have a brother like this and a sister like that and we will kill them all.” Ness and Stila responded to the criticism and explained that the song was meant to support the people of Israel. They reiterated that “Harbo Darbo” was not intended to harm the Palestinians, but was meant to express the pain and frustration following the terrorist attack, and that the phrase “Amalek” that appears in it refers toHamas only. All this did not help, and despite the success in Israel, “Harbo Darbo” also led to additional unpleasant events for the duo, culminating when the United States refused to grant them artist visas, which led to the cancellation of a planned tour of the two in Miami and New York.

“Harbo Darbo” simply disappeared completely and without explanation

However, these very days, when we already thought that the peak of the global opposition to “Harbo Darbo” was behind us, the music streaming platform chose spotify not to include the very successful song in the list of “the most played songs of the year in Israel”, which she published as part of the projectWrapped its. While other songs by the duo, such as “Mighdalim” and “Bumperim”, were included in the list – “Harbo Darbo” simply disappeared from it completely, and this without reasons, but apparently due to its controversial content.

This episode raises thoughts – complex and not entirely decisive, it must be admitted – about the global rules of morality, and who is supposed to be their determiner and enforcer.

So first you should know a little about Spotify’s content censorship policy and its role as a gatekeeper – Spotify, as a large digital platform, is currently defined, at least within the limits European Uniondue to its Digital Markets Act (DMA)as a ‘gatekeeper’ who hosts content from many creators. Therefore, it bears a certain responsibility, and even quite a high one, for these contents. The company is committed to maintaining the cleanliness of its service, as reflected in its approach to extreme content, which it described as follows: “Spotify strives to enable artists to make a living from their art and billions of fans to enjoy and be inspired by it. To this end, our teams around the world work around the clock to ensure that the experience along the way is safe And fun for creators, listeners and advertisers.”

In principle, Spotify prohibits content that promotes terrorism or violent extremism, and works to remove content that violates the rules of the platform or the law. The company uses proactive monitoring methods, human expertise and user reports to identify potentially offensive content – and delete it.

To be fair, it should be said that Spotify, according to various reports, also faced pressure from various interest groups, such as Zionist groups from the UK, who urged it to remove pro-resistance Palestinian music. Therefore, it is possible that the Swedish company’s moves originate from its desire to demonstrate a balance between enabling freedom of expression for artists and preventing incitement and offensive content, simply as compliance with the law.

However, this time Spotify behaved in a strange and secretive manner and did not inform anyone of its decision to remove a dominant song from the past year without explanations or apologies. In addition, we all know that the streaming service still contains plenty of misogynistic, sexist and violent songs that are simply played peacefully and without interruption.

So, on the one hand, I am happy about the demand of governments and continents from giant online services to demonstrate responsibility for the content that is published in them. But on the other hand, either you really censor any kind of call for violence or revenge and hate speech – or you don’t. Spotify, it’s time to decide if you flow with nationalism, racism, violence and other sick evils of society, which are reflected in music, or not. Because when you act inconsistently, it conveys management of where and where, which, admittedly, is not a very successful concept, neither for you nor for your artists and creators or listeners.