The Skeptics Guide #799 - Oct 31 2020 (Ad Free)
Added 2020-10-31 16:06:15 +0000 UTCCOVID-19 Update; News Items: Pandemic Holidays, Water on the Moon, Murder Hornets Murdered, High Value Plastic, Exoplanet View of Earth; Who's That Noisy; Your Questions and E-mails: Superconductors and Computers, Beef and Climate Change; Interview with James Randi; Science or Fiction
Comments
No worries. I didn't read it that way. Your assessment seems pretty spot on. It's funny that Spotify actually banned AJ. Then Rogan immediately had him on as a guest. I think there's been some blowback against Spotify for it. I'm not sure of the value of refutation. In a head on situation anyway. (Not that it's not.) For a reasoning person, that works fine. But for others, emotion rules the day, and the showmanship of AJ and his ilk has a deep psychological impact. I once listened to a 9/11 truther talk about going deep down the rabbit hole. When presented with evidence (he and 4 others received invitations to investigate the evidence), it only confirmed his beliefs. It was talking with the families of the victims that actually swayed him. Seeing the human side and how much he was hurting them actually changed his mind. He, of course, became part of the conspiracy when he gave it up. For a good analysis of AJ work, the Knowledge Fight podcast is fantastic, and fun to listen to.
Asymetra
2020-11-08 17:28:30 +0000 UTCI didn't mean for this to get contentious, BTW, so please don't read the above (or below) as smarty-pants. I just wanted our favorite 'casters to consider the possibility that their emotional proximity to the Alex Jones issue might effect their natural cognitive bias, and media censorship is a double-edged sword. In fact, it is the growing belief in media censorship that truly gives kooks like AJ his platform (Pew research that shows belief in media censorship is growing - https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/08/19/most-americans-think-social-media-sites-censor-political-viewpoints/). We want AJ on the shows, even if we don't want him to have his own shows, because we want to be able to refute him. And we want to restore public confidence in media.
Jacqueline Lapacek
2020-11-08 17:16:39 +0000 UTC@Jacqueline. Thanks for the response. I agree that we need to be aware of the crap spouted by the likes of Jones. Screening is a good thing for certain. Just look up Aaron Rabinowitz and Monster Island. He demonstrates what happens when speech is (almost) entirely unfettered. I'm not sure what it is about being unfettered that brings out the absolute worst in some people. People don't seem to understand that freedom of speech is not the right to be heard. While I can "change the channel" when I don't like something, the internet allows for these people to follow you and ram it down your throat, which they then justify as freedom of speech and if you don't like it just "change the channel." Only for them to follow you again. What is it about lunatics and pedophiles that they have such incredible abilities to cyberstalk, yet cannot (in the case of lunatics, particularly on the right but also on the left) find valid information? I mean besides cognitive biad, motivated reasoning and the Dunning-Kruger effect. I suppose there isn't much left.
Asymetra
2020-11-08 16:42:45 +0000 UTCThanks. We are in agreement. It felt to me that they were dangerously close to rationalizing censoring Jones. Steve certainly seemed to be more cautious in his responses, which I agree with. I haven't heard the Joe Rogan podcast itself, but an analysis done by Knowledge Fight.
Asymetra
2020-11-08 16:28:37 +0000 UTCYou are correct that the right to free speech is exclusively applied to the government, but the term "censorship" is not. That is not even the most common use of the term.
Jacqueline Lapacek
2020-11-08 15:54:25 +0000 UTCYou are right in that there is no Constitutional burden on Spotify to ban or allow any guest they choose - censorship is not a crime, and I was not claiming that it is. This is the equivalent of a newspaper not accepting commentary from a particular author, or a private library banning a book. Alex Jones - dangerous kook though he may be - is a political voice with quite a large platform already. It's important that we are all aware of what he is blathering on about. Otherwise we are unprepared for it when gunmen raid pizza parlors, or when we need to engage in productive dialog with someone who has been mislead by him. I'm not saying we should never screen the material we produce, publish, or market (I'm ok that my kid's private school library has no nudie magazines), but never when it comes to politics. We know Fox News has liberal commentators (like Chris Wallace and even Dennis Kucinich), and CNN has conservatives. These are legitimate politicians, I know
Jacqueline Lapacek
2020-11-05 23:11:48 +0000 UTCSpotify are a free enterprise who can choose who they allow time on their channels. This is not censorship, just a choice of how they want to conduct business. They have no power to deny Rogan from going on with his podcast and guests but they can ban it from their own services. There is no problem here.
Ville Kuitunen
2020-11-02 18:47:50 +0000 UTCI am really sick of people saying that all we need to do is go vegan and we will do more for the planet than we would if we stopped driving cars. I wish they all knew just how complicated the reality is.
Ted Apelt
2020-11-01 23:35:53 +0000 UTCThe one thing about censorship is the right to free speech is in regards to the government, not private individuals/organizations. The right to free speech is not the right to be heard.
Asymetra
2020-11-01 19:30:08 +0000 UTCI'm an Iowan born on a farm and unless there's a whole bunch of cows in confinement someplace I think the comment that, "most" beef production is confinement is a gross misunderstanding. Hogs, chicken and turkey? Yes, most are in confinement but not beef cattle.
Brian Hagmeier
2020-11-01 16:20:26 +0000 UTCInteresting. Both the Beef and the Plastic discussions smartly point out the subtlety of the issues. The vilification of both has always annoyed me.
Deino
2020-10-31 18:00:21 +0000 UTCI do agree with Kara that we don't want the outlet to do the censorship. Joe maybe should not have had him on the show, but Spotify should not control whom he can interview. This is maybe too close to home for you all - literally - because of the school shooting that occurred near you. I feel that you rationalized censorship in this podcast. Gotta be careful. Changing the rules to serve a current policy can result in those rules being used against us in the future.
Jacqueline Lapacek
2020-10-31 17:12:25 +0000 UTCIf we mine this, will it deplete quickly?
Scott Kahler
2020-10-31 16:53:13 +0000 UTC
