Podcast Joe Rogan - Tricked again!

[the_interloper]

Making a popular podcast?

Funny when Rogan fans argue that he's a great source of news, better than the MSM because he discusses topics such as cobalt mining.

Then they also argue he has no onus to fact-check what people say because no one should be taking him seriously.

Well I don’t argue he’s a source of news, maybe a trigger to “do your own research”

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Making a popular podcast?

Funny when Rogan fans argue that he's a great source of news, better than the MSM because he discusses topics such as cobalt mining.

Then they also argue he has no onus to fact-check what people say because no one should be taking him seriously.

The cobalt mining expert clearly had evidence to his claims. Wouldnt use him as a example for that. The real issue with his fact-checking is the guests who come on and are like "I cant divulge who but I know insert crap here " which is the issue.

In that realm though, I dont think any media outlet in the world differs in dealing with that type of nonsensical information trail. I suspect people just dislike Rogans take a bit more because he is quite politically biased

In other words, it not the reporting style, its the context of what he is saying that people are annoyed about

 

[Gethelred]

Hard to say I think. Its not a black and white answer. Itd be percentage based. Id suspect 70 percent accept him as gosepl and 30 percent do a bit more digging if I was to wager a complete guess

I acknowledge that the medium he works in is successful because it - to an extent - overlooks the question of if something is the case and into what it means that something is the case. But that itself implies some dutiy to ensure that he doesn't just outright platform people who are unequivocally wrong; there has to be some boundary to a willingness to go with it.

If someone told you to jump out of a plane without a parachute, do you just go with it out of a desire for entertainment?

I dont think Rogan should judge what is and isnt truthful like he is some form of knowledgeable know it all. That would be pretty disingenuous of him. He isnt really smart enough to do that in any way. He gives people a way to tell a story and just accepts guests via their qualifications and job titles as opposed to what they might or might not know or what he believes. He knows nothing of what is said so for him to screen guests and determine whether they are truthful or not seems a bit of a overreach for me. You are giving the guy way too much credit with that. He isnt that intelligent

He's also not stupid, and trying to equate a modicum of backgrounding with intellect is poor analysis.

In this concept though he isnt alone. I mean do you think Peter Helliar is smart enough to screen guests on The Project?

I think Ch.10 is a subscriber to the Australian Media Authority, and Peter Helliar - due to being on a show that does the task of journalism sometimes - is subject to the Australian Journalist Code of Ethics.

Ergo, if someone isn't screening guests, I would be very surprised.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

I acknowledge that the medium he works in is successful because it - to an extent - overlooks the question of if something is the case and into what it means that something is the case. But that itself implies some dutiy to ensure that he doesn't just outright platform people who are unequivocally wrong; there has to be some boundary to a willingness to go with it.

If someone told you to jump out of a plane without a parachute, do you just go with it out of a desire for entertainment?

He's also not stupid, and trying to equate a modicum of backgrounding with intellect is poor analysis.

I think Ch.10 is a subscriber to the Australian Media Authority, and Peter Helliar - due to being on a show that does the task of journalism sometimes - is subject to the Australian Journalist Code of Ethics.

Ergo, if someone isn't screening guests, I would be very surprised.

Channel 10 and screening guests? You gotta be joking? Definetly some screening guests going on here

 

[Gethelred]

Channel 10 and screening guests? You gotta be joking? Definetly some screening guests going on here

This would be an interesting conversation, debating the merits of some of FTA's journalistic content...

... if you weren't trying to shift the goalposts away from what you said before.

Ch.10 are bound by law to be subject to a code of conduct. They screen their guests to ensure they don't platform people unduly. Your comparison between Rogan and Peter Helliar doesn't bear out, because the Project would absolutely screen their guests.

 

[Saint]

Hard to say I think. Its not a black and white answer. Itd be percentage based. Id suspect 70 percent accept him as gosepl and 30 percent do a bit more digging if I was to wager a complete guess

I dont think Rogan should judge what is and isnt truthful like he is some form of knowledgeable know it all. That would be pretty disingenuous of him. He isnt really smart enough to do that in any way. He gives people a way to tell a story and just accepts guests via their qualifications and job titles as opposed to what they might or might not know or what he believes. He knows nothing of what is said so for him to screen guests and determine whether they are truthful or not seems a bit of a overreach for me. You are giving the guy way too much credit with that. He isnt that intelligent

In this concept though he isnt alone. I mean do you think Peter Helliar is smart enough to screen guests on The Project?

