[sdn20ns]

What a baseless accusation. Did you even bother listening to the podcast linked in the article or consider that a centralized directory hosted by a major company might be cause for concern? Last I checked he does a current podcast with an ADOS member discussing everything from reparations to current events... Throwing this sort of stuff out there is irresponsible.

[leahey]

You not liking it != baseless. Similarly, hosting a podcast with a black person doesn’t, a priori, preclude you being alt right.

[sdn20ns]

And similarly, throwing out the term “went full alt-right” without providing any references at all does not make something true/a responsible statement. I can see already that this is going to be a fruitless conversation based on feelings rather than evidence.

[leahey]

>I can see already that this is going to be a fruitless conversation based on feelings rather than evidence.

Knowing yourself is the first step. Thanks for the heads up.

[AndrewUnmuted]

I am sure I'm not the only one who would actually appreciate some insight into where this accusation comes from.

Not very familiar with the guy but have heard him on other podcasts before, and did not expect there to be such widespread distaste for him here. Can you help sort me & others out?

[mistermann]

Which of the many definitions of alt-right are you using?

[_euac]

I have. And the poster is right: Adam Curry's other podcast (No Agenda) can accurately be described as right-wing propaganda. If you don't believe me, I challenge you to listen to the show for a week and find anything positive they might say about anyone who isn't a Republican in Trump's orbit.

[markkanof]

What your saying is just not true. I'm as certain as a third party can be that neither of them want Trump to be president. They follow where the media goes and take exception to the way much of the media bends the truth when they report on Trump and also spend all their time losing their minds about the tweets that he puts out rather than actually reporting about important issues. And here is the important part. They don't do this because they like or want to defend Trump, they do it because they want to point out the dishonesty in a lot of what passes for journalism these days. Their coverage is not all about Trump, they talk about all sorts of current events.

[_euac]

> They follow where the media goes and take exception to the way much of the media bends the truth when they report on Trump

They didn't seem to care that much about right-wing media doing exactly the same during all of Obama's presidency. In fact, they regularly would regurgitate their talking points and promoted ridiculous conspiracy theories, including Birtherism.

> They don't do this because they like or want to defend Trump, they do it because they want to point out the dishonesty in a lot of what passes for journalism these days.

Then you would expect them to cover such dishonest media outlets as OANN, Fox News, The Blaze and Breitbart, right? And yet they've probably spent more time covering a single show (The View) than they have spent covering the full programming of all those outlets.

They can claim they deconstruct media all they want, but they can't claim they have 'no agenda'.

[leahey]

This is a combination of regurgitated mantras from the show and fan fiction.

They defend Trump at every turn and only hold his feet to the fire for things like “Tweeting too much.” You need only look to the subreddit for the show to see those that fell off over the years owing to their alt right turn. Let’s not pretend this is some accusation you’ve never heard before.

As the other replier said, they constantly and consistently repeated the Obama birtherism nonsense. Now they defend Trump. There is a throughline there, you just don’t want to see it.

[nailer]

There's a massive difference between right wing and alt right