Why do you consider him mainstream, because he has a million+ viewers?
>He’s horoscopes and crystals for people who think they’re intellectuals.
In all honesty, I think you're proving the point that online hatred needs to be curbed before it becomes overwhelmingly destructive to society. Who are these people who so obviously wrongly think of themselves as intellectuals, in your mind, when they really are nothing of the sort? ALL of Joe Rogans listeners, or just the ones opposed to government-enforced medical procedures?
> The true con in all of this is ..
.. is that its possible to espouse hatred (calling Joe Rogan a con, people 'think they are intellectuals', etc.) for an out-group and not be called to task over the reasoning behind that hatred.
Do you hate Joe Rogan because he's mainstream, or because he espouses a view that is not mainstream while appearing to be a mainstream media personality? How is it possible to hold both positions?
Personally, I am not pro-Joe Rogan, I enjoy his podcasts but don't agree with his personality and find his views on some things utterly intolerable, but I am anti-hate speech, which we have seen has allowed the commitment and further justification of so many actual crimes in Americas' socio-political environment recently. Surely there comes a time in every American's mind where they need to balance the strength of their states freedom-granting instruments (the Bill of Rights) with their desire to tone-police the cultures they don't like into oblivion... isn't this how the Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya/Syria/Yemen mess got started in the first place - Americans deciding they don't like the voices of some out-group?
>Do you hate Joe Rogan because he's mainstream, or because he espouses a view that is not mainstream while appearing to be a mainstream media personality
It's that he is mainstream and provably wrong most of the times he opens his mouth, and barely any opposition is ever allowed onto the podcast. It is an actual example of an "ideological echo chamber", unlike most of the times a conservative proclaims it.
Mainstream media is quite often provably wrong too, but yet not held up to the same standards (unless you're 'a conservative' with a "cancel CNN!" t-shirt) .. so when they come for Joe Rogan, and you say nothing, who will be there to protect you when they come for CNN/MSNBC/NYT?
Essentially, you are saying you despise Joe Rogan because he's mainstream, pretending not to be, and mis-informing, while also pretending not to .. so does this begin a new era in the American socio-political landscape where news is no longer going to be used to propagandize an entire country, and 'mainstream media' is going to be held to much, much higher levels of truthful standards than ever before?
Because its going to be great to see the disinformation inherent in the modern American media landscape be replaced with actual truth-telling. Like, a lot of us who don't live in that bubble are going to be very relieved to see the truth being told, for a change, about such things as Ukraine, Yemen, and so on ..
Or do we only care about Joe Rogan because he impacts the lives of fellow American citizens?
>he is mainstream and provably wrong most of the times he opens his mouth
I mean, this is your stated opinion.
But he's not mainstream or we'd be seeing his show on the televisions in the airport - instead he's only available on special platforms that have to be sought out .. and your opinion that he is wrong most of the time is also specious.
But lets assume that both of these points of view are 'true': now that it is okay to start cancelling 'mainstream shows' because of the disinformation they spread, do you support the winding down of CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post, and the New York Times - who have each been found guilty of spreading disinformation multiple times in their history?
The issue is, at what point is 'your side' more informative than 'the other side'? When it becomes mainstream? When it has the approval of known, entrenched establishment entities who stand to profit a great deal from their disinformation campaigns (as is the case with CNN/MSNBC/etc.)?
Mostly, I just want to understand why cancelling mainstream shows should stop at Joe Rogan, in your mind.
I'd LOVE to see CNN and Rachel Maddow - and Tucker Carlson, too - get cancelled in my lifetime over their quite clearly profit-motivated propaganda activities .. so if that is the inevitable end result of the "Cancel Joe Rogan Movement", then - sorry Joe - I'm in.
Mainstream for millennials and gen z - maybe even gen X. He’s probably not mainstream for boomers.
Because your definition of mainstream is incredibly narrow. In the age of the Internet, mostly boomers and some gen X are watching TV. I don’t watch what’s on any tv anywhere. I haven’t used TV in the traditional sense in over a decade and that’s very common in my demographic. To me - those “news” networks spread as much disinformation as Joe Rogan does. (Which is to say - a lot and practically all the time)
Stop. I'm not even in the US. I give very few shits about what you think I think is good or bad journalism, or what political pundits I'd defend. Takes my words as they are and please, shut up.
>He’s horoscopes and crystals for people who think they’re intellectuals.
In all honesty, I think you're proving the point that online hatred needs to be curbed before it becomes overwhelmingly destructive to society. Who are these people who so obviously wrongly think of themselves as intellectuals, in your mind, when they really are nothing of the sort? ALL of Joe Rogans listeners, or just the ones opposed to government-enforced medical procedures?
> The true con in all of this is ..
.. is that its possible to espouse hatred (calling Joe Rogan a con, people 'think they are intellectuals', etc.) for an out-group and not be called to task over the reasoning behind that hatred.
Do you hate Joe Rogan because he's mainstream, or because he espouses a view that is not mainstream while appearing to be a mainstream media personality? How is it possible to hold both positions?
Personally, I am not pro-Joe Rogan, I enjoy his podcasts but don't agree with his personality and find his views on some things utterly intolerable, but I am anti-hate speech, which we have seen has allowed the commitment and further justification of so many actual crimes in Americas' socio-political environment recently. Surely there comes a time in every American's mind where they need to balance the strength of their states freedom-granting instruments (the Bill of Rights) with their desire to tone-police the cultures they don't like into oblivion... isn't this how the Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya/Syria/Yemen mess got started in the first place - Americans deciding they don't like the voices of some out-group?