Shameful Joe Rogan

[PurpleTree]

Also what would you want Rogan to say or do, so that you "like him" again?

To the people thinking he's so bad and dangerous or whatever

 

[How to be wise]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Meh, my work is not meant for such a broad audience. It's not a serious show.

How about just talking about regular personal development, like your material 7 years ago.

[SS10]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Meh, my work is not meant for such a broad audience. It's not a serious show.

@Leo Gura Would you go on his show if he asked you?

[Ivan Dimi]

13 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

It's amusing to watch all these YTbers who directly feed their careers off Joe's podcast shill for him.

I don't think Joe should get canceled, but the way these people smugly kiss his ass is amusing and no different than the way politicians get in bed with donors, lobbyists, and corporations. It's the same thing as mainstream media does but now its branded as anti-mainstream media.

Case in point:

 

So pathetic and somehow sad, all this guys JR made famous in some way and gave platform to (Lex Fridman, Tim Dillon, all this comedians & mma guys etc.)  now sucking Joes dick as hard as it gets ? zero critics, nothing ... it couldn't be more pathetic. I mean if any of his so called 'friends' truly have cojones would tell him directly the truth to stop spreading misinformation & how dangerous it is  and would give him a real feedback / honest reflection, but no, they are looking at him like being kind of cult leader, agreeing and repeating everything JR says using zero critical thinking whatsoever...

[MrFundamental]

@Leo Gura I think that's an over-generalization. Even if it's not a serious show most of the time, it has its fair share of serious episodes with scientists and researchers and truth seekers. And in the comments of those episodes you can see how much people appreciate to hear these people talk and articulate their ideas in a long-form format, when usually the only time they get exposure is on short news clips or articles that can easily get taken out of context. 

If 3 million people watch the Rogan episode with you, and even if only 50k new people resonate with what you say, isn't that worth it?

[Leo Gura]

I don't support deplatforming Joe Rogan. He should have his show and run it as he likes.

People just need to be aware that Joe is not a reliable source of serious understanding about reality.

[Joel3102]

 

Pretty hilarious debate on this whole Rogan Covid saga

Edited February 6, 2022 by Joel3102

[PurpleTree]

36 minutes ago, Joel3102 said:

 

Pretty hilarious debate on this whole Rogan Covid saga

watching this but it's probably the worst debate ever

 

[Hardkill]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I don't support deplatforming Joe Rogan. He should have his show and run it as he likes.

People just need to be aware that Joe is not a reliable source of serious understanding about reality.

I think that politics should be greatly deplatformed throughout almost all forms of media. If that happened then everything would be much less politicized including science related material and we as a country would be much less divided than we are now.

Not only would allow much more trust in our country’s core institutions, but also there would be much less political gridlock which would allow our government to make a lot more progress. Plus, there would be much less hatred and violence from both sides. Furthermore, much less stupid, ignorant, and lowly educated people would get involved in politics and voting because they would get too easily bored with politics and conspiracy theories. 

That’s what was so great about the “Great Quieting” period after the Gilded Age. It calmed entire political atmosphere so much throughout entire country and also skewed the skewed the voting process a lot more in favor of highly educated people. Afterwards, the government was able to pass a flood of new historic progressive laws and constitutional amendments during the early to mid 1900s. Also, bipartisanship increased tremendously throughout all of America.

Edited February 6, 2022 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

You can't really ban politics. It's just what people do.

[Hardkill]

43 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You can't really ban politics. It's just what people do.

No, but there has to be some way to cool down it like they did during the turn of the 20th century in the US. 

Something definitely has got to change with the way politics affects our everyday lives because its not working well and this political divide just keeps getting worse and worse for everyone in America.

Otherwise, I fear that we will never get pass the gridlock we keep having and we might not ever be able to effectively control the political violence in our country. It's very possible that some kind of unforeseen and unimaginable horror might occur one within our society one day in the future.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Hardkill

[Ramu]

@Timothy they're usually conservatives who are attacking him out of embarrassment for Trump being sluggish in his response.  What's his name is an eye doctor but is only doing this to give his screwed up party some sort of clout.  Anyone with half a brain can see right through this duplicitous b.s.

[DocWatts]

On 1/30/2022 at 9:22 AM, PurpleTree said:

Also what would you want Rogan to say or do, so that you "like him" again?

To the people thinking he's so bad and dangerous or whatever

I've listened to his podcast for close to eight years, and the quality of his show has dropped considerably since Rogan moved to Texas, as his show has become an echo chamber for conspiracy theories and for the far right.

