Censorship as a method of government takes hold in the West: the cancellation of Joe Rogan
In the international hunt for what is summarily called disinformation, the new white whale bears the name of Joe Rogan. The host of the most followed podcast in the world is under attack in the United States, accused first of having spread disinformation on Covid-19 , and now of racism.
The story begins, at least officially, when the old glory of rock Neil Young threatens to withdraw his music from Spotify if Joe Rogan's podcast, accused of Covid disinformation, is not censored. “Either him or me!” Young tells Spotify .
Spotify doesn't think about it much. Joe Rogan is a goose that lays golden eggs, many Neil Young don't even remember who he is. However, Young's self-censorship makes some proselytes among other musicians, but above all creates a media case. The case mounts, and soon the one to censor Joe Rogan becomes a movement, and the names that threaten to leave Spotify begin to become more and more prestigious, even including former president Barack Obama. However, many other celebrities , politicians, influencers , and members of the news are sided with Rogan.
Under pressure, Spotify agrees to add one of the now familiar social media disclaimers to some of the podcast 's judged sensitive topic episodes. Joe Rogan releases a video in which he explains his position, admits he is not perfect, but also points out that no one is, including traditional media, and reiterates his dedication to the plurality of information.
The media office is led by CNN , which has had an ongoing dispute with Rogan for some time now. The Atlanta network is in deep crisis. The ratings sink and he finds himself overwhelmed by multiple sexual and ethical scandals. His credibility is questioned, to the point that many Democratic voters, who represent his typical listener, are even falling back on the hated Fox News anchorman Tucker Carlson.
But everyone knows that it is really the alternative and independent media, often in the form of podcasts or streaming , that take away audiences from the big television networks. And this despite censorship, demonetization, shadow banning , and all the other measures implemented a few years ago by Big Tech to reduce its influence. Everyone knows that if television news suffers from a credibility deficit it is because of their evident political partisanship, accompanied by a reality show sensationalism. When conductor Brian Stelter complains from CNN studios that people tend to prefer figures like Joe Rogan rather than "real newsrooms " like CNN , he earns jokes from all directions.
Considered Ophra Winfrey's third millennium heir, Rogan is an eclectic character to say the least. A martial arts instructor turned comedian, then actor, then television presenter and sports commentator, has become a popular name thanks to his podcast born almost as a joke in 2009, when he decides to set up an arranged studio at his home and invite his friends. to discuss the most varied facts.
That little podcast has steadily grown to become the Joe Rogan Experience , the most listened to in the world. He moved from Rogan's living room to bigger and bigger dedicated studios, and from earnings from monetizing YouTube clicks to a contract with Spotify worth an estimated $ 100 million.
The hosts evolved from Rogan's drinking buddies to scientists, Hollywoood stars, and presidential candidates. Rogan has launched numerous characters that have become global phenomena, such as Canadian psychologist and philosopher Jordan Peterson. Today celebrities are competing to secure a seat opposite Joe Rogan in his studio, but the eclecticism has remained. One day Joe Rogan interviews an economics expert, the next day he talks about UFOs, one day the guest is an important politician, the next day an unknown deep sea sport fisherman.
It is precisely this authenticity that is the secret of the success of the Joe Rogan Experience . Joe remains a simple man, intellectually curious about the world around him. Despite the success he never got his head right. His attitude has not changed, it remains that of a man in the street without forcing. He sits across the table from a prestigious intellectual wearing jeans, trainers and a t-shirt with some martial arts logo. In the Joe Rogan Experience , the echo of the glossy TV talk shows of the 1980s and 1990s is completely extinct.
But the real secret of his success is that as an interviewer Joe Rogan knows his stuff. He lets the guest speak, asks them to explain what is not clear, delves into every question until it is eviscerated. The “long talk” format of podcasts has become a hit with the public in reaction to television formats made of video clips interrupted by commercials and committees of “experts” with thirty seconds to speak.
