RE: Rogan and the responsibility of platforms
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
The problem arises whenever anyone claims the power to be arbiter of truth. Sure, flat earth and ancient aliens shouldn't be treated as credible, but I remember all too well 5 years ago when any skepticism toward the official government line on COVID was treated as the same level of pseudoscience.
I tend to agree with Dave Smith's arguments, although there are points of contention. People who complain, "he's just a comedian," are not addressing his arguments. It's a classic ad hominem, and should be embarrassing.
Some people forget many podcasts are entertainment as much as informative. Rogan likes to have conversations with interesting people, whether they are credible or not. Compare him to terrestrial radio shows like Coast to Coast AM, and he's far less woo-woo, but still, he doesn't claim to be a counterpart to NPR, FOX, or MSNBC either.
the handling of COVID, the lies, the coverups, all that broke everything. I for one, and I know I'm in the majority, don't believe in the "trust the experts" by default anymore.
I'd say the sane position is "listen to the experts, but verify"
I'm with Dave on this one too.
If the experts stopped acting like propagandists or openly whitewashing the uncomfortable facts as court historians, they might earn the trust they want. Treating science like a religion where scientists cannot be questioned should be dangerous, but politics made science and history as defensively insular as the police are.