Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Joe Rogan Experience Podcasts

Options
1444547495066

Comments

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Who decides what constitutes "disinformation"? Unless you have an MD or phd in your field then why should we listen to you? 11 out of every 12 deaths means nothing on it's own. Why were those people unvaccinated?, how old were they?, did they have underlying conditions?. The simple fact is that this virus, irrespective of variants, overwhelmingly impacts the elderly and co-morbid. Anyone who wants a vaccine has gotten a vaccine. The reality is that if unvaccinated people are dying then it's probably because they were too old, too ill, or both to receive a vaccine. Not because they were listening to the JRE.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I've already shown expert analysis from medical professionals on Rogan and guests' Covid disinformation - I didn't create any of these claims. That's a terribly poor argument effort on your part. to go along with your conflation and joke-level whataboutism.

    It has also been shown using surveys and quantitative analysis of same that Rogan has influence over his listeners' vaccine intentions and has influenced them

    Joe Rogan told his millions of listeners not to take his anti-vaccine advice seriously. Is it too late?

    In short, Rogan repeatedly spread dubious coronavirus-related information. In December 2020, regular Rogan listeners’ intentions to vaccinate were 15 percentage points lower than those of non-listeners. By February 2021, they were 18 percentage points lower, both statistically significant effects.

    How we did our research

    We conducted demographically representative surveys once every two months, beginning in April 2020 and ending in February 2021, via Lucid Theorem’s online opt-in sampling service. Each survey sampled about 1,000 Americans, with the exception of the February 2021 survey, which sampled about 1,500. Lucid Theorem uses quota sampling to produce samples that resemble the U.S. adult population with respect to age, gender identity, racial identity, household income, educational attainment, political partisanship and geographic region. To account for any remaining deviations between the sample and U.S. adult population, we weight responses to U.S. census benchmarks on age, gender, race, household income and educational attainment. Each survey asked respondents to report whether they were “very likely,” “somewhat likely,” “not too likely” or “not likely at all” to be vaccinated against the coronavirus once a vaccine became widely available.

    With this information, we scored respondents as more vaccine hesitant — meaning, intending to forgo a vaccine — if they indicated that they were “not too likely” or “not likely at all” to receive a vaccine. In the study’s February wave, those who said they already been vaccinated were scored as not hesitant. We also asked respondents to report how frequently, in the previous month, they had watched or listened to dozens of different programs. In our analysis, we compare the effects of Rogan listenership with how frequently respondents watch “local news” and “national news” broadcasts and listen to programs such as “The Daily” (a popular podcast) and NPR (on the radio).

    Respondents could indicate that they watched or listened “never,” “just once or twice,” “about once a week” or “almost every day.” We considered respondents to be regular viewers or listeners of each program if they reported watching or listening to each program at least once a week that month. We also asked respondents about such information as their political partisanship, attitudes toward scientific experts and personal demographics.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 20,411 Mod ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    It's their platform, they can dictate the terms of the content. Always could and always did. They've removed content for all sorts of reasons. It's curation. plain and simple.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    As I keep saying. We can both find "surveys" and "research" to confirm our bias. That you came up a Washington post article proves this. Surveys and research...



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,702 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    They're also held to a higher standard with regards to Rogan's content too given that they paid him a lot of money for exclusivity rights to his podcast. However it also means their hands are tied somewhat, as they likely have a pretty strong deal with him that they can't just remove him easily, and he probably pushed for making sure they can't tell him what he can or can't talk about.

    I'd say his recent comments following the Neil Young thing is partially because he doesn't want the negative publicity but also doesn't want to be seen as being an anti-vaxxer.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 33,702 ✭✭✭✭Penn




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Grand then.

    Please peruse your bank of "surveys" and "research" that you claim you can find and come back with some similar multiple survey data over a 9 month timeline complete with analysis showing that Rogan has not influenced his listeners' vaccine intentions

    Please also provide back up for this pure speculation.

    The reality is that if unvaccinated people are dying then it's probably because they were too old, too ill, or both to receive a vaccine.

    Especially given that at the time 11 or 12 of Covid deaths in the USA being unvaccinated people in the Delta wave over the 2021 Summer, that less than or barely over 50% of the US population were vaccinated

    https://www.google.com/search?q=vaccination+rate+usa&oq=vaccination+rate+usa+&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i20i263i512j0i512l7j0i10.5192j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,000 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    Well, in America is most certainly was used as a political football. Lest we forget that the vice president herself said she would not trust the trump administration on the vaccines safety. Where are the calls to have Kamala censored or cancelled?

    So what's worse here, a podcaster with a penchant for DMT or the vice president of the USA?

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,000 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    Ah yes, the old correlation =/= causation argument cam be used here. Have more people not taken the vaccine because they listened to the JRE or are more people who are likely to get vaccinated just happening to be listening to him 🤷‍♂️

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'm not here to provide you with anything. If you want to trawl the internet for surveys and "research" to support your pre conceived notions - have at it.

