Andrew Schulz's Flagrant with Akaash Singh
Andrew Schulz's Flagrant with Akaash Singh
"He's like the Tasmanian devil, right? And everything he says out of his mouth, it sounds like a complete lie. And then it's also kind of true. And you want it to be true." — Unidentified Speaker
"The narrative is often just as dangerous as the information. It could be. And it's more dangerous in a way that there's no way to, there's, it's way harder to prove the conspiracy." — Unidentified Speaker
"The extremes of news have gotten so far left in, right? That they've actually started to alienate the masses, right? They've gotten so niche that the majority of people