Freedom of speech in the us constitution is a restriction on government action. It says nothing about requiring individuals or businesses from choosing whom they interact with (subject to discrimination laws, etc). If “you” are an activity I find distasteful, why should I be required to support or even interact with it. These artists are merely giving away their revenue stream, which is their choice.
Actually, it’s usually their labels choice, but some labels listen at times.
Good for her, although it is astonishing how these at one time anti establishment artists are now shilling for the man. And trying to shut down free speech and the exchange of ideas.
> anti establishment artists are now shilling for the man
Yes I came to say the same thing.
I find the artist's behavior, and much of the media coverage of it, to be a bit like the whole "facebook whistleblower" thing. It's framed as an act of defiance, but it's actually the establishment pushing back against something that threatens them. I see this more and more, where the most mainstream and orthodox ideas pretend to be actually some principled stand against an imagined "establishment".
Actually, it’s usually their labels choice, but some labels listen at times.