Play Nice Random Chat Thread VI

[Val Keating]

Rogan’s response to the situation

 

[ferball]

Chuck E's in Love is a great song.


BURN.

 

[Themanbun]

Rogan’s response to the situation

Pretty reasonable response and I like that he's taking on board the responsibility he has to ensure he's not just used as a gateway to controversial opinions..

One thing I would like to see him do is clean up his language a little more. There are three things he mentioned in that clip that he says 'mainstream media would have banned you from social media for, but now are accepted as fact'. He constantly drops phrases like 'the narrative.'

Those three things I have seen a heap of people posting since the start of this pandemic and none of them were banned. Some of them were even shared by experts and by the 'narrative', but with conclusions drawn that didn't invite people to whackjobbery. For example, from the start of the pandemic it was always raised as a possibility that vaccines wouldn't entirely prevent you from getting infected or transmitting it. I don't think I ever heard anyone guarantee that the vaccines would be bulletproof in that respect, but it was usually tempered with 'but it still prevents serious illness and lowers viral load' or something to that effect. That's a whole lot different from those who conclude that if the vaccine isn't bulletproof then there's no point in taking them.

Is mainstream media a thing and is it often used to push opinions on a topic? Absolutely. Is there often a 'narrative'? Yes.

'Narratives' aren't always nefarious. Some are just consensus truths. It's the 'narrative' that the Earth is spherical. That doesn't make it wrong, though.

Part of my issue with his show is that it's used by many as a gateway to some pretty nutjob opinions. I don't think he grapples (pun kinda intended) enough with how the way he frames his discussions and his commentary contributes to that.

Someone like Louis Theroux is an example of the differing styles - both engage with controversial people but Louis is much more refined in making sure he can't be interpreted as endorsing those opinions.

 

[Caracas]

Not bad not bad

Brilliant.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[ferball]

Pretty reasonable response and I like that he's taking on board the responsibility he has to ensure he's not just used as a gateway to controversial opinions..

One thing I would like to see him do is clean up his language a little more. There are three things he mentioned in that clip that he says 'mainstream media would have banned you from social media for, but now are accepted as fact'. He constantly drops phrases like 'the narrative.'

Hey there are plenty of examples of MSM voices in the US calling for the banning of people because they have said those things and plenty of the similar examples on social media. There is definitely a narrative going on too. Look at the way we are banging on about boosters. There is nothing like the scientific or evidential support for mass booster programs against Omicron that there is for vaccination in the first place. Especially when those vaccines would be more useful in places like Africa, where everyone reckons Omicron came from (lol.)

If the MSM were actually competent you'd all know that. (And that Omicron probably came from Europe.)

Those three things I have seen a heap of people posting since the start of this pandemic and none of them were banned. Some of them were even shared by experts and by the 'narrative', but with conclusions drawn that didn't invite people to whackjobbery. For example, from the start of the pandemic it was always raised as a possibility that vaccines wouldn't entirely prevent you from getting infected or transmitting it. I don't think I ever heard anyone guarantee that the vaccines would be bulletproof in that respect, but it was usually tempered with 'but it still prevents serious illness and lowers viral load' or something to that effect. That's a whole lot different from those who conclude that if the vaccine isn't bulletproof then there's no point in taking them.

Re the first bolded. There are alot of people I know in the US who will tell you the opposite and its certainly the impression they have. They aren't all anti vaxxers either. It seems our media are more competent than theirs at least on that level cos everyone I know here knows the vaccines were always primarily about protection from death not infection.

The second one... its funny how polarised everything is now. That because they aren't absolutely perfect, but do function to a point they should be completely rejected is lunacy but its the same attitude by opposite sides on so many issues arguments these days.

 

[Val Keating]

Pretty reasonable response and I like that he's taking on board the responsibility he has to ensure he's not just used as a gateway to controversial opinions..

One thing I would like to see him do is clean up his language a little more. There are three things he mentioned in that clip that he says 'mainstream media would have banned you from social media for, but now are accepted as fact'. He constantly drops phrases like 'the narrative.'

