Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
What about also quoting The New York Times? or The Guardian? Or dozens of other ostensibly pro-vaccine sources I've also linked to back up my arguments?

You're trying to paint a picture that the vaccine-hesitant are getting their info exclusively from anti-vax types...this isn't remotely close to the truth, as my posts have demonstrated.

But I've seen the replies my posts get...hence the theory on mass psychosis gaining traction.

I’m not going to engage with you in this thread. So don’t waste your time.
 
What about also quoting The New York Times? or The Guardian? Or dozens of other ostensibly pro-vaccine sources I've also linked to back up my arguments?

You're trying to paint a picture that the vaccine-hesitant are getting their info exclusively from anti-vax types...this isn't remotely close to the truth, as my posts have demonstrated.

But I've seen the replies my posts get...hence the theory on mass psychosis gaining traction.
Please demonstrate how your theory on mass psychosis has gained traction in here?
 
What about also quoting The New York Times? or The Guardian? Or dozens of other ostensibly pro-vaccine sources I've also linked to back up my arguments?

You're trying to paint a picture that the vaccine-hesitant are getting their info exclusively from anti-vax types...this isn't remotely close to the truth, as my posts have demonstrated.

But I've seen the replies my posts get...hence the theory on mass psychosis gaining traction.
I wouldn't look too deeply into that last bit of your post, it's more of a mass pile-on of what you write because you're a bellend.
 
Please demonstrate how your theory on mass psychosis has gained traction in here?
Not in this echo chamber, but outside of here it is almost becoming accepted wisdom.


You can always spot rogans horrendous fan base before they reveal themselves. That insincere empty headed moron is just alex Jones with better friends.
440px-Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg.png
 
You didn’t really answer the question. Number of views or popularity has never and will never be proof of somethings value or accuracy. Your suggestion was that the video should be paid attention to simply because of the number of YouTube views it will get, which is mental.

How many of the views that video receives are people being linked to it, laughing and then closing it ? Like 99% of the views from you posting it here.
He also didn’t answer the question about his scientific background asked by folks here.
 
These are all people often quoted and referenced in the anti vax / conspiracy world, and have all spent a lot of time throughout the pandemic on these issues. They’ve all been quoted as sources in this thread for that type of content. So perfectly reasonable to reference them together.

The point was that financial incentive is often used as an indicator of ulterior motive. But that charge can equally be levelled at anyone who makes money off anything, including those 3.
Well I mean Rogan gets paid regardless by Spotify mate, so not sure there's any additional financial incentive there. He got the biggest ever deal when they bought him out. Any profits go to Spotify now?

But yeah, just like any media they draw clicks etc. I think Young is like Piers Morgan - an old fashioned, Tory, wind up merchant of the highest order. He's a prat.

Rogan has some pratish views but at the end of the day he's completely different. Brand, I don't know enough about. But the tendency to lump people who are actually very different in together isn't healthy IMO. I don't use Rogan as a source for information, but I do occasionally listen when he has an interesting guest on. If I am not quite sure on what that guest has said, I go check it out - hence why I posted that vid in here earlier.

When he had Sanjay Gupta on, it was a great interview/conversation, but even Dr Gupta was a bit biased and wouldn't budge from his beliefs even when presented with contradictory evidence. It's two sides of the same coin really. McCullough, though, came across as arrogant and steadfast, which is why I had doubts. However, his comments on the myocarditis risk, which is his area of expertise, were interesting.
 
Well I mean Rogan gets paid regardless by Spotify mate, so not sure there's any additional financial incentive there. He got the biggest ever deal when they bought him out. Any profits go to Spotify now?

But yeah, just like any media they draw clicks etc. I think Young is like Piers Morgan - an old fashioned, Tory, wind up merchant of the highest order. He's a prat.

Rogan has some pratish views but at the end of the day he's completely different. Brand, I don't know enough about. But the tendency to lump people who are actually very different in together isn't healthy IMO. I don't use Rogan as a source for information, but I do occasionally listen when he has an interesting guest on. If I am not quite sure on what that guest has said, I go check it out - hence why I posted that vid in here earlier.

When he had Sanjay Gupta on, it was a great interview/conversation, but even Dr Gupta was a bit biased and wouldn't budge from his beliefs even when presented with contradictory evidence. It's two sides of the same coin really. McCullough, though, came across as arrogant and steadfast, which is why I had doubts. However, his comments on the myocarditis risk, which is his area of expertise, were interesting.

I’d say it’s highly likely he still gets a cut of any revenue Spotify receive through ads, and he also plugs products or services during the podcast which will be directly related to the number of viewers he’s pulling in.

Any future deal will also be related to the size of his audience, he has a huge incentive to grow that audience by being controversial or hitting certain talking points.
 
Well I mean Rogan gets paid regardless by Spotify mate, so not sure there's any additional financial incentive there. He got the biggest ever deal when they bought him out. Any profits go to Spotify now?

But yeah, just like any media they draw clicks etc. I think Young is like Piers Morgan - an old fashioned, Tory, wind up merchant of the highest order. He's a prat.

Rogan has some pratish views but at the end of the day he's completely different. Brand, I don't know enough about. But the tendency to lump people who are actually very different in together isn't healthy IMO. I don't use Rogan as a source for information, but I do occasionally listen when he has an interesting guest on. If I am not quite sure on what that guest has said, I go check it out - hence why I posted that vid in here earlier.

When he had Sanjay Gupta on, it was a great interview/conversation, but even Dr Gupta was a bit biased and wouldn't budge from his beliefs even when presented with contradictory evidence. It's two sides of the same coin really. McCullough, though, came across as arrogant and steadfast, which is why I had doubts. However, his comments on the myocarditis risk, which is his area of expertise, were interesting.

It’s true that Rogan got the big Spotify payday, but it’s obviously in his interest to keep his stock high, and keep his content that interests his audience.

Some of his interviews have been good and worthwhile, but I’ve always found him to accept too easily clearly dodgy claims.

The general point is that pointing at a financial incentive is an easy and lazy option as it applies to most people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top