So if the guy with the wrong information has 100 million dollars behind him and an audience of tens of millions and anybody with the right information doesnt have that… then false information is right, good, and ok to spread?
Because we are just talking about math at that point. If bad information can spread viraly better than good information, then bad information will inevitably win even though that information is objectively wrong
Ah, yes, I’m glad you mentioned that, brings me to the second point of my manifesto. What’s causing this virality? Largely by outrage-driven and optimized advertising firms like Facebook. We should rip Facebook and the Google apart with antitrust law and make their targeted advertising illegal. It serves no useful societal purpose other than enriching Zuckerberg and the Google guys, when they should be in jail for anticompetitive practices.
More than possible that this was a legal line rather than a moral one. Jones was being sued, and eventually lost, and Rogan just didn’t want to get tagged in on any of that - however remotely.
Not even a peep from the democratic establishment or even off establishment about legalizing weed. It’s crazy.
Not a lie, you lie. You and the Rogan mob are saying that him expressing his views is wrong, he should stop and he is deserving of public opprobrium if he doesn’t. That meets your definition of censorship.
Sit this one out Keed.
They already removed multiple jones appearances, why do they allow new ones to stand? It’s unlikely Alex Jones was really a different person.
Rogan thinks Jones is funny. That is his whole appeal to rogan. Given the message, that’s a pretty weak reason to have him on.
If they followed up and censored his more reason visit to stay consistent is that a problem?
I’m not saying any of that. What is the lie I am saying? Be very clear.
pass
Spotify isn’t just a neutral platform provider here. They paid Joe hundreds of millions to have him exclusively on their platform as part of their business and marketing strategy. Absolutely appropriate to call them out for that and disassociate.
Pass
On the other hand, maybe Spotify’s exclusivity deal is part of a scheme to “censor” Joe from other podcast platforms and reduce his reach? Hmm, makes you think……
On next, is Derp McDurp to take about this and other schemes of the so called global “elite.”
I thought I had wandered into somebody’s Substack for a minute.
What’s nuts is that he isn’t.
When he has comedians on, they make very obvious jokes that go completely over Rogan’s head. He doesn’t want to acknowledge other comedians’ jokes if he thinks they might be funnier than him.
To me, Rogan is a guy who wasn’t funny naturally but worked really hard at it and became funny through looking at others and practicing being like them. It’s why so much of his material feels tried and basic. There’s nothing creative about it.
I agree with this, and while we do so, we shouldn’t insist that consumers who tell companies that they should do X or they will be taking their business elsewhere are engaging in any type of censorship. Just like the consumers who say Google and Facebook should break up their monopolies or lose them as customers as well.
I don’t think amplifying Alex Jones misinformation counts as patient advocacy.
Right, you’re passing because you’re making up lies about me that you can’t defend.
You should challenge him to a duel.
Another way to regulate problematic speech!
No of course not. But I can also read the context here. I agree its probably not a good idea to frame Alex Jones and his terribleness in the context of mental illness.