That doesn’t refute what rogan is or is doing. So what’s the relevance other than possibly as an ad hominem to distract from the point?

Because it is the point. This whole thing is about controlling the narrative and censorship. Whether you agree with what the people are saying or not, if you think they shouldn't have a forum to say it that's censorship.

The institutions that previously had more control over the narrative and are losing the control have the most to lose.

Are you really claiming someone who landed a $100M+ contract on one of the largest streaming platforms in the world in addition to his Youtube channel and Facebook page, who is reaching tens of million of people every day is being censored? It's ironic how people who 'just ask questions' don't like being questioned themselves.

It’s censorship to express the opinion that a person with a platform reaching millions is selling snake oil to them when that is what’s literally happening? That’s what the article is pointing out, and it’s true.

I’m tired of this any criticism or fact I don’t agree with is “censorship” and should be ignored/censored hypocrisy.