[swamy_g]

If you call Jordan Peterson videos or Joe Rogan clips extremist videos, then I think this is clearly a step in the wrong direction. Their videos thrive on YouTube not because they hold extreme views, it's because their videos are very engaging, fun and you learn something from it.

If this is a ploy to push more mainstream narratives through YouTube that is akin to watching CNN/CBS or ABC, then I'll be looking for other platforms.

[joshuamorton]

>extreme views

>videos are very engaging, fun and you learn something from it.

This is not an either/or situation. Extremist content can be engaging, fun, and appear to be informative.

[brogrammer5]

How is their content "extremist" though?

[joshuamorton]

I never said it was.

However, JRE hosted Alex Jones (conspiracy theorist "mass shooting victoms are crisis actors"), Gavin McInnes (white supremacist), and Milo yiannopolous (conservative provocateur who among other things supports pedophilia in the gay community.

Joe himself I can't comment on. He chooses to promote controversial and actively extreme people though. Sometimes he disagrees with those people, sometimes he doesn't.

[unpwn]

Inviting a variety of guests, with a variety of viewpoints is what makes podcasts like his interesting and informative.

[joshuamorton]

And like I said before, this isn't a binary. Extremist content is often interesting.

[PavlovsCat]

So why keep saying that, when you aren't claiming it's extremist? If I said "a person who plays with their socks every evening, pretending it's the royal family, might also make such an argument", that would also be technically correct, but I doubt I could get away with "just making an observation, not saying that's describing anyone here, just that it might".

[ddingus]

Nothing mentioned in this thread is Extreme.

[fmihaila]

Such a pity your post is in the basement. Sometimes it is costly to be genuinely moderate.

I'll keep you company here.

[minikites]

https://twitter.com/VicBergerIV/status/1110301264657551360

>Joe Rogan went on Infowars today, the same day a man who lost his child in the Sandy Hook shooting committed suicide. The grieving father was among the plaintiffs suing Alex Jones for defamation after smearing the murdered children and their parents as part of a hoax.

>In the same Infowars episode that Joe Rogan appeared on, Alex Jones pushed a conspiracy theory that the father of a child killed at Sandy Hook didn't kill himself, but may have been murdered to silence Jones and end the first amendment.

[fmihaila]

> https://twitter.com/VicBergerIV/status/1110301264657551360

That Twitter thread is interesting, because it contains a link to a 'This American Life' program that gives a platform to Alex Jones to explain himself. I doubt anyone would call 'This American Life' a platform for spreading conspiracy theories or hate.

In this light, is Joe Rogan, who also allows people like Jones to explain themselves, a moderate or an extremist?

[minikites]

You have to look at what both Joe Rogan and This American Life do in a larger context, which should clarify the differences. I do think that TAL should not have given airtime to Alex Jones because it really is that dangerous to give him (and people like him) a platform.

[cwkoss]

Vic Berger is a pretty disingenuous propagandist. He's funny, but I wouldn't take him too seriously.

[minikites]

Did those events not happen?

[cwkoss]

Vic made two factual statements, with the disingenuous implication that they are connected or causally related.

Alex Jones is a wacko. Talking to Alex Jones does not necessarily mean you are also a wacko. This new concept of moral badness transitively propagating through conversation is nonsensical and counterproductive.

[shiohime]

thx for letting me know, know what I'm doing this evening. Time to kick back, pop some Super Male Vitality pills, and watch everyone's favorite water filter salesman :+1:

[Allvitende]

Couldn't agree more.