Comment on What are the connotations of Joe Rogan?
Screwthehole@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I enjoy Rogan. I hear shit I should know without the msm slant.
Some of his guests are batshit crazy, but I think he just gives a platform to everybody. You know, free speech is also freedom to disagree. But censorship isn’t good, and he’s not about that.
From time to time his guests say some ridiculous shit though. I’d say I agree with maybe 40% of the content, disagree with 40%, and am neutral or uneducated on the 20% in the middle. It’ll spur me in to read / listen to other topics and expand my knowledge base so I can form an opinion.
There’s a load of shit brought up on Rogan you might otherwise have not know, because the media is a stilted propaganda machine.
He doesn’t just “give a platform to everybody” for the sake of free speech, that’s not how free speech works when you’re a host and/ or owner of a media company. He hosts a certain crowd because he wants to. It’s his show.
Literally all media is biased. If someone tells you that they are unbiased or if some other show is, they are lying. Rogan is friendly to capitalism and drug legalization, and there’s nothing wrong in disclosing it (even if I don’t personally agree with the former).
Veraticus@lib.lgbt 1 year ago
“Censorship?” Does everyone deserve to get on his talk show? Are those that aren’t “censored?”
No. He has to draw the line somewhere, and he has. Where he’s drawn it – who he invites to speak to his enormous audience – is very instructive indeed.
By looking at all the alt-right, conservative, and qanon guests he invites on his show, we can tell who Joe Rogan is: a useful idiot for the alt-right, if not an enthusiastic enabler of them. And he is as bad at interviewing guests as he is at selecting them. He lobs dangerous, loaded questions at the worst people in the world, fails to challenge even the most basic errors they make with their answers, and idiots lap it up because they want to imagine they’re smart.
If he was alive a hundred years ago, he’d been enthusiastically debating the Jewish question and “free speech” people around the globe would be nodding sagely and being happy someone is finally willing to stand up against “censorship” and “international Jewry.” Because he’s alive now, he’s just doing that about vaccines, racism, trans people, police violence… basically anything where it’s possible to have a bad take, he’s interviewing someone about it.
Screwthehole@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Counterpoint - you’re cherry picking. He also invites left wing guests and gives them the same opportunity to speak.
He has a vast audience because a more centrist view of things appeals to a huge # of people. Your description of his audience is reductive and close minded. Yep, there are people who fit that description. And there are going to be others who fit every other description you can write down, too. Why? Because hundreds of millions of people listen.
Veraticus@lib.lgbt 1 year ago
That’s not true. You want to imagine he’s centrist because it gratifies your ego, but he is simply right-wing.
As are the people who he appeals to.
Screwthehole@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Now do fox and MSNBC!