    This argument that we need to exclude voices, especially qualified voices, because their views are so dangerous that if people hear those voices they'll become more sceptical about vaccines and people will die. That is an argument no one believes and I'll explain why. Trust in the WHO and CDC will only happen when all voices can be aired, if Dr. Malone can be heard and then Dr. Fauci can say what he got wrong, people can use their reasoning to decide what they think is correct. When you see institutions of authority banning and prohibiting any questioning of their decrees, the normal reaction is to distrust those institutions. They come across as authoritarian and tyrannical not trusting and benevolent. Aside from the fact that censorship and banning people from platforms doesn't work, it actually makes them more alluring which is why over 40m people have listened to the Robert Malone episode because twitter had just banned him days before.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]



    Yes - you have shown nothing but conflation, whataboutism and haven't been able to back up even 1 of your speculations.

    Free speech has never meant lack of accountability and never will, especially in the case of public health.


    Imogen Coe, Founding Dean of the Faculty of Science at Ryerson University in Toronto, Canada, claimed Rogan has not simply spread misinformation once, but kept doing so.


    “Why would someone deliberately share information that is potentially damaging to the health and well being of others? That needs to be addressed and health professionals in particular have a duty of care and scientists have an ethical responsibility to speak up,” she said.


    Asked how an open society should balance free speech and discussion with the need to combat misinformation about the spread of Covid, she said: “There appears to be a conflation with ‘free society’ meaning anyone can say anything, including misinformation and falsehoods, without being held accountable for it.”


    She added: “Falsehoods and misinformation that lead to illness and death (which happens when scientific consensus and public health directives are undermined) surely must be challenged in a free society.”




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The data collected according to recognised sampling methods and the analysis approach conducted is a lot more convincing than you showing precisely nothing to the contrary

    the authors even acknowledged it being correlational but also compared the Rogan audience against audiences of other podcasts where the vaccine hesitancy did not increase

    In short, Rogan repeatedly spread dubious coronavirus-related information. In December 2020, regular Rogan listeners’ intentions to vaccinate were 15 percentage points lower than those of non-listeners. By February 2021, they were 18 percentage points lower, both statistically significant effects.


    That’s also noticeably different than for listeners of comparable radio programs and podcasts. Regular NPR radio and “The Daily” podcast listeners, for example, were statistically neither more or less likely to intend to vaccinate throughout the duration of the study and in some survey waves were even significantly more likely than non-listeners to intend to vaccinate. For example, in December 2020, NPR and “The Daily” listeners’ intentions to vaccinate were respectively 18 and 19 percentage points higher than those of non-listeners.


    Our data is correlational. We cannot determine that listening to Rogan causes someone to become skeptical about the vaccine; people who are skeptical about the vaccine may be more likely to listen to Rogan. But we can conclude that Rogan’s audience is more likely to hesitate to get the vaccine, compared with listeners of our set of other podcasts and radio programs.


    This finding is consistent with the idea that Rogan listeners may be heeding his and his guests’ nonexpert medical advice. As someone who is able to garner a truly massive audience in a very fragmented media landscape, Rogan’s voice becomes very important — both because he is influential and because his influence is often ignored by researchers and public health planners who tend to focus on legacy and social media.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,000 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    So we are in agreement, there's no way of knowing which of those statements is true.

    In that last paragraph the word 'may' is doing a lot of heavy lifting. It's also full of ifs buts and maybes. It reads like an opinion piece rather than a factual study with more than a littke whiff of bias.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    they went out and contracted the surveys and analysis to be professionally done on several occasions over 9 months across the audiences of different podcasts.

    yet only Rogan's podcast listeners showed increased vaccine hesitancy over the period.

    that's what was recorded.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,000 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    Seems like a fairly arbitrary set of criteria to measure it against. Did they account for age, who they follow on twitter, party affiliation, profession, etc etc etc.

    It's a complete stretch to be making the types of claims they are making, that's all I'm saying.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Did they account for age, who they follow on twitter, party affiliation, profession, etc etc etc.

    Did you actually just miss or just wilfully ignore the part about "How we did our research" that I posted in my original post about this data?

    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118566198/#Comment_118566198

    How we did our research

    We conducted demographically representative surveys once every two months, beginning in April 2020 and ending in February 2021, via Lucid Theorem’s online opt-in sampling service. Each survey sampled about 1,000 Americans, with the exception of the February 2021 survey, which sampled about 1,500. Lucid Theorem uses quota sampling to produce samples that resemble the U.S. adult population with respect to age, gender identity, racial identity, household income, educational attainment, political partisanship and geographic region.

    To account for any remaining deviations between the sample and U.S. adult population, we weight responses to U.S. census benchmarks on age, gender, race, household income and educational attainment. Each survey asked respondents to report whether they were “very likely,” “somewhat likely,” “not too likely” or “not likely at all” to be vaccinated against the coronavirus once a vaccine became widely available.