Politically Joe Rogan is as eclectic as his podcast . It is generally left, but it also has conservative and libertarian positions. Hostile to authoritarianism, pro-welfare, pacifist, avid hunter and defender of the right to own firearms, antiprohibitionist, family man with a solid marriage on his back, defender of gay and transgender rights, but suspicious of woke theology. Rogan does not follow any party line, and his positions are always blurred. He always makes an effort to see both sides of the coin. Raised in an ex- hippie family, he retains many of the suggestions of that counterculture, especially that of dialogue, understanding, and the rapprochement of opposites.
This particular form of independence of thought and moderation often got him into trouble with his own fans, who appreciate him as one of the few capable of breaking the media monopoly of single thinking, but at the same time criticize him as a bit. 'soft.
For example, in 2019, at a time when pressure on social media for censorship was starting to get serious, Rogan invites then- Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to his podcast, while spending all his time talking about something else. Disappointed fans rise up. Rogan makes up for it by re-inviting Dorsey, this time accompanied by one of the Twitter lawyers, to discuss censorship with independent journalist and digital media expert Tim Pool. The resulting episode is considered a podcast classic and a milestone in the internet censorship debate, and has more than six and a half million views for the full episode alone.
Since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic Rogan has been running his podcast as the average person he is. It hasn't given rise to no-vax delusions about nanobots injected under the skin, but neither has it followed the lead of many mainstream media, flattened to any official version coming from the authorities. True to its mission to broaden understanding of events, it has hosted voices from both sides of the fence.
The controversy over his handling of the Covid topic begins when Rogan in 2020 expresses the opinion that the vaccine is not necessary for young people and generally healthy people. Rogan later contracted Covid , and with a medical prescription he treated himself with a cocktail of medicines that included a treatment based on monoclonals and Ivermectin . This comes in conjunction with the bizarre controversy over Ivermectin "drug for horses". CNN , which has given voice to false reports of hospitals clogged up due to overdoses by Ivermectin , vehemently attacks Rogan, ridiculing him for having treated himself with a veterinary drug.
Later Rogan, interviewing in his podcast Saanjay Gupta, one of the medical experts in Covid who appears regularly on CNN , reminds him that the drug does have a veterinary version, but is designed for humans, even if its effectiveness for the care of Covid is currently under discussion, and accuses CNN of… disinformation. Gupta cannot deny and gets away with a confused answer, but CNN returns to the charge. Don Lemon reiterates that it is not incorrect to say that it is a "medicine for horses" as it is used for horses, and is not approved for specific use against Covid , although it is common for general use in humans. Rogan responds by giving Lemon an idiot and saying CNN is "reducing its authority".
But the real controversy erupts when Joe Rogan hosts, a short distance from each other, Dr. Peter McCullough, a prestigious cardiologist, and Dr. Robert Malone, one of the fathers of mRNA technology. Both are dissident doctors who have much to say about the Covid measures taken by governments, and point the finger at pharmaceutical companies and scientific committees, which they accuse of having abandoned the scientific method in favor of a consensus that ignores all the facts that do not coincide with the predetermined narrative.
The truth is that it is not Joe Rogan who has changed since the start of the pandemic, but the tolerance for diversity of opinion. The definition of no-vax has steadily expanded from those who think vaccines are poison to those who, even when vaccinated, contest measures such as vaccination lockdowns , obligations and passports.
“The problem I have with the term disinformation, especially today – Rogan says in the video explaining his position – is that many of the things we considered disinformation until recently are now accepted as facts. For example, until eight months ago if you had said that with the vaccine you can still get infected and infect with Covid , you would have been removed from social media . Some platforms would have banned you. It is now an accepted fact. If you had said I don't think cloth masks work, you would have been banned from social media. It is now openly and repeatedly affirmed by CNN . If you had said I think it is possible that Covid-19 came from a laboratory, you would have been banned from many social media . Now it's on the cover of Newsweek . "
Spotify 's decision to label the Joe Rogan Experience episodes that talk about Covid with a warning ends up being, as is now regularly the case, the classic finger granted and then losing the arm.
Appeals to "deplatforming" , that is to remove the podcast completely, multiply. The call to stop disinformation has morphed into a call for cancellation, now involving even the White House, with Biden spokesperson Jen Psaki urging Spotify to "do more."
