5 ms·
Isn't that his appeal though? He lets the guests speak without much interjection beyond "wow" and "really". Unlike many other media hosts, he doesn't have his t
by factsaresacred 5y ago
Isn't that his appeal though? He lets the guests speak without much interjection beyond "wow" and "really". Unlike many other media hosts, he doesn't have his thumb on the scale trying to steer conversations towards his own political leanings.
And while he's featured a few conspiracy theorists, they're a minority and are balanced out by credentialed 'serious' scientists.
That's all beside the point though - purging conversations from the internet is bad, and the culture that cheers this on is worse.
- digitcatphd 5y agoFair points, but holistically one could argue he causes more misinformation and controversy than he contributes to scientific progress and education. Regarding censorship, where does one draw the line? Misinformation? A conversation encouraging self-harm? The harm of others? Without holding media to some reasonable standard an anything goes mentality develops.
- willis936 5y agoSelecting guests is a palm on the scale.
- threeseed 5y agoIt’s almost like Joe Rogan is the one doing the censoring by refusing to host guests who are actual, credentialed experts in their respective fields.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- musingsole 5y agoWho has he refused to host?