Those three things I have seen a heap of people posting since the start of this pandemic and none of them were banned. Some of them were even shared by experts and by the 'narrative', but with conclusions drawn that didn't invite people to whackjobbery. For example, from the start of the pandemic it was always raised as a possibility that vaccines wouldn't entirely prevent you from getting infected or transmitting it. I don't think I ever heard anyone guarantee that the vaccines would be bulletproof in that respect, but it was usually tempered with 'but it still prevents serious illness and lowers viral load' or something to that effect. That's a whole lot different from those who conclude that if the vaccine isn't bulletproof then there's no point in taking them.

Is mainstream media a thing and is it often used to push opinions on a topic? Absolutely. Is there often a 'narrative'? Yes.

'Narratives' aren't always nefarious. Some are just consensus truths. It's the 'narrative' that the Earth is spherical. That doesn't make it wrong, though.

Part of my issue with his show is that it's used by many as a gateway to some pretty nutjob opinions. I don't think he grapples (pun kinda intended) enough with how the way he frames his discussions and his commentary contributes to that.

Someone like Louis Theroux is an example of the differing styles - both engage with controversial people but Louis is much more refined in making sure he can't be interpreted as endorsing those opinions.

That’s nitpicking a bit because everything he said was true. But hey let’s not derail into that. He admitted that he should have someone with the counter POV on after he has these people on.

The thing is Rogan, despite his success is just a normal guy who grew an enormous platform purely by being curious.

Theroux and Joe are friends btw. Louie has been on a few times. Not lately… mostly due to Covid. Theroux has his critics too, especially about his relationship with Jimmy Savile. The difference between Rogan and Louis is that Louis is an actual journalist whereas Joe is just a comedian who has conversations with people. That’s not to say Joe isn’t intelligent, he’s very intelligent.

But clean up his language? He’s literally a ‘dirty’ comedian.

 

[Themanbun]

That’s nitpicking a bit because everything he said was true. But hey let’s not derail into that. He admitted that he should have someone with the counter POV on after he has these people on.

The thing is Rogan, despite his success is just a normal guy who grew an enormous platform purely by being curious.

Theroux and Joe are friends btw. Louie has been on a few times. Not lately… mostly due to Covid. Theroux has his critics too, especially about his relationship with Jimmy Savile. The difference between Rogan and Louis is that Louis is an actual journalist whereas Joe is just a comedian who has conversations with people. That’s not to say Joe isn’t intelligent, he’s very intelligent.

But clean up his language? He’s literally a ‘dirty’ comedian.

1) they're not true

2) yes I gave him credit for that

3) he's no longer a normal guy, he's making a lot of money doing this and I'm glad he has recognised his responsibility now

4) I said Theroux has a better safeguard against leading people to follow his guests' opinion. Doesn't bother me if they're mates or not, they both seem like easy to get along with people


5) I didn't mean literally clean it up as in 'dont swear', I meant stop saying shit to the effect "the narrative and mainstream would have you banned from social media if you posted that vaccines wouldn't be bulletproof" (paraphrasing him, not actual quotes) when it's just not true, but that goes to point 1. I don't know what you are reading, seeing or listening to but I haven't seen anyone banned for their whackjob opinions on vaccines, the most they got is a little disclaimer. And since the start of this pandemic I have consistently heard people who we would class as being 'mainstream' saying vaccines aren't always 100 per cent bulletproof.

 

[Val Keating]

The most ironic thing about this is that Joe was criticised at the start of the pandemic when he had Michael Osterholm on people were angry at him at spreading fear at the situation we’re currently in.

