Joe Rogan | Chappelle's New Special Had 0% on Rotten Tomatoes

It's not even just that. It's expanded even further and the best evidence is Dave Chappelle. Dave Chappelle's recent Sticks and Stones Netflix documentary, for whatever reason, Rotten Tomatoes thought it would be a good idea to only have it reviewed by five super progressive critics, only critics. They closed it off to the public. It had got zero percent on Rotten Tomatoes. They then opened it to the public and it got 99%. Of course. If that doesn't show a crazy disparity between, first of all, the idea that you're going to suppress it. Like you're going to say it's zero percent so no one's going to watch it and we're going to shut Dave Chappelle down. He's canceled. Fuck him. But people love him. You can't cancel someone who doesn't care, man. You can't cancel Dave Chappelle. No, you can't. On top of that, like how would they not understand that someone is going to know that you're not opening it up to the public and that once it does get open to the public, you're going to get a massive whiplash, a backlash where people are going to come and even if they didn't want to vote on it, now they do. And now they're going to give it a hundred percent or 99%. I knew I had to watch it when I saw how all the media channels, many of the media channels that I really dislike and do not respect were coming so hard at it and saying, oh no, you don't need to watch it. And all this, I was like, oh, this means I absolutely have to watch it. The Guardian in the UK gave it one star. And then I saw Vice saying, like, don't watch it. Vox saying don't watch it. I was like, okay, this means that I have to watch this. This is going to be good. And I wasn't disappointed. The influence of a small group of, a relatively small group of human beings that are in charge of these media conglomerates is, it's really astounding. And that they, it's not just opinion, right? It's like they're, they're trying to get people to behave and think the way they do. It's not just, yes, it is activism. And it's also, it's undisguised activism. It's very transparent activism. In opposed to journalism, I really wish there was a place where we could go, where we can get 100% unbiased information and news. And we can get an honest perspective of both sides. This side believes this and this is why they believe that, but this side believes that, and this is why they believe that. It's very hard to do. And if you have a podcast, one of the things that's really interesting is if you even talk to someone who has an opposing point of view of yours, or who is right wing, or who maybe has some questionable ideas, you are somehow platforming them and supporting their idea and then supporting some alt-right ideology. There's no room anymore for people to have conversations with people with differing opinions and just find out why they think. There is. There is. You've literally created it, man. Seriously, you and a handful of other people have created this. Well, it'd be a nice fact if I could go somewhere. If I could go somewhere and find things, I mean, it's nice that I'm doing it, but you got to trust me. I don't know what the fuck I'm doing. I'm not the guy to be distributing information. I'm certainly not the guy to be analyzing things. I'm too busy. I have too many other jobs. I got three kids. I got three jobs. I got a lot of hobbies. I'm fucking busy. I'm not the guy to go to that's going to give you an in-depth comprehensive analysis about the way the world works. It's not going to happen. I'm not your guy. But what I am is someone who's interested in talking to people. What they should have is someone who has my, I don't want to say my sensibilities, but my willingness to communicate with almost anybody. And then also someone who does a real exhaustive research, does real exhaustive research on the actual facts behind all these critical issues that are going to affect everybody. I don't see that anywhere. You're certainly not going to find it on television just because the format just doesn't allow for that. You've got the time pressure, the advertising, all that. It just simply doesn't allow for it. And then in the way newspapers and journalism is going, I mean, the stuff that's been paying is the clickbaity sort of stuff, the stuff that gets people outraged, stuff that gets people fired up, highly partisan stuff. Being sensible is not the, in the old media, that's not what seems to be profitable. I know, but is that everything, is profitability anything? Where's real journalism? Because I feel for real journalists because I do think that they are fighting for their lives in terms of this world. Nobody, I subscribe to a few different things. I subscribe to the Washington Post and the New York Times and a few other periodicals online where I pay money to read their stuff online because I think they have valuable contributions. I don't think many people are doing that. There's so much free shit. Vox is free. All these other places are free. And so if you're only going with free shit, you're only going to get biased stuff. And you're also only going to get stories that are commercially viable to the people that are making it. Why would they be commercially viable? Well, they got to be click baiting. That's the only way you get people to pay attention to shit these days. I think that's already starting to stop working. You think so? The click baiting stuff. Yeah. I don't know if you, I mean, if you were, I think back a couple of years ago where I don't know, you'd go on Facebook and you'd get all these kind of like buzzfeed things. And you had all these new media companies that sprung up and sort of took advantage of the click bait era. But people are pretty, people have become quite wise to that now, I think. And people are starting to realize, I mean, I think if you went back even a decade, I don't think most people thought that the media in general was particularly biased. Maybe they would have thought, okay, maybe that one and that one, but not just generally now. I think if you were to survey people, like a lot of people understand that even the ones that are supposed to be impartial, things like CNN, things like the New York Times, especially when it comes to the opinion pieces, people know that those things are not just giving it to you straight. They know you're getting some spin. Some cases you're getting it from a totally partisan angle. And I think if people are upfront with that, if they're like, look, we're a conservative news outlet. Look, we're a liberal left wing news outlet and that's the filter everything is coming through. If they're upfront about that, then I'm kind of like, oh yeah, yeah, that's fine. But if people claim to be unbiased or claim to be totally impartial and just bring you the facts without putting too much opinion or spin on it, and then you can kind of see through that and see that's what they're doing, and they may not even know that they're doing it, right? Because so many people get stuck in these echo chambers. So I don't think all of it is necessarily on purpose, but that's just how it is. And I think the vibe I'm certainly getting, I know with myself and with other people and listening to what people are saying is people are starting to notice it a lot more. I know you've talked a lot about the online tech censorship and bias and stuff like that, which is another thing that again, I think if you went back 10 years ago, I don't think people thought that Facebook or Twitter or YouTube or any of these things were biased. Whereas now in 2019, it's like, okay, you've got enough examples to see, okay, they're de-platforming a lot of people of certain political persuasions. And then you've got other people who are outright calling for violence or just saying like crazy stuff or threatening people and they're fine. They're turning a blind eye to it. And it's just in your face. And it's kind of like, well, this isn't me being a conspiracy theorist. It's just, look, they've taken off that person, that person, that person, that person, but all these people are still there. So these rules are not being applied fairly.