In the world where entire organizations of activists are receiving rich donations to fulfill the unique task of monitoring the internet activity of the political opposition for scandals, episodes of the Joe Rogan Experience are sifted through for anything. At the end of the show is put together a video made of clips out of context with various situations to the limit.
The controversy mainly concerns Joe Rogan's use of the term "nigger" . It is a derogatory term towards African Americans whose use is rightly considered a social taboo, but which has undergone the strange evolution from a term that cannot be used by anyone to denigrate, to a completely unpronounceable term for those who are not African Americans. In other words, it is no longer considered racist to insult a black person by calling him a "nigger" , but also to just pronounce the word, which should instead be replaced with the euphemism "N-word" , to indicate that it is a racist term . So, if you're not black, even saying, "Dude gave that black person a nigger , what a horrible thing," is in itself evidence of racism because that term should never touch non-African American lips.
And this is exactly the meaning in which Joe Rogan was "pinched" to use the word: to indicate others who have used it, or observing how bizarre is the same idea of a term that can be used in multiple meanings by a category of people, but not from everyone else.
Another of the indicted examples is a funny story told by Rogan in which he went with a group of friends to see "Planet of the Apes" , accidentally ending up in an African American neighborhood. The story is an example of another new style, that "six degrees of separation", whereby racism manifests itself, and is proven, through a series of passages: Planet of the Apes = monkeys = Africa = African Americans = racism .
Anyone who has followed Joe Rogan for a while has no doubt that there is not a molecule of racism in his body, but in the era when the term racism is continually being broadened and redefined, moving from an objective and commonly accepted definition to always. new ideological definitions dictated by activists, this is of little importance.
Spotify went into panic mode and started removing hundreds of episodes of the Joe Rogan Experience . Joe Rogan himself has released a new clarification and semi-apology video, which is probably another finger that starts before the rest of the arm.
The implications of this strange story, however, are much deeper than Rogan's communication style, his bickering with CNN , and even the rivalry between traditional and alternative media. It is utterly disturbing that the White House is calling a private company directly to censor information sources contesting the government's official line. And it must lead to reflect on the current union between politics, state bureaucracy, media and, increasingly, even large companies, whether they are high technology or pharmacology. As reporter Glenn Greenwald wrote:
“Everyone knows that if Spotify removes Rogan, he will move to another platform with its millions of listeners. The reason for all this is: 1) Denying them the credibility of a large corporate platform. 2) Vilify it and ostracize it to prevent its further growth. 3) Create an example for others. "
But even more, attempts to cancel Joe Rogan and his show seem to align with a disturbing new style of governance that is taking hold in the West where politics, whether economic or social, are no longer discussed in one domain. democratic, but decided by experts through a top-down process.
From this point of view, the persuasion of the "demos" is judged a deleterious waste of time, and the discussion becomes consequently destructive. Only “the opinion of the experts” counts, a term distorted from its original meaning, and in reality redefinable as “experts in agreement with the government”, when not “activists”. It is a viaticum to put an end to the political discussion, if not to politics itself. After all, any measure taken by any government is taken "with the" opinion of the experts ". It is easy to see how consent, the single narrative, becomes imperative from here, and therefore censorship becomes imperative as well.
Worse still, difficult at that point for politics, and for all the consensus apparatus that revolves around it (media, bureaucracy, academia), to resist the temptation to confuse dissent with heresy, difference of opinion with stupidity or lack of sophistication. . To label one's political opponents as mere Boeotians and, in the next step, evil. To be canceled. To be removed from public life.
Just as it also becomes easy to associate any form of dissidence with extremist fringes, of which there is never a shortage if you want to go and look for them, a "guilt by association" which can indifferently take the form of ridicule (the ignorant no-vax ), or of demonization (the violent extremist). If Hitler was a vegetarian, vegetarians are Hitler.
The pattern followed in the attempts to cancel Joe Rogan and his podcast is exemplary in this regard. The first accusation is that of "disinformation", followed by an accusation of moral turpitude (racism). Usually follows an accusation of association with dangerous extremist elements and even, as incredible as it seems to have reached this point, of violence.