 

[Val Keating]

1) they're not true

2) yes I gave him credit for that

3) he's no longer a normal guy, he's making a lot of money doing this and I'm glad he has recognised his responsibility now

4) I said Theroux has a better safeguard against leading people to follow his guests' opinion. Doesn't bother me if they're mates or not, they both seem like easy to get along with people


5) I didn't mean literally clean it up as in 'dont swear', I meant stop saying sh*t to the effect "the narrative and mainstream would have you banned from social media if you posted that vaccines wouldn't be bulletproof" (paraphrasing him, not actual quotes) when it's just not true, but that goes to point 1. I don't know what you are reading, seeing or listening to but I haven't seen anyone banned for their whackjob opinions on vaccines, the most they got is a little disclaimer. And since the start of this pandemic I have consistently heard people who we would class as being 'mainstream' saying vaccines aren't always 100 per cent bulletproof.

What’s not true? What exactly did he say that wasn’t true?

 

[Themanbun]

Hey there are plenty of examples of MSM voices in the US calling for the banning of people because they have said those things and plenty of the similar examples on social media. There is definitely a narrative going on too. Look at the way we are banging on about boosters. There is nothing like the scientific or evidential support for mass booster programs against Omicron that there is for vaccination in the first place. Especially when those vaccines would be more useful in places like Africa, where everyone reckons Omicron came from (lol.)

If the MSM were actually competent you'd all know that. (And that Omicron probably came from Europe.)




Re the first bolded. There are alot of people I know in the US who will tell you the opposite and its certainly the impression they have. They aren't all anti vaxxers either. It seems our media are more competent than theirs at least on that level cos everyone I know here knows the vaccines were always primarily about protection from death not infection.

The second one... its funny how polarised everything is now. That because they aren't absolutely perfect, but do function to a point they should be completely rejected is lunacy but its the same attitude by opposite sides on so many issues arguments these days.

Tbh I think a lot of those people just convince themselves what they think 'the narrative' is to be what it is. Not saying narratives don't exist and all that, and I don't wanna get into too protracted a discussion because I've spent far too long delving into whackjobbery to try and protect my family from it, I'm exhausted. It's very common for people in these circles to say "the mainstream narrative is X" (and therefore they are righteous for fighting it or whatever) while they ignore a whole lot of more nuanced and dissenting 'mainstream' opinions, in order to continue convincing themselves that the narrative is what they think it is.

 

[Themanbun]

What’s not true? What exactly did he say that wasn’t true?

Social media companies would ban you for saying the vaccines might not prevent you getting COVID, and 'now it's fact'. That's literally been everywhere since before they even rolled these vaccines out and was the overwhelming opinion coming from experts as they managed our expectations.

Social media companies would ban you for saying cloth masks don't work, 'and now it's fact'. I've not met a single one of those parasitic nuffies getting banned for spewing this crap all over socials, and the general theme has been that other masks are better but cloth will provide some protection either to yourself or others. That's still the case, it's still the overwhelming scientific consensus, and apart from that weird period where the government itself ironically said masks don't work because they were shitting themselves about supply, has remained pretty consistent.

It's strawmanning something into existence that doesn't exist just so he can pat himself on the back. That's shit and he's better than that as evidenced by that video response where he clearly cares about not harming people with misinfo.

 

[Val Keating]

Social media companies would ban you for saying the vaccines might not prevent you getting COVID, and 'now it's fact'. That's literally been everywhere since before they even rolled these vaccines out and was the overwhelming opinion coming from experts as they managed our expectations.

Social media companies would ban you for saying cloth masks don't work, 'and now it's fact'. I've not met a single one of those parasitic nuffies getting banned for spewing this crap all over socials, and the general theme has been that other masks are better but cloth will provide some protection either to yourself or others. That's still the case, it's still the overwhelming scientific consensus, and apart from that weird period where the government itself ironically said masks don't work because they were shitting themselves about supply, has remained pretty consistent.

It's strawmanning something into existence that doesn't exist just so he can pat himself on the back. That's sh*t and he's better than that as evidenced by that video response where he clearly cares about not harming people with misinfo.

In those cases I believe he’s referring to Bret and Heathers podcast being pulled from YouTube.

Having said that YouTube is notoriously over the top with these type of things.

 

[ferball]

In those cases I believe he’s referring to Bret and Heathers podcast being pulled from YouTube.

