4 ms·
That might be an argument you'd like to take to a proper debate. What we're arguing about is whether having such a debate constitutes "dangerous misinformation"
by prohobo 5y ago
That might be an argument you'd like to take to a proper debate. What we're arguing about is whether having such a debate constitutes "dangerous misinformation".
- jamienicol 5y agoThe debate has been had. Rogan has been told countless times why he's wrong. He continues spewing dangerous misinformation regardless
- DiggyJohnson 5y agoWhat are you opinions on free speech and how should they relate to public broadcasting?
- jamienicol 5y agoI'm struggling to see the relevance of that question
- DiggyJohnson 5y agoWell your struggle to connect them is evidence of my point. Ok, so let’s say Rogan is sharing dangerous misinformation: what do you think should be done about it?
- jamienicol 5y agoI'm not sure what should be done about it, but again don't see the relevance of that question. Your argument was that there's value to be had out of such a debate, which there isn't. And that a debate cannot be misinformation, which is again clearly false. Packaging misinformation up as a debate doesn't stop it being misinformation.