The recent Joe Rogan controversy has branched into a vast number of debates regarding political correctness, the limits of artistic and speech freedoms, and censorship. It has also caused an immense amount of trouble for Spotify which hosts the Joe Rogan Experience (JRE) podcast; seeing its stocks shed $2bn USD in value in just a few weeks. The controversy stems from prominent folk musician Neil Young pulling his music from the platform in protest of perceived misinformation being spread without sufficient challenge from the host on Rogan’s extremely successful podcast The Joe Rogan Experience. Following Young, many other artists proceeded to do the same, including Joni Mitchell and Crosby, Still and Nash.
Rogan’s podcast has followed a philosophy of showing debate from all sides and giving them airtime to discuss ideas. This has often led to a backlash, as his podcast has featured guests including conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, and “alt-right” activist Gavin McInnes. None of the past guests, however, have stirred up as much conversation and ridicule as his recent flirtation with COVID denialists. Rogan himself has been in hot water regarding COVID-19 before when he suggested that young people should not get vaccinated, however, it wasn’t until the airing of episodes featuring Peter McCullough and Robert Malone, both otherwise respected scientists, that the pile-on began.
Image from Spotify
On the podcast, Malone railed against vaccinations, referring to them as a “major threat to reproductive health”, whilst McCullogh went as far as to say that the virus was a planned act of “mass formation psychosis”. These positions, naturally, are unpopular with the scientific community, and much of the internet has turned on Rogan for allowing a platform for these kinds of views. Rogan does himself no favours with his calm and collected demeanour, often encouraging guests to develop their ideas where other interviewers may interject and argue. This then comes down largely to a critique of the overall attitude of the show and how it approaches information. The Joe Rogan Experience adheres, intentionally or otherwise, to a liberal view that in the marketplace of ideas there are winners and losers, and that all opinions should be heard and weighted in the public sphere.
However, Rogan’s immense popularity means that the views of those who fall outside of the realm of common discourse are amplified and legitimised to a viewership in its millions. There is no escaping the fact that when what may have otherwise been a minority position is broadcast on such a large scale, it is going to convince or at least garner sympathy from many that comprise the viewership. For many, the issue boils down to one of free speech and press freedom. According to the first amendment of the US constitution, which necessarily governs both the JRE and Spotify, freedom of speech and the press is an inalienable right untouchable by Congress. From a strictly constitutionalist view, there is then nothing that can be done. Things get more complicated when it comes to Spotify stepping in and trying to mitigate the damage done to its brand by removing old episodes. Earlier this month, Spotify removed over 110 episodes of the JRE to curtail further criticism.
A company or corporation removing or censoring content on its platform is perfectly legitimate by law, but that hasn’t quelled the online mob. Accusations of adhering to the demands of ‘SJWs’ and proliferating cancel culture mentality continue to dog the company from one side, and of allowing dangerous and irresponsible fake news from the other. This points to the societal recognition that big tech now possesses an unprecedented ability in forming world consciousness. From US Senator Ted Cruz’s attacks on Twitter and Google for conservative censorship to the Guardian reporting widespread left-wing censorship on Facebook, it is clear that hosting platforms are the perceived battleground of an information-based culture war in which censorship or curtailing of speech is increasingly contentious.
Image from Unsplash.com
It was philosopher Karl Popper who devised the idea of the ‘paradox tolerance’. The theory is summarised as follows: if a society allows tolerance of ideas without limits, then the proliferation and dissemination of intolerant ideology will eventually snuff out the conditions that allowed intellectual freedom in the first place, leaving an ultimately intolerant society. Information brokers, be it the JRE or hosting platforms, or any other news outlet or social media company will be aware of the power of speech to affect action. However, in liberal democracies that value free speech as an ultimate ideal, it is difficult to implement any kind of corporate or governmental control on media or speech without extreme backlash. In today’s increasingly online world, where speech can be algorithmically manipulated and amplified, it is more pressing than ever that consumers are aware of the power that media possesses in influencing them. As governments and corporations seem to have their hands tied, it falls on us more than ever to cultivate media literacy and critical thinking, both in ourselves and others.
Online Resources:
Academic resources:
Popper, K.R., 2020. The open society and its enemies. Princeton University Press.
Comments