For example, the same pattern seems to be at work in Canada in Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's reaction to the agitation of truck drivers who demand the revision of the many anti -Covid mandates in force in that country. Trudeau in the past had defined anyone who is not vaccinated against Covid-19 a "minority" of "science deniers" who "occupy space", often made up of "misogens and extremist racists", finally wondering if it is necessary to "tolerate these people". A rather striking example of falling into the temptation to vilify dissent.
When a convoy of trucks set off from British Columbia with the intention of reaching the capital Ottawa, to become the longest convoy ever recorded, and starting a protest occupation that has been going on for two weeks without incidents, in a festive and peaceful atmosphere, how did the Canadian government / bureaucratic / media complex react?
Initially, the media outright lied, saying it was a protest by truckers over the condition of the roads. Then they attempted to minimize and keep media coverage to a minimum. For days, looking at the Canadian media, one was faced with an unreal parallel world in which the largest convoy in the world did not exist. While on social media , in podcasts , in all alternative media, nothing else was talked about with an abundance of videos and images never seen before.
When it became impossible to ignore the convoy, a demonization began by exploiting and magnifying sporadic incidents and the presence at the protest of exactly two swastika flags and a Confederate flag. Canadian state television even suggested that the truckers were "Russian actors". Dynamics that we now know well in Italy too …
The government branded the entire protest as a racist, accused the truck drivers of intimidation (i.e. violence), and from there it never pulled away, even refusing to meet the protesters. However, he launched a campaign to pressure private companies, such as GoFundMe , to boycott the convoy.
Still, it is a peaceful and wide-ranging protest. The truckers were joined by farmers, cowboys and commoners along the way. Important intellectuals of the country sided with the convoy. Brian Peckford, the last of the Canadian Constitution fathers alive, has returned from retirement to sue the Trudeau government for serious constitutional violations.
This obstinacy may seem unusual for the Western tradition, which has always prided itself on guaranteeing the right to peaceful protest and the mediation capabilities of its liberal democratic system, and even more so in a model country like Canada. But if we look at it from the perspective of the new style of “expert” governance, it is clear that the pattern returns.
The Covid-19 pandemic is the perfect incubator for the new model, because it exposes anyone who challenges governments' anti-Covid measures to the easy accusation of scientific ignorance and insensitivity to deaths. But it is clear to those who want to observe that the same style of governance is being applied to many other transformative projects currently in vogue in Western governments: the ecological transition, the Build Back Better , digitization, gender equality and the recoding of Western culture by means of Critical Theories .
In each case we are told that it is necessary, inevitable, that the government has a plan, and that only the bigots and the ignorant are likely to oppose, and that any form of dissent amounts to sabotage.
One therefore wonders, is Joe Rogan under attack just because he "misinforms" about Covid , or because he insists on talking about everything that tickles his curiosity, regardless of the wishes of the government and the "experts"?
Are his troubled guests just Drs McCullough and Malone, or are all the other guests that Rogan, agree or disagree with their position, insists on inviting to his podcast to speak freely? Environmentalists against the Green New Deal like Michael Shellenberger, critics of Critical Race Theory like James Lindsay, transgenders against Gender Theory like Blaire White, rebel journalists like Tim Pool, Matt Taibbi, Glenn Greenwald, politically incorrect comedians like Dave Chapelle. No one ever seems to complain about the normally welcome guests even at CNN , who are far from rare at the Joe Rogan Experience as well.
It is quite clear at this point that this goes beyond the debate on Covid measures. There are two fronts: on the one hand the traditional media, favored by governments and state bureaucracies, and on the other the alternative ones, defended by discontent and dissidents. Joe Rogan finds himself in spite of himself to be a symbol of success and independence for the latter, and a trophy to hang on the wall for the former.
The post Censorship as a method of government takes hold in the West: the cancellation of Joe Rogan appeared first on Atlantico Quotidiano .
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Atlantico Quotidiano at the URL https://www.atlanticoquotidiano.it/quotidiano/la-censura-come-metodo-di-governo-prende-piede-in-occidente-la-cancellazione-di-joe-rogan/ on Tue, 08 Feb 2022 03:56:00 +0000.