I've read the articles: none of them explain how this is dangerous, and none of them have a compelling case that Joe Rogan or his guests intentionally lie to their audience.

What they do is make arguments against their points, many of which aren't verifiable or are just opinions.

I'm all for removing things that are empirically and logically "dangerous misinformation", but we have to actually prove it empirically and logically first. Can you do that?

Rogan doesn't have to be intentionally lying to his audience for it to be dangerous misinformation

There is no evidence that Rogan's opinions are either dangerous, or considered "information" by most people. Beware overusing this term or it will lose all meaning.

Intentionality is required for something to be misinformation.

misinformation: incorrect or misleading information

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/misinformation