My 27 yr old sibling is a hard core follower of Joe Rogan 💩

What are some progressive channels/people/content that I could have my sibling start watching instead?

Preferably something that has a similar flavor - example: male host, muscular, easy to digest. I think that will make the transition easier.

My personal preferences are Seth Meyers and John Oliver, but Last Week Tonight (John Oliver) is even a heavy watch for me sometimes!

[No Andrew Hubbard. He’s another fake.]

Thank you!

  • unknowing8343
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    So now everyone that has been on Joe Rogan is a right wing fascist? Cause I couldn’t imagine Neil deGrasse Tysson like that.

    In terms of the pseudoscience and supplements… It clearly shows people don’t watch his stuff. I am SURE it’s not perfect, but most of it is clearly WELL referenced on the show description, and anything that hasn’t been officially approved he states that clearly with CONSTANT warnings to PLEASE CONSULT A PROFESSIONAL.

    I hate Joe Rogan. I hate fascist propaganda. Yes, Huberman makes money with his podcast, all podcasts are business, all big ones, at least.

    All the claims about his personal life seem to me like journalists trying to come up with vector attacks to a famous figure for clicks, just like it happens with any other celebrity.

    Yeah, he may be a terrible boyfriend, but Einstein married his cousin and Oppenheimer was a cheater and we live in this amazing (or horrible) world thanks to them.

      • unknowing8343
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        You cannot take an article and say it’s true and therefore “Andrew bad”. It doesn’t work like that. I’ve seen that article a million times already. It presents no proof, it’s just a reddit comment as an article for clicks.

        The sunscreen thing, here’s the first link that comes up when you search online:

        Taken together, this review advocates revisiting the current safety and regulation of specific sunscreens and investing in alternative UV protection technologies.

        In any case I am sure he wasn’t saying ALL SUNSCREEN IS BAD but you know, people are going to build up their stories.

        No, his personal life isn’t relevant if all he does in his podcast is condense evidence about a subject, with all relevant sources right there.

        • moon@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          20 days ago

          Whenever he saw a red flag warning at the beach he grabbed his surfboard.

          • unknowing8343
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            Good journalism would be an article going through all the papers from the Huberman podcasts and his analysis of them (which he always cites if it’s been peer-reviewed, etc) and debunking all the misinformation. But nope. It’s all about talking to enough people hoping they say some crap about the personal life about a private person, cherry picking information and building up a story from that.

            The sunscreen thing, I just passed the first link that came to me, showing that in fact there is proof of bad agents in sunscreen.

            If you go check the video of Huberman and sunscreen, very easy to find, you’ll see how he literally says that sunscreen is important because you don’t want to get cancer, it’s just that SOME SUNSCREEN has been found to have toxic components that may cross the blood-brain barrier, and he simply advices to BUY A GOOD SUNSCREEN.

            See how this “journalism” works? They pick those little things and extrapolate into madness instead of doing actual work. Because why would you do the actual journalism if there is an easier way to get clicks?

            And I am sure one could find some contradicting science to Huberman’s podcasts and I would LOVE to see that. In fact, I think Huberman would love that too. That’s science!!

            • moon@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              20 days ago

              Random words in front of other random words create a random sentence.

              • unknowing8343
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 years ago

                First of all: yes, science is about constantly trying to disprove hypotheses. That is what the guys at CERN are doing, that is what people at Stanford are doing. What else could it be?

                If you think Huberman is giving these people a right to spout off scientific matters and that’s horrible, then we should cancel Veritasium, we should cancel Sabine Hossenfelder, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Brian Cox, MinutePhysics, VSauce, all TED speeches, damn, BURN every science book and magazine, cause it is making people have opinions about these evil things!!

                • moon@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  20 days ago

                  The anaconda was the greatest criminal mastermind in this part of the neighborhood.

                  • unknowing8343
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    I am not defending the man. I am just trying to get to the meat of why there is so much hate on him.

                    All that young men, nofap, supplement-seller thing is NOWHERE in his podcast. It just shows that people are just reading clickbait article titles. Please watch one of his episodes about sleep, or alcohol, or whatever. I’ve explained it in many comments already. This dude is REALLY careful about what he puts in his podcasts, and it shows.

                    BTW, none of his advice has ever said anything losely related to Peterson’s rethoric of male superiority thingie, and I don’t even know who that Sam Harris is.

                    I can tell you something tho. So far in all discussions, NO ONE has brought up what I believe is Huberman’s biggest mistake: bringing Zuckerberg in. That was a very bad episode, but everyone (I even remember Veritasium f*cking it up hard once) deserves to make mistakes sometimes (particularly if no illegal action was taken). I think (hope) he learned his lesson because every comment was clear. No highlight videos were made out of that episode which clearly shows they probably realised the mistake.

    • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      He has also had Bernie Sanders on and pretty much agreed with him on everything.

      I haven’t paid that much attention to Rogan since he moved to Spotify and have only heard a couple episodes since the exclusivity deal ended. However almost equally controversial character I do listen to almost religiously is Sam Harris and virtually every single time I hear someone criticizing him it’s clear as day that they’re just parroting some slander article (or likely just the title of it) without having having any clue about what was actually said and in which context.

      Nowdays when ever seemingly everyone suddenly decides to start hating on some person I just assume the critics are just as informed as is the case with people accusing Sam of saying things he haven’t. It’s actually quite hilarious that the people who haven’t listened a single episode think they know the person better than a long-time listener who has been following them for years.