4 ms·
What this letter is effectively saying is that you can't share an opinion on anything, even if you have expertise in a field, if it at all goes against the Cath
by ravenstine 5y ago
What this letter is effectively saying is that you can't share an opinion on anything, even if you have expertise in a field, if it at all goes against the Cathedral.
I don't give a damn if someone is wrong. I listen to people who are wrong all the time because that's the only way to sometimes find out if you are wrong yourself.
If you read the letter from these doctors, which is linked to in the WP article, all it does is assert that Malone's positions are wrong and dangerous. Are they? Is the fact that you can find a variety of doctors to openly disagree with Malone actually worth something?
In actuality, the list of individuals who signed this open letter is padded; I see a nurse practitioner, a science teacher, a PhD student, a medical student, a registered nurse, a nurse practitioner, another registered nurse, a licensed clinical worker... I could go on and on.
So is my ability to listen to people to be dictated by nurse practitioners and med school students? Get real.
When people aren't allowed to hear different opinions or contrary facts, and they aren't supposed to make their own decision that deviates from the mainstream in any way, they are cattle.
Although this was pretty much the only JRE episode I bothered to listen to on Spotify in quite some time, I hope Spotify ignores this tripe.
- paulryanrogers 5y ago> What this letter is effectively saying is that you can't share an opinion on anything, even if you have expertise in a field, if it at all goes against the Cathedral. Is it? Or is it saying that a hugely popular platform shouldn't amplify false information likely to cause harm? I don't see any call for government intervention or regulation.
- mpfundstein 5y agowho dictates what false information is and what not? the majority? guess what. the majority once thought the earth is flat
- drewcoo 5y agoCitation needed. There is a common myth of consensus flat earth in the past, created and perpetuated by people who claimed they were "enlightened."
- edanm 5y agoWhile that's true and an interesting tidbit, for the purpose of this conversation I think you can charitably take parent's meaning to be "the majority believes untrue things all the time, that's not a good basis for deciding what is true and what isn't".
- lucb1e 5y ago> So is my ability to listen to people to be dictated by nurse practitioners and med school students? Get real. Getting real, I would venture that they have a much better understanding of coronavirus than this comedian interviewer. You're also blowing it way out of proportion: it's not about a nurse dictating who you're allowed to listen to, it's about a group of people that know stuff about medicine being against this popular guy spreading misinformation specifically about vaccinations and covid.
- gruez 5y ago>You're also blowing it way out of proportion: it's not about a nurse dictating who you're allowed to listen to It is however, about them dictating what you can hear: >the group is pushing for the company to do more to prevent further misinformation from spreading on what is considered the nation’s most popular podcast
- smaryjerry 5y agoWhat’s interesting is that in their letter they don’t provide any data to refute what was said, they simply use their profession as a resin they should be listened to. This kind of cancel culture is outrageous. They pretend that Joe Rogan wouldn’t hear their side of the story if they prepared an actual refutation with the data to back it up. Even in the article itself it shows Joe already heard from opposing opinions so why write this letter except to cancel someone they don’t like?
- trs8080 5y agowhat "cancel culture"? joe rogan is literally being paid millions of dollars by spotify, is constantly being advertised all over their platform, and has millions of listeners. this letter is asking the platform to stop spreading harmful misinformation, not to "cancel" rogan. per the article, "Rogan, whose show reaches an estimated audience of 11 million people an episode, has repeatedly downplayed the need for coronavirus vaccines and used his platform to flirt with misinformation about covid-19."
- 5y ago
- bryanlarsen 5y agoSpotify dropping Rogan won't prevent you from listening to Rogan. They're not asking for the government to censor him, they're asking Spotify to stop publishing and promoting him and providing their implicit endorsement.
- ravenstine 5y ago> Spotify dropping Rogan won't prevent you from listening to Rogan. So I shouldn't have a problem with continuing to pay Spotify for removing content I want access to? In what universe should that not concern me? I don't want to go to another platform, because that's precisely why I pay Spotify, so that I have to do that as little as possible.
- solarkraft 5y agoThe Podcast used to be free.
- adolph 5y agoSpotify can’t drop Rogan in the sense that they have an exclusive arrangement with him. “Dropping” him is to let him be everywhere. https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-52736364 https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-52736364
- bryanlarsen 5y agoSpotify can release him from that arrangement.
- mpfundstein 5y agogood that you know all the contract specifics.
- fer 5y ago> all it does is assert that Malone's positions are wrong and dangerous. Are they? Yes. To point one not directly related to COVID/vaccines, I was particularly surprised by his claims that strokes in children are zero (and that basically all paediatric strokes are caused by COVID vaccines). In actual paediatric medicine, stroke is among the top 10 causes of death in children, precisely because people think it doesn't happen, so even though the symptoms are well known, the required medical attention is fatally delayed.
- drcongo 5y agoOP could probably have looked that up for themselves if they actually wanted to know who is wrong. Sadly Rogan's show is perfectly pitched at the wilfully ignorant.
- Bancakes 5y agoIt isn't. It shows you different points of view than the ones you read online or hear on TV. Plus the burden of proof is on the scientists and as OP said, they did not cite/refute any specific misinformation. I'm nit defending Rogan but I am defending my ability to get all viewpoints I can.
- fer 5y agoJoe Rogan has steered from doing light-hearted interviews to notable individuals to offering pre-chewed, easy-to-digest, sometimes-factual, no-opposing-view interviews on complex and controversial issues. Somehow Malone didn't have time to put on a paper the claims that got him banned from Twitter. That should be enough food for thought about such claims. > they did not cite/refute any specific misinformation. It's an open letter, not a rebuttal. Google Malone fact check for rebuttals, focus only on those by other experts if you want. I just gave above one piece of misinformation that literally kills children, it's easy to verify.
- timeon 5y agoIt is interesting how you try dismiss these people in your 'freedom of reach' argument.