Having said that YouTube is notoriously over the top with these type of things.

Did you read that thing about facebook and don't worry be happy?

 

[Val Keating]

Did you read that thing about facebook and don't worry be happy?

Nah. What’s that?

 

[LuvtheKangas]

That’s nitpicking a bit because everything he said was true. But hey let’s not derail into that. He admitted that he should have someone with the counter POV on after he has these people on.

The thing is Rogan, despite his success is just a normal guy who grew an enormous platform purely by being curious.

Theroux and Joe are friends btw. Louie has been on a few times. Not lately… mostly due to Covid. Theroux has his critics too, especially about his relationship with Jimmy Savile. The difference between Rogan and Louis is that Louis is an actual journalist whereas Joe is just a comedian who has conversations with people. That’s not to say Joe isn’t intelligent, he’s very intelligent.

But clean up his language? He’s literally a ‘dirty’ comedian.

C'mon Val, the basis of the video is him trying to assert that he just sits in the middle and allows all viewpoints, because, you know, the "narrative changes". He then gives 3 examples of narrative changing in an attempt to demonstrate how even handed he is, but each is disingenuous.

1. "Covid vaccinations are 100% protection against getting and spreading Covid" - this was never, ever asserted by the vaccine manufacturers or the medical professionals who are in favour of vaccines (i.e. the vast majority of them).
2. "Cloth masks are useless" - in the early days of the virus, the idea of masks was to limit transmission from the mask wearer to others, by limiting the spread of particles from coughing and sneezing. All masks, including cloth masks, were infinitely more effective at doing this than not masking. In the last year or so, the focus has turned to masks for self protection (against contracting the virus). Due to increased learning and dealing with virus mutations, surgical masks are now accepted as superior.
3. It has never been controversial to say the virus came from a lab. It may or may not have, but to assert that people were sanctioned for suggesting the possibility is simply bullshit.

What I can't work out is whether he truly believes he doesn't spread misinformation (in which case, he's wrong), or he's just in damage control so he can stay on the same grift as Tucker, Hannity, Candice, Ingraham, Rand Paul, RFK Jr, etc. I suspect it's the former, because he seems committed to providing balance and apparently doesn't perceive that some of it is serious misinformation. Also, he's the only unvaccinated one out of that group.

 

[Val Keating]

C'mon Val, the basis of the video is him trying to assert that he just sits in the middle and allows all viewpoints, because, you know, the "narrative changes". He then gives 3 examples of narrative changing in an attempt to demonstrate how even handed he is, but each is disingenuous.

1. "Covid vaccinations are 100% protection against getting and spreading Covid" - this was never, ever asserted by the vaccine manufacturers or the medical professionals who are in favour of vaccines (i.e. the vast majority of them).
2. "Cloth masks are useless" - in the early days of the virus, the idea of masks was to limit transmission from the mask wearer to others, by limiting the spread of particles from coughing and sneezing. All masks, including cloth masks, were infinitely more effective at doing this than not masking. In the last year or so, the focus has turned to masks for self protection (against contracting the virus). Due to increased learning and dealing with virus mutations, surgical masks are now accepted as superior.
3. It has never been controversial to say the virus came from a lab. It may or may not have, but to assert that people were sanctioned for suggesting the possibility is simply bullshit.

What I can't work out is whether he truly believes he doesn't spread misinformation (in which case, he's wrong), or he's just in damage control so he can stay on the same grift as Tucker, Hannity, Candice, Ingraham, Rand Paul, RFK Jr, etc. I suspect it's the former, because he seems committed to providing balance and apparently doesn't perceive that some of it is serious misinformation. Also, he's the only unvaccinated one out of that group.

“C'mon Val, the basis of the video is him trying to assert that he just sits in the middle and allows all viewpoints”

That’s literally what he does.

And in the early days of the virus Americans were told that masks were useless by Fouci.

I know I’m coming across as fanboing, but I honestly think he’s way more trustworthy then any mainstream media that comes out of the US.

