Neil Young vs. Joe Rogan

[DinkinFlicka]

He's the Larry King of our time. It's the best comparison I can come up with.

Lol.

 

[Vol8188]

Lol.

Idk why that’s funny? Doesn’t he sit down for long form interviews with A list celebrities like Larry King did?

Not sure what I’m missing

 

[n_huffhines]

I used to listen to Rogan fairly often (usually for entertainers and UFC fighters) and then he went exclusively to Spotify and I haven't listened since.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

Same with CNN.

And Fox.

 

[DancingOutlaw]

The market is reacting violently to Joni Mitchell pulling her music lmao.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

I like Rogan, but too many people take what he says as gospel.

 

[Vol8188]

I like Rogan, but too many people take what he says as gospel.

Which is odd given how often he tells people directly not to take his word for anything

 

[MontyPython]

^^When you realize you lost an argument but just have to have the last word.

Heh. Mkay.

It's sad that folks demonize Fauci, CDC, NIH and science in general. Pretty much proves that simple minds want simple answers to very complicated subjects, but I digress...

 

[Vol8188]

Heh. Mkay.

It's sad that folks demonize Fauci, CDC, NIH and science in general. Pretty much proves that simple minds want simple answers to very complicated subjects, but I digress...

Isn't the demonization of science coming from those attempting to silence dissenters? Seems far more demonizing than people calling Fauci out for the times he's been incorrect or behaved as a partisan hack.

 

[luthervol]

So we shouldn't listen to doctors unless they follow an approved narrative?

I could call vaccinating and masking children "harmful misinformation" and provide data to back those things up. Should we ban people who promote that?

What?
You should listen to doctors who provide you the best information.
Each person needs to decide who is providing the best information.

 

[luthervol]

Anthony Fauci and masks circa March 2020?

Is there a point in there you are trying to make?

 

[Vol8188]

What?
You should listen to doctors who provide you the best information.
Each person needs to decide who is providing the best information.

How do we do that if you are attempting to shutdown dissenting information?

 

[luthervol]

So Faucci and Justice Sotomyer shouldn't be listened to?

Certainly not if you think they are intentionally providing harmful misinformation.

 

[luthervol]

How do we do that if you are attempting to shutdown dissenting information?

Fox can decide which "experts" they wish to put on their network.

 

[DancingOutlaw]

Heh. Mkay.

It's sad that folks demonize Fauci, CDC, NIH and science in general. Pretty much proves that simple minds want simple answers to very complicated subjects, but I digress...

Science is great. People talking out of their ass or trying to tell grown adults patently goofy **** like a virus respects when you eat or can only go six feet or neck gaiters save lives makes rational people start to resent the "experts".

 

[Vol8188]

Fox can decide which "experts" they wish to put on their network.

No one wants to limit discussion, only intentional and harmful misinformation.

Can they determine who they want on their network, or should there ability to do so be limited to prevent "harmful misinformation"?

 

[luthervol]

Can they determine who they want on their network, or should there ability to do so be limited to prevent "harmful misinformation"?

They can put whoever they wish on.....they've been doing it for years.
Companies can decide they do not wish to advertise on Fox because of who they put on. That's not cancel culture, that's not trying to silence dissenters, that's just choosing with whom you associate.

 

[utvolpj]

Is there a point in there you are trying to make?

Probably that you're ok with dangerous misinformation as long as you believe in the source

 

[luthervol]

Probably that you're ok with dangerous misinformation as long as you believe in the source

lol....I'm never okay with dangerous misinformation, unless it is the least dangerous of all of the options. Then I really no longer consider it dangerous misinformation.

 

[Vol8188]

They can put whoever they wish on.....they've been doing it for years.
Companies can decide they do not wish to advertise on Fox because of who they put on. That's not cancel culture, that's not trying to silence dissenters, that's just choosing with whom you associate.

It is cancel culture (they're actively attempting to have someone removed from the conversation for the crime of interviewing both sides of the conversation) but that's a different discussion.

You seem to be stating it is okay to censor harmful/misinformation. Are you now saying you don't want that censored and fox/JRE can do what they wish?

 

[Vol8188]

They can put whoever they wish on.....they've been doing it for years.
Companies can decide they do not wish to advertise on Fox because of who they put on. That's not cancel culture, that's not trying to silence dissenters, that's just choosing with whom you associate.

lol....I'm never okay with dangerous misinformation, unless it is the least dangerous of all of the options. Then I really no longer consider it dangerous misinformation.

Is this intentional double speak? Surely you see the contradiction here?

 

[luthervol]

It is cancel culture (they're actively attempting to have someone removed from the conversation for the crime of interviewing both sides of the conversation) but that's a different discussion.

You seem to be stating it is okay to censor harmful/misinformation. Are you now saying you don't want that censored and fox/JRE can do what they wish?

I'm saying Fox can decide which "experts" they want to have on their network, and companies can decide which networks on which they wish to advertise.

 

[luthervol]

Is this intentional double speak? Surely you see the contradiction here?

I see no contradiction whatsoever.

 

[KB5252]

I like Rogan, but too many people take what he says as gospel.

Sure they do, America is oddly infactuated with the cult of celebrity.

 

[Vol8188]

I'm saying Fox can decide which "experts" they want to have on their network, and companies can decide which networks on which they wish to advertise.

But to be clear, you're "never okay with" that. Those were your words. So are you or are you "never okay with" that?