I think it's a pretty basic ethics question.

Does he have a duty to check if what his guests are saying is true?

Part of the problem is that he mixes learned, educated, peer reviewed guests with lunatics who are spouting opinions dressed up as facts. It's very hard for most people to tell the difference.

He's a private person running a private business, so his ethics decisions are mostly up to him. And the platforms he's on can also do their own screening to see if the episodes they're hosting are full of disinformation.

The biggest problem is when health opinion is dressed up as health advice and will get people killed, and probably already has, given Rogan's hatred of masks and preventative medicine.

 

[Saint]

Channel 10 and screening guests? You gotta be joking? Definetly some screening guests going on here

Rogan's guests pretend they're smarter than these psychics. Many are, many aren't.

The psychics on Channel 10 admit what they are.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Your incredulity doesn't change the facts, mate.

It does completely. You pointed to a code that isnt followed as proof

If they were screening guests at Channel 10, how do you suggest that gets on the air?

 

[Gethelred]

It does completely. You pointed to a code that isnt followed as proof

If they were screening guests at Channel 10, how do you suggest that gets on the air?

See my edit.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

I think it's a pretty basic ethics question.

Does he have a duty to check if what his guests are saying is true?

Part of the problem is that he mixes learned, educated, peer reviewed guests with lunatics who are spouting opinions dressed up as facts. It's very hard for most people to tell the difference.

He's a private person running a private business, so his ethics decisions are mostly up to him. And the platforms he's on can also do their own screening to see if the episodes they're hosting are full of disinformation.

The biggest problem is when health opinion is dressed up as health advice and will get people killed, and probably already has, given Rogan's hatred of masks and preventative medicine.

Dressed up as health advice?

As if anyone watches Rogan for health advice. You are giving credit for something that just isnt there. Based on that i watched the psychic predictions and believe the world is doomed?

 

[faible]

As if anyone watches Rogan for health advice.

Which is it then?

He still latches onto news that is truthful, that does exist, that people do care about, but the main stream media will simply not touch due to the fears they hold in offending their corporate sponsors. We can all sook and moan about what Rogan thinks and his opinions on subjects BUT he still is providing a necessary alternative to the MSM and this type of video shows why he is relevant

 

[bourbons]

LMAO at your examples

CNN video is a puff piece how they are going to fix the problem so dont worry about it. Ive basically never seen a video so pro-slavery in recent times

The Al Jazeera video is one I watched previously and is a good one though. I think Al Jazeera is a much more honest media organization then any we have in the West

And Al Jezera is absolutely a mainstream media org, so his examples have in fact proved that your statement about mainstream orgs not being willing to touch certain topics is completely false.

Similar to your predictions about mandated covid vaxes for 6 year olds and everywhere back in lockdown in 2022, it never hurts to put your hand up and admit yeah I got that wrong.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

And Al Jezera is absolutely a mainstream media org, so his examples have in fact proved that your statement about mainstream orgs not being willing to touch certain topics is completely false.

Similar to your predictions about mandated covid vaxes for 6 year olds and everywhere back in lockdown in 2022, it never hurts to put your hand up and admit yeah I got that wrong.

Al Jazeera is comparable to Fox News and CNN?

If Al Jazeera is considered main stream, then Im wrong but not something id consider main stream

Im certainly not taking that CNN report as evidence. That was vile journalism

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Which is it then?

News, not advice. And some of the time, not all of the time

Some of Rogans guests are moronic dumbasses, but some are not. Thats the thing i can admit, but you cant. Assuming they are all moronic dumbasses because you dont like 5 of his guests is a tad unhealthy

 

[Saint]

Al Jazeera is comparable to Fox News and CNN?

