People in the know have known Rogan has flaws for years. I first heard the planet of the apes thing years ago, it's only recently that he's exploded in popularity in the mainstream and started playing knowledge rather than sponge. It's the same way information spreads about anything.

Also the reason why you can't work out how these things are coordinated is because you don't understand how social media (maybe just the first word) works and are trying to explain away often very justifiable critique raised by people who you disagree with.

I think there are pretty simple criteria based on what drives viral controversy and "engagement"

1) public figure with household brand

2) controversial statements

3) broad following willing to defend them

Going after personalities clearly over the line is of no value. To optimize clicks and engagement, you want the issue at hand to be as contested as possible : topics the public is deeply split on, subjective, complex, and flimsy or poorly articulated.

The more misinformation the better, because it drive more engagement as people read and post it both to support their priors or show how outrageous it is.

There is a tiny market for comprehensive reporting analyzing issues from multiple perspectives.

US Government actually puts out lists of people who should be banned/marginalized on social media. Almost certainly has similar lists going out to NGO's, many of whose workers also happen to operate prodigiously on social media. It's not explicitly coordinated, so much as nudged and incentivized.

If you're trolling this is pretty funny, if you're serious this is even funnier.

I mean the practice mentioned in the parent post has been common since the McCarthy Era. Gotta keep those commies out of our country somehow /sarc

Joe Rogan called out lies by the White House press secretary. Now there is a huge effort to cancel him. This is the normal pattern of anyone that crosses the left.

But unlike shorting a stock and putting hit jobs on a company you want to tank (for profit), or politically utilizing a scapegoats/attack pieces (for winning power), it’s really hard to trace back who gains by subduing Joe Rogan or an Elon Musk.

The only thing I can think of is the new corporate diversity/woke organizations that want to cultivate an environment where companies need to pay them to keep things from becoming a PR nightmare (that is a new type of manufactured threat). Organizations haven’t even been effective at coercing companies about global labor practices (Nike’s slave wage factories in China), but somehow this new attack vector of social propriety has been extremely effective.

It’s been iteratively effective. Pointing out Nike has 1, then 2, then 3 slave wage factories never escalated the situation. Pointing out Rogan antivax stuff, then the N-word compilation, and perhaps soon that he used steroids, has been hyper effective to reach a knock out blow. By the time we get from ‘Elon’s factories segregates black people’ to the n-th ‘and his ex said he was verbally abusive’, he could be done.

Something to keep track of, or certainly pay some people to ward something like that off. That would make the most sense.

> it’s really hard to trace back who gains by subduing ... Elon Musk

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/ford-motor-co/summary?id=D0...

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/general-motors/summary?id=D...

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/toyota-motor-corp/summary?i...

Not particularly hard, as it turns out.

> it’s really hard to trace back who gains by subduing Joe Rogan or an Elon Musk

You would hope people in high places wouldn’t be petty or personally vindictive, but there is plenty to gain from the personal rush you get ruining someone’s life (or at least a couple of months of it).

Happens sadly more frequently than you’d hope.

So your assessment is that the Black workers who joined this suit (or otherwise filed hundred of complaints going back to 2012, as per the DFEH complaint) -- did so out of a spirit of pure and simple vindictiveness, and to gain from the personal rush they will get ruining Musk's life, or at least a couple of months of it?

No I was responding to the parent’s musing on what motivation someone like Jen Psaki would have on coordinating a negative press campaign because someone like Joe Rogan criticized her on a podcast. Of which I responded to, based on my own personal observations of people in high places.

So nothing to do with the original subject of the thread, basically.

See https://calfkicker.com/examining-the-democratic-super-pac-th...