@Zel
Quote:Quote:
Face it - Joe Rogan is part of the mainstream.
Tim Pool on the other hand - he opposes sometimes the mainstream even while being a leftie. His channel is partly de-monetized or by now completely demonetized.
Joe Rogan is just a sellout with some more alternative or edgy content. When you listen to him closely then you realize that:
1) He is smarter than he makes out to be - his persona being part of the show
2) He clearly tows the globalist party line on most essential subjects that they care about - he knows how far he can go
His main value comes from some of his wild guests out there - some crazy and some true or entertaining. Good for him - he carved out a good niche as part of the mainstream media empire - all while appearing independent. But that is nothing new - the CIA is known to have co-sponsored many of the so-called patriot radio conspiracy stations in the 1980s to 1990s.
This is a gross oversimplification. I think any notion of mainstream is quickly dissipating. Is mainstream TV? No, none of the new generation is watching TV. Is CNN mainstream? Not really, most younger people are getting their news from social media. The internet has fragmented the mainstream and any notion of mainstream shifts quickly depending on where you are physically, or what subculture(s), interest groups you follow. There is no shared reality now, everyone has their own unique reality. Newspapers, basically dead at this point. Youtube is like I believe the second most visited site on the web. And yes, recently they’ve been pushing more mainstream friendly for TV and advertiser friendly content. I think any idea of mainstream is dying pretty damn quickly.
If you want to go down a black hole, youtube has been censoring since 2007, so we could call youtube cucked.
Quote:Quote:
As the company’s struggle with copyright holders grew, activists in a number of countries were sharing videos on the platform to draw attention to local issues. In Morocco, for example, the now-famous “Targuist sniper” posted videos of police demanding bribes from passing motorists that he had filmed from a nearby hill, sparking a national conversation about corruption. Tunisian activists used the platform to share video testimonies of former political prisoners. In response, the governments of both countries blocked YouTube. By 2008, more than half a dozen countries, including Brazil, China, Syria, Thailand, Pakistan, and Turkey had blocked the platform—temporarily or otherwise.
It wasn’t long before YouTube, faced with the possibility of being blocked in even more locales, was forced to take a stronger stance on certain types of content. Among the company’s first controversial decisions came in 2007 when it suspended Egyptian user Wael Abbas. Abbas, an award-winning blogger and anti-torture activist, had used the platform to draw attention to police brutality in Egypt, uploading more than a hundred such clips. Although there were rumors that YouTube’s decision had come at the behest of the Egyptian government, the company later told Abbas that it had removed the videos after receiving numerous complaints from other users.
The decision to suspend Abbas was widely (and rightly) criticized as censorship—and yet, later that same year, after being accused of profiting from footage of children being beaten, a spokesperson for the company claimed that censorship wasn’t its role.
In 2008, YouTube also made a significant policy change, instituting a clear three-strikes rule for (non-copyright) community guidelines violations. The platform gave users a clean slate after six months without a second violation, and in 2010, added the ability for users to appeal strikes that they believed had been wrongfully applied. In doing so, YouTube formalized its role as an arbiter of appropriateness.
To add, he’s entertainment, as is a good portion of content on the web. I use his show as a starting point, and then if anything is of interest (dissident thought) I do my own research. To think any pod-cast constitutes hard news would be a bit ridiculous anyway.
Everyone plays a persona in media, so I find it a non-issue that he plays up his bro-ness or “alpha-ness”
Is he a globalist? Not especially relevant to me. Youtube is a globalist platform and it’s censored. So is virtually all mainstream media, TV, Radio, social media, as well as others. To preach the message of self-reliance, personal responsibility, and being a man is sufficiently “dissident” at this point for me to give his thoughts, however bro-ish they may be, at least a little thought.
What constitutes independent anyway for you? Shortwave radio? Numbers stations? Most of the internet is heavily censored via ICANN and web hosts…
Quote:Quote:
One look at his sponsors and you can tell where Joe's allegiance lies.
https://jrelibrary.com/articles/joe-roga...omo-codes/
He also works for the UFC, which is owned by WME-IMG (co-CEO Ari Emanuel and co-CEO Patrick Whitesell...).
I view Joe, and pretty much every mainstream "alternative" source, as a trap for angry Gen X'ers and Millennials fed up with the system. People fed up with the TV/radio propaganda will find JRE. He gets you woke on all the non-problematic topics, without ever naming the culprit. Weed, DMT, and psychedelics are then offered as the solution.
He's like the Rush Limbaugh of millennials and Gen X. Some of his guests are interesting, but it's all mainstream and safe stuff. He would never have a guy like E Michael Jones, Roosh, Owen Benjamin (new Owen), Andrew Anglin, etc. on the show.
Everyone is loyal to their sponsors unless they’re self-funded. If anything that sounds like an indictment of corporate media.
I repeat, you should not go to youtube expecting to here uncensored people. They censor anyone remotely dangerous. Recently, it’s been alt-right types, and now, infowars. Who I don’t consider dangerous in any narrow sense.
You should not expect shows for mass audiences, much less podcasts, mind you, to regal you with high level discourse or dense information. I agree it is a problem to push drugs, and I think actually that’s my least favorite part of his shtick.
Roosh I would love to see on his show, but if enough people asked, maybe it would happen. As far as Anglin he doesn’t do media anymore, and I suspect he’s more of a shadowy figure than most could imagine. To be honest, I don’t even think Anglin has much of a following. I find it highly suspicious when of all people Chuck palahniuk is publicly praising him:
Quote:Quote:
“I read the Daily Stormer because Andrew Anglin cracks me up.” -Chuck Palahniuk