If Al Jazeera is considered main stream, then Im wrong but not something id consider main stream

Im certainly not taking that CNN report as evidence. That was vile journalism

Al Jazeera is definitely mainstream. It's the arabic world's number 1 news source.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Al Jazeera is definitely mainstream. It's the arabic world's number 1 news source.

Why do people think that?

Al Arabiya is by far the number 1 news source. Al Jazeera is still number 2 though.

 

[faible]

News, not advice. And some of the time, not all of the time

Some of Rogans guests are moronic dumbasses, but some are not.

How is someone meant to know which are serious, or not serious. Who are dumbasses and who aren't.

Rogan is giving a platform to these people. Some of whom really shouldn't be getting the platform he's offering them.

Thats the thing i can admit, but you cant. Assuming they are all moronic dumbasses because you dont like 5 of his guests is a tad unhealthy

Where have I ever done this? Good try though.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

How is someone meant to know which are serious, or not serious. Who are dumbasses and who aren't.

Rogan is giving a platform to these people. Some of whom really shouldn't be getting the platform he's offering them.



Where have I ever done this? Good try though.

That is the problem with every single media outlet in the world. Its not exclusive to Joe Rogan like you want to make it out to be

I mean iTV, CNN, Fox have constantly paraded around Andrew Tate and his viewpoints but im not really hearing them being given responsibility for doing this nor cancelled. Most just want to cancel Andrew Tate himself and not the platform that gave him his voice

 

[Gralin]

Joe covers stuff no one else does

here's a bunch of articles proving that wrong

its not on TV so its not news

here's a bunch of tv reports

i don't like those networks so its still not being discussed except by Joe

does that about sum it up?

 

[Gethelred]

Joe covers stuff no one else does

here's a bunch of articles proving that wrong

its not on TV so its not news

here's a bunch of tv reports

i don't like those networks so its still not being discussed except by Joe

does that about sum it up?

 

[bourbons]

Al Jazeera is comparable to Fox News and CNN?

If Al Jazeera is considered main stream, then Im wrong but not something id consider main stream

Im certainly not taking that CNN report as evidence. That was vile journalism

I mean.. you guys were pretty adamant that Reuters and AP were MSM during covid.

If they are then Al Jazeera certainly is.

 

[Jivlain]

So what is his domain? Or should he actually speak to experts on subjects so we can hear from them, like he already does of course.

This gets us back to our original problem that he doesn't do anything to distinguish between experts and whackaloons, between facts and hoaxes, is actively hostile to finding out the difference. That he encourages immediate emotional responses to whatever hoaxes he finds rather than any sort of critical thinking to distinguish between them.

 

[Bloods86]

Joe covers stuff no one else does

here's a bunch of articles proving that wrong

its not on TV so its not news

here's a bunch of tv reports

i don't like those networks so its still not being discussed except by Joe

does that about sum it up?

Yep.

Basically, the claim was made that mainstream media hadn't covered the issue, which was shown to be false, and it was really easy and quick to do. All they could do was cherry pick a perceived fault with one of the reports (which wasn't the original claim they were making), ignore the rest, and they can go on pretending like Joe is some news breaker (his guest has had mainstream media appearances for related work going back years) or that I did extensive research to find what I did (no, I just understand how to do a simple search unlike the poster before they made their original claims).

Also, their fixation on The Project as some standard of journalism is bizarre. It does explain a bit though.

 

[zill]

Also, their fixation on The Project as some standard of journalism is bizarre. It does explain a bit though.

The fixation on Rogan's jornalism standards is completely different, i'm sure.

 

[burge13]

Yep.

Basically, the claim was made that mainstream media hadn't covered the issue, which was shown to be false, and it was really easy and quick to do. All they could do was cherry pick a perceived fault with one of the reports (which wasn't the original claim they were making), ignore the rest, and they can go on pretending like Joe is some news breaker (his guest has had mainstream media appearances for related work going back years) or that I did extensive research to find what I did (no, I just understand how to do a simple search unlike the poster before they made their original claims).

Also, their fixation on The Project as some standard of journalism is bizarre. It does explain a bit though.

You mean the exact thing you lot do but for someone you like its not ok... classic hypocrisy of the srp regulars