Joe Rogan - Intellectual Heavyweight

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I never heard of Joe Rogan until I saw this thread. Hooray for me.

 

[Trausti]

I never heard of Joe Rogan until I saw this thread. Hooray for me.

You must live in a hermetically sealed bag. People eating cockroaches is part of our cultural zeitgeist.

 

[Emily Lake]

However, blacks aren't hated in America because of their skin color. The skin color just makes them easier to identify. Blacks are hated in America because of social inertia and lies dating back to the 17th century and culminating in a war in the 19th Century that The South just won't drop... and then the use of said animosity by Nixon in the mid to later 20th Century post Civil Rights Act. Not calling them black isn't changing any of that.

You do know that the vast overwhelming majority of people in the US don't hate black people at all, right?

 

[Emily Lake]

Is there any chance, any chance at all explaining to these stupid cunts that the problem with Joe Rogan isn't his politics, attitude or format but that he provides extremists a huge platform where they can express their views with little or no push back? CNN revised their policy and told Rick Santorum to fuck off, so I guess the difference between Joe Rogan and MSM is at least MSM can take a fucking hint.

Have you ever watched Joe Rogan when he has on one of those extremists? The majority of the time, the extremists are given the leeway to feel comfortable and not attacked... which leads to them coming across as complete and utter whackos. There's no real need to 'fight back' against the extremists, you just have to let them explain their beliefs in their own terms to see how vapid and ridiculous they are.

 

[Patooka]

while you make an interesting point here, is there no nuance in the fact that CNN is ostensibly a news program, and joe rogan is a comedian doing a podcast where the stated intention is just a chat between a host and guests?

Yes there is nuance. I hesitate to use nuance because most Rogan fans don't understand the meaning of the fucking word but you are exactly right. Incidentally, the same argument was used towards Jon Stewart when he was hosting the Daily Show. Stewart's argument was that as a comedian he shouldn't be held to the same standard as a journalist. Whilst the argument is the same the context isn't. Stewart regularly challenged his guests and called out their bullshit. Rogan does nothing of the sort.
Now with regards to the comparison I provided (CNN), yes absolutely Rogan should be held to a different standard. But still to some standard. Considering the size of Rogan's audience he has some responsibility towards the content he provides. How much responsibility? I'm fine with a discussion on that. The problem is Rogancunts believe Joe Rogan should be absolved of any responsibility of the content he provides and that is complete horseshit.

i'm certainly on board with requiring (either explicitly via law or implicitly via consumer pressure) for news outlets to be held to a high standard of both fact checking in terms of verifiable accounts and records and also being responsible for presenting valid information through their on-air personalities,

Agreed.

but the logical end point of what you're suggesting is that anything which is available to the public should be scrutinized for both accuracy and general integrity, which would effectively end anything which contains 'opinion' or anything religious.

That is exactly what I am suggesting. I'd point out that is what is already happening, you and I do it every day. Public criticism is a functional mechanism to achieve this. Dan Rather, Brian Williams and Rachael Delezal are examples of this happening and yes; I deliberately cited left wing examples.

Again, this is not the case with Joe Rogan. He readily admits he is not qualified to challenge his guests and more importantly he shows no inclination to prepare for such interviews. That is not the same as providing contrarian expert a platform to scrutinize general consensus for accuracy and integrity. That's giving legitimacy to fringe attitudes without scrutiny or integrity - almost the exact opposite result.

i'm not taking a stance on that suggestion btw, at least not in this post - i'm just establishing the parameters of the argument here and how they extend outside of the context of one podcast.

If I had to put it into a one size fit all principle it would be this; if you have an audience, you have a responsibility with regards to the content you put out. The level of responsibility varies with regards to the type of platform, size of platform and topic material but it is always there. It's never nonexistent. "I'm just asking questions", is an extremely disingenuous excuse and typically hides, "I like being a provocative cunt" as the real motive.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Have you ever watched Joe Rogan when he has on one of those extremists? The majority of the time, the extremists are given the leeway to feel comfortable and not attacked... which leads to them coming across as complete and utter whackos. There's no real need to 'fight back' against the extremists, you just have to let them explain their beliefs in their own terms to see how vapid and ridiculous they are.