To be honest the covid stuff on his show bores me, same as it does with our media.

I like his show for the interesting people he has on there like the MMA fighters and boxers, the hangs with other comedians or when he has Gary Clark jr or Snoop dog on and other relevant musicians. I don’t mind the shows with scientists like Neil Degrass Tyson or the dude that was trying to explain quantum physics and a bunch of others, the fighter pilot who spotted the UFO that the New York Times wrote about. That stuff is way more interesting to me then anything to do with covid. I think I have long covid fatigue and I’ve never even caught it.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

“C'mon Val, the basis of the video is him trying to assert that he just sits in the middle and allows all viewpoints”

That’s literally what he does.

And in the early days of the virus Americans were told that masks were useless by Fouci.

I know I’m coming across as fanboing, but I honestly think he’s way more trustworthy then any mainstream media that comes out of the US.

To be honest the covid stuff on his show bores me, same as it does with our media.

I like his show for the interesting people he has on there like the MMA fighters and boxers, the hangs with other comedians or when he has Gary Clark jr or Snoop dog on and other relevant musicians. I don’t mind the shows with scientists like Neil Degrass Tyson or the dude that was trying to explain quantum physics and a bunch of others, the fighter pilot who spotted the UFO that the New York Times wrote about. That stuff is way more interesting to me then anything to do with covid. I think I have long covid fatigue and I’ve never even caught it.

All well and good, mate. The variety of stuff does sound interesting.

But the Neil Young stuff that kicked off this discussion (and Rogan's video) is as a result of covid misinformation being disseminated via Rogan's show, and the issue I have is that he's trying to deny that his show is a carrier of misinformation. It's either ignorant or disingenuous.

 

[Val Keating]

All well and good, mate. The variety of stuff does sound interesting.

But the Neil Young stuff that kicked off this discussion (and Rogan's video) is as a result of covid misinformation being disseminated via Rogan's show, and the issue I have is that he's trying to deny that his show is a carrier of misinformation. It's either ignorant or disingenuous.

Fair enough.

 

[ferball]

Did you read that thing about facebook and don't worry be happy?

My missus runs a facebook group centred around John Peel and music. i think she is the main admin, if she isn't any more she was for years.

Five years ago someone made a post saying Bob Marley wrote and sang "Don't Worry Be Happy" and the whole group are now on restricted posting and restricted promotion by facebook because they have been spreading misinformation.

This is what its come to.

One person says the wrong thing about who wrote or performed a song five years ago and that group is shut down. Its a group with 15, 000 people (my coiusin in the UK joined and didn't even know we were involved,) or more in it and all they do is post songs or talk about music that Peel promoted or would most likely promote if he was still around.

(I'll be honest part of me thinks that is fair enough. Bob Marley is great and that song is drivel. It makes perfect sense that even facebook truth bots would find that offensive. Damn, if I say it you can slap me right here. But there is no way it happened because of that. Its a blunt instrument approach driven by fact checking AIs.)

 

[Tectonic]

Annoying that I reported FB groups focused on dog fighting that got to stay up for years and this sort of censorship is happening now.

 

[ferball]

Dog fighting is obviously a misinformation free zone.

 

[goalieboy82]

AFL odds from near me.

Tournament Antepost

gambetdc.dclottery.com

 

[koshari]

Annoying that I reported FB groups focused on dog fighting that got to stay up for years and this sort of censorship is happening now.

Poor automation algorithms likely banned the Marley group posts. Manual complaints like yours require manpower to investigate which costs money. So these pile up.

 

[gokangas]

He gets it, which is great



On a similar note, many years ago I was in a band that opened for Roberta Flack, whose big hit was Killing Me Softly. They played it twice.

Saw Billy Field many years ago when Bad Habits was a huge hit. He opened the show with Bad Habits and finished the show the same way. Only time I have seen an act play a song twice and it worked a treat.

 

[goalieboy82]

Coach Scamper from today (a few hours ago)