    With this information, we scored respondents as more vaccine hesitant — meaning, intending to forgo a vaccine — if they indicated that they were “not too likely” or “not likely at all” to receive a vaccine. In the study’s February wave, those who said they already been vaccinated were scored as not hesitant. We also asked respondents to report how frequently, in the previous month, they had watched or listened to dozens of different programs. In our analysis, we compare the effects of Rogan listenership with how frequently respondents watch “local news” and “national news” broadcasts and listen to programs such as “The Daily” (a popular podcast) and NPR (on the radio).

    Respondents could indicate that they watched or listened “never,” “just once or twice,” “about once a week” or “almost every day.” We considered respondents to be regular viewers or listeners of each program if they reported watching or listening to each program at least once a week that month. We also asked respondents about such information as their political partisanship, attitudes toward scientific experts and personal demographics.


    Again simply what was recorded ->

    Out of the listeners of different podcasts, Rogan's podcast listeners showed increased vaccine hesitancy over the period.

    That's outside of any claim.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,000 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    I did actually miss that in your first post. No need for the passive aggressive reply at all. There was nothing willful about it. Sometimes people do just miss stuff in posts.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,109 ✭✭✭SuperBowserWorld


    Neil Young, Old Man, brilliant song and performance here. Will take my mind off the fact that I can't listen to this on my Spotify account now.




  • Registered Users Posts: 14,294 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    So, if Spotify do what you don't agree with, you'll engage in "cancel culture" yourself?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]



    What exactly do you want me to back up? Either you are for censorship or against censorship. Aside from the fact that censorship doesn't work considering that Dr. Malone's podcast has been listened to over 40 million times just days after he was banned from twitter. T

    The issue for me isn't whether censorship works or doesn't work, I think it's unethical and inherently dangerous to silence people, particularly ones qualified in their field because the capacity for human corruption is so high one of the few checks against corruption and human error is to ensure that those in authority are challenged and that dissent is allowed.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    "Dr. Malone" has been completely discredited by his field about the unsubstantiated claims he makes about vaccines and is inherently dangerous to public health.

    Did you ever consider that he might have some angle where he was coming from? Malone has a personal agenda because he got Covid in early 2020 and ended up with long Covid and hoped that the vaccine would help his long covid (long haul Covid they call in the US) - which he already had for months before getting a vaccine.

    Just because he had prior work on mRNA technology doesn't mean that he has proof for his claims. He doesn't. His obvious personal situation of having his life fooked by long covid is where he is coming from.

    His concerns are personal, too. Malone contracted COVID-19 in February 2020, and later got the Moderna vaccine in hopes that it would alleviate his long-haul symptoms. Now he believes the injections made his symptoms worse: He still has a cough and is dealing with hypertension and reduced stamina, among other maladies. “My body will never be the same,” he told me.




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,438 ✭✭✭dalyboy


    I’ll support any person or company that stands against cancel / woke culture. If they remove said podcast then they’ll be automatically part of a bigotry system I detest so I’ll remove my support.

    Thats not me part of the cancel culture system since I’m giving the benefit of doubt to Spotify.



  • Registered Users Posts: 578 ✭✭✭VillageIdiot71


    Is this still a thing?

    I mean, yes, people can have conversations about things, including speculations that include the term “grassy knoll”. They can say things about vaccines that may be right or wrong.

    People can choose not to have a vaccine, based on incomplete information. Because removing their autonomy does more harm than exposure to disease.

    Are there really people who don’t get that?



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,952 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    The notion anyones culture is being cancelled is one of the biggest hoaxes of the last 20 years.

    Anyone that subscribes to that spends too long on the Internet and needs to go find an actual physical hobby.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,803 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Listening to him on Tidal. Great sound quality. Joni too.


    Imagine being so culturally desolate that you'd bash Neil Young and Joni Mitchell because of an MMA colour commentators podcast.



  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,529 Mod ✭✭✭✭humberklog


    I don't think "cancel culture" means cancelling cultures. I thought it was referring to a culture of cancelling.

    Or have I got it wrong?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]



    You can keep posting hit pieces from the Altantic, Wapo and all those other corporate outlets that have spread more disinformation than any random YouTube or podcast. Maybe it's because you're so invested in your online position that you need to cling on to these articles and survey because they support your preconceived notions. Despite all this you have yet to explain why you support censorship?

    As I said, trust in the WHO and CDC will only happen when all voices can be aired, if Dr. Malone can be heard and then Dr. Fauci can say what he got wrong, people can use their reasoning to decide what they think is correct. The way that human beings reason is that you weigh all of the competing evidence as rationally as possible. I have yet to meet someone who says they would rather remain ignorant about what is being done or have the full facts.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,088 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    I see Sharon Stone has now come out against Joe. He is definitely finished now !😁 I'm sure Spotify are happy about all the free publicity they are getting.



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,026 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    we're at a situation now where absolute muppets are writing about joe as if he's

    fuck1n hell is this where we're at :)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 21,026 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams




Advertisement