It works that way for someone who is scientifically literate. I've never watched this guy but can appreciate what you say.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I never heard of Joe Rogan until I saw this thread. Hooray for me.

Newsradio? He played the guy who tried to fix the equipment.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

However, blacks aren't hated in America because of their skin color. The skin color just makes them easier to identify. Blacks are hated in America because of social inertia and lies dating back to the 17th century and culminating in a war in the 19th Century that The South just won't drop... and then the use of said animosity by Nixon in the mid to later 20th Century post Civil Rights Act. Not calling them black isn't changing any of that.

You do know that the vast overwhelming majority of people in the US don't hate black people at all, right?

Sure love, whatever gets you through the day.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I never heard of Joe Rogan until I saw this thread. Hooray for me.

Newsradio? He played the guy who tried to fix the equipment.

I did a quick google. He sounds like an entertainment personality.

 

[Emily Lake]

Have you ever watched Joe Rogan when he has on one of those extremists? The majority of the time, the extremists are given the leeway to feel comfortable and not attacked... which leads to them coming across as complete and utter whackos. There's no real need to 'fight back' against the extremists, you just have to let them explain their beliefs in their own terms to see how vapid and ridiculous they are.

It works that way for someone who is scientifically literate. I've never watched this guy but can appreciate what you say.

I think it works that way for most people.

Pick a topic you think would be interesting, and watch an episode, and judge for yourself. I watched one with Elon Musk, which was... weird. Musk ends up looking like he's either an alien or a robot, either way he doesn't come across as a real human. Rogan also had some white supremacist guy on once, I don't remember who, but the racist guy was so obviously demented and irrational, his viewpoint so devoid of any kind of sense that I think it was obvious to anyone who reaches even the 30th percentile of intelligence.

 

[Emily Lake]

However, blacks aren't hated in America because of their skin color. The skin color just makes them easier to identify. Blacks are hated in America because of social inertia and lies dating back to the 17th century and culminating in a war in the 19th Century that The South just won't drop... and then the use of said animosity by Nixon in the mid to later 20th Century post Civil Rights Act. Not calling them black isn't changing any of that.

You do know that the vast overwhelming majority of people in the US don't hate black people at all, right?

Sure love, whatever gets you through the day.

So what, you're just going to throw out this massive assertion that black people are hated, with the implication that they're widely hated, with no support and no evidence... and then just drip some condescension when I disagree with you?

Seriously, do you even have any black friends?

 

[Trausti]

 

[marc]

Is there any chance, any chance at all explaining to these stupid cunts that the problem with Joe Rogan isn't his politics, attitude or format but that he provides extremists a huge platform where they can express their views with little or no push back? CNN revised their policy and told Rick Santorum to fuck off, so I guess the difference between Joe Rogan and MSM is at least MSM can take a fucking hint.

Have you ever watched Joe Rogan when he has on one of those extremists? The majority of the time, the extremists are given the leeway to feel comfortable and not attacked... which leads to them coming across as complete and utter whackos. There's no real need to 'fight back' against the extremists, you just have to let them explain their beliefs in their own terms to see how vapid and ridiculous they are.

The same thing could have been said about Trump. It was very easy to see from his speeches that he was an unintelligent, narcissistic, habitual liar. Yet there were tens of millions of people who voted for him, denying the evidence of his lies even when it was presented to them.

when Rogan has these whackos on, sure a lot of us will see them for what they are. But there will also be plenty of people who will take them at their word, especially when the host apparently does so. He gives them a false air of legitimacy, reinforcing the opinions of the crazy, and swaying the opinions of the uninformed.