Since I'm not holding out any hope that he'll stop platforming people with dangerously misinformed views, the best I could hope for is that he'll at least take seriously the suggestion to go back to talking to people with diverse viewpoints.

This is the same guy who had Cornell West, Abbie Martin, David Pakman, and Bernie Sanders on his podcast in the past, and his show wasn't always the echo chamber it's become over the past few years.

Edited February 9, 2022 by DocWatts

[Scholar]

On 6.2.2022 at 2:51 PM, Leo Gura said:

I don't support deplatforming Joe Rogan. He should have his show and run it as he likes.

People just need to be aware that Joe is not a reliable source of serious understanding about reality.

That seems to me a very individualistic stance. I think it is a bit naive. Deplatforming probably wouldn't be helpful, but I think he should feel responsible for the information he disseminates. He has a huge impact on society and with the power he holds his responsibility increases too.

People "should", be aware that Joe is unreliable, but the reality is that they are not. Living in Lalaland and pretending like Joe is not actually encouraging people to take his content as a reliable source of information is dysfunctional to me.

 

But it makes sense to me that you would take this stance as you in my view also tend to reject certain responsibilites and impacts you have on others with your work.

Edited February 9, 2022 by Scholar

[Wilhelm44]

1 hour ago, Scholar said:

That seems to me a very individualistic stance. I think it is a bit naive. Deplatforming probably wouldn't be helpful, but I think he should feel responsible for the information he disseminates. He has a huge impact on society and with the power he holds his responsibility increases too.

People "should", be aware that Joe is unreliable, but the reality is that they are not. Living in Lalaland and pretending like Joe is not actually encouraging people to take his content as a reliable source of information is dysfunctional to me.

 

But it makes sense to me that you would take this stance as you in my view also tend to reject certain responsibilites and impacts you have on others with your work.

People "should" discover nuance for themselves. And there's always the risk that the truth will be misinterpreted, no matter how hard you try to make your message foolproof.

[Jodistrict]

Why aren’t the mainstream news outlets deplatformed for spreading misinformation 24 hours a day?  And who checks the fact checker?  And when you say “misinformation”, you are assuming that you are the arbiter of truth.  But everyone thinks his opinion is the truth.  The theory behind “freedom of speech” was that the best chance of eventually finding the truth is to let everyone speak.  The alternative is that truth is determined by power and all other opinions are censored.

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, Scholar said:

I think he should feel responsible for the information he disseminates.

It's cute that you think he doesn't feel responsible.

He's not irresponsible, he just has a different worldview/perspective than you.

[DocWatts]

I find it hilarious that conservative leaning people are happy to become caricatures of a postmodern relativist when it comes to truth claims around Covid and vaccines, despite being hostile to postmodern relativism in most other areas.

'One view is as good as any other' isn't actually a defensible epistemological position. Rather it's a misuse of skepticism.

Edited February 9, 2022 by DocWatts

[PurpleTree]

2 hours ago, DocWatts said:

I've listened to his podcast for close to eight years, and the quality of his show has dropped considerably since Rogan moved to Texas, as his show has become an echo chamber for conspiracy theories and for the far right.

Since I'm not holding out any hope that he'll stop platforming people with dangerously misinformed views, the best I could hope for is that he'll at least take seriously the suggestion to go back to talking to people with diverse viewpoints.

This is the same guy who had Cornell West, Abbie Martin, David Pakman, and Bernie Sanders on his podcast in the past, and his show wasn't always the echo chamber it's become over the past few years.

i mean i only listen to like 25% of the episodes anyway

lately i listened to the journalists, authors and scientists, the alien stuff, some of the covid stuff, some of the comics, some artists

i'll never listen to people like Jocko willinks, the army/marine guys, Tim pool, Shapiro, the CIA shills etc.. so those could be very right leaning but i'll never hear it anyway and also don't cares i think he'd totally have Cornell West, Pakman, Bernie etc. on again if they come.

 

[Scholar]

1 hour ago, Wilhelm44 said:

People "should" discover nuance for themselves. And there's always the risk that the truth will be misinterpreted, no matter how hard you try to make your message foolproof.

Joe doesn't just risk misinterpretation, he is actively engaging in misinformation.

 

56 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

It's cute that you think he doesn't feel responsible.

He's not irresponsible, he just has a different worldview/perspective than you.

He used the excuse that his show is only entertainment many times, and that nobody should take anything seriously anyone says on his show. Yet he keeps bringing on scientists that agree with his bias, and talking about subjects in quite serious manners.

In the end, the world doesn't care whether or not he feels responsible. There will be a tremendous backlash, and the longer we ignore it, the bigger the backlash will be. Truth has no mercy.