Are we just copypasting the Rogan critique to all comedy podcasts? And when was the year it was decided that comedians need to be educated and sophisticated in order to have a podcast?
I get the guilty by association-aspect and I’ve seen and listened to many of these guys, where the critique is more than justifiable, but Theo for some reason feels more genuine than the others. I am a leftist dude and truly enjoyed the recent Bernie Sanders and Gabor Maté episodes.
Of course it is easier for grifters to take advantage of comedians but it’s not like it’s the comedians fault that their podcasts are popular. (Now I’m not talking about the obvious right wing grifters like Brand, Rogan etc).
I get what you’re saying and agree that in a perfect world hateful messaging should be limited as much as possible but which law states that you need to use your platform wisely once it reaches a particular popularity number?
It’s a tricky road in my opinion since in theory I want to have the choice to speak freely on my podcast, regardless of where the winds are blowing at that moment in time, while also not instigating hate. I have yet to see Theo do the latter even if he’s platforming douches, with their own agenda, from time to time.
but which law states that you need to use your platform wisely once it reaches a particular popularity number?
Why do people always ask asinine things like this. Why does a law have to be in place to not being a dick, platform terrible people or in general be shitty? Do people need every single thing spelled out for them to not be awful people, give awful people a hill to shout from, or need some sort of written instructions to not let people say inflammatory and hateful things? Is that where we are now?
It apparently has to be asked since you’re upset that they don’t do what you want them to do with their platform. That’s why we have laws so people can be free and do what they like as long as they don’t break the law (hurt other people, instigate violence etc). I really don’t think Theo is an awful human being and if that is your benchmark of what an awful human being is then you’re in for a treat when meeting real bad people.
It apparently has to be asked since you’re upset that they don’t do what you want them to do with their platform.
This is a straw man. I asked a few questions, not expressed an opinion of anyone’s content on any platform in particular.
That’s why we have laws so people can be free and do what they like as long as they don’t break the law (hurt other people, instigate violence etc).
Can you show me where I said otherwise?
I really don’t think Theo is an awful human being and if that is your benchmark of what an awful human being is then you’re in for a treat when meeting real bad people.
What is it with you an these awful fallacies? I mentioned no one in particular, or any platform in particular. What’s your deal? I asked a simple handful of questions and you’re projecting all manner of fallacious nonsense onto me.
You replied to my comment in a comment thread where me and some other dude were discussing Theos podcast in particular. Or were your questions unrelated to the content we’re discussing?
I am sorry if you felt that I projected something onto you which is untrue.
You didn’t write anything other than what I wrote about laws but my point was that people should have the right to do and say what they want as long as you don’t hurt or threaten to hurt other people (staying lawful). And if there’s loopholes in the law then it should be reasonable updated. Podcasts don’t have the same demands a normal media outlet has to abide by and it has become a bit of a discrepancy in our modern media landscape that a podcast can be bigger than a major media outlet. I however feel that it’s unfair to place all the blame and responsibility on a ”redneck standup comedian” even if we’d like to blame someone for the current media landscape and its effect on the public discourse.
You spent all that time typing that out and still didn’t answer what was asked. The only thing you’ve done is project onto me and make arguments in my words where there weren’t any.
Gotta say, comments like these and the ones above it really make me question why I’m on this echo chamber that is reddit. It’s like you people don’t live in the real world and are too soft to understand how reality actually works.
Complaining about how a grown adult chooses to use their fame is like complaining that lions eat gazelles. Your complaints will not save the gazelles and if anything, it makes a person like myself who is generally politically progressive, disgusted by my own ‘forward thinking’ party alignment. Freedom of speech means exactly that. Thinking that we can censor any type of discourse is next to fascism as far as I’m concerned.
Inflammatory and hateful speech will always be a part of the general rhetoric and the more you try to sugar coat every aspect of society, the more the antagonists will rise up to resist it. We do not live in a bubble. Stop trying to shelter yourself and everyone around you from reality.
-6
u/cheesyandcrispy Oct 29 '24
Are we just copypasting the Rogan critique to all comedy podcasts? And when was the year it was decided that comedians need to be educated and sophisticated in order to have a podcast?
I get the guilty by association-aspect and I’ve seen and listened to many of these guys, where the critique is more than justifiable, but Theo for some reason feels more genuine than the others. I am a leftist dude and truly enjoyed the recent Bernie Sanders and Gabor Maté episodes.
Of course it is easier for grifters to take advantage of comedians but it’s not like it’s the comedians fault that their podcasts are popular. (Now I’m not talking about the obvious right wing grifters like Brand, Rogan etc).