 

[JohnG]

said no one

 

[Trausti]

Is there any chance, any chance at all explaining to these stupid cunts that the problem with Joe Rogan isn't his politics, attitude or format but that he provides extremists a huge platform where they can express their views with little or no push back? CNN revised their policy and told Rick Santorum to fuck off, so I guess the difference between Joe Rogan and MSM is at least MSM can take a fucking hint.

Have you ever watched Joe Rogan when he has on one of those extremists? The majority of the time, the extremists are given the leeway to feel comfortable and not attacked... which leads to them coming across as complete and utter whackos. There's no real need to 'fight back' against the extremists, you just have to let them explain their beliefs in their own terms to see how vapid and ridiculous they are.

The same thing could have been said about Trump. It was very easy to see from his speeches that he was an unintelligent, narcissistic, habitual liar. Yet there were tens of millions of people who voted for him, denying the evidence of his lies even when it was presented to them.

when Rogan has these whackos on, sure a lot of us will see them for what they are. But there will also be plenty of people who will take them at their word, especially when the host apparently does so. He gives them a false air of legitimacy, reinforcing the opinions of the crazy, and swaying the opinions of the uninformed.

Please. The MSM peddled the Russia Collusion hoax for five years. Russia bounties. All lies. If you think that Rogan’s listeners easily fall for falsities, why do you assume that you don’t also believe bullshit propagated by the news sources you consume?

 

[Trausti]

said no one

Yes. This coordinated attack on Rogan by the legacy media isn’t happening. Okay.

 

[bilby]

You do know that the vast overwhelming majority of people in the US don't hate black people at all, right?

The vast overwhelming majority of 1930s Italians weren't fascists.

The vast overwhelming majority of 1930s Spaniards weren't fascists.

Therefore, by the same logic that you used to conclude that the modern USA isn't a racist shithole, neither Mussolini's Italy nor Franco's Spain were fascist shitholes.

And yet, they were. So your reasoning is broken.

By not fighting against the vile minority, by leaving that fight to others, you allow their victory, as both Italy and Spain discovered to their cost.

For evil to triumph it is necessary only for good people to do nothing.

 

[ZiprHead]

Please. The MSM peddled the Russia Collusion hoax for five years. Russia bounties. All lies. If you think that Rogan’s listeners easily fall for falsities, why do you assume that you don’t also believe bullshit propagated by the news sources you consume?

Bull-fucking-shit.

The collusion has been proven and shown to you several times.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I think it works that way for most people.

Pick a topic you think would be interesting, and watch an episode, and judge for yourself. I watched one with Elon Musk, which was... weird. Musk ends up looking like he's either an alien or a robot, either way he doesn't come across as a real human. Rogan also had some white supremacist guy on once, I don't remember who, but the racist guy was so obviously demented and irrational, his viewpoint so devoid of any kind of sense that I think it was obvious to anyone who reaches even the 30th percentile of intelligence.

Sounds kinda like the Gong Show. Chuck Barris was always high. I'll have to check it out. As idiotic as the Gong Show was it was entertaining. I suppose it's up to the individual how seriously they will take any offering.

 

[Patooka]

Please. The MSM peddled the Russia Collusion hoax for five years.

How
Many
Fucking
Times
Are
You
Going
To
[removed and replaced with: “Repeat this false statement”]

Like honestly, is there going to be a figure on the finite amount of times you will peddle this horseshit? The only people who don't believe elements of the Trump campaign colluded with Russia are yourself and Barbos. Only the dumbest of dumb cunts would look at an investigation where people pleaded guilty and went to jail along with millions and millions of dollars of assets seized and go, "Yep, just a hoax. Flynn, Manafort and Papadopolous plead guilty just for shits and giggles".
So seriously, how many times are you going to repeat this crap? Do you suffer from a learning disability? I honestly think you are an intelligent guy, so it's entirely possible you know that you are willingly and knowingly spreading misinformation. Kinda ironic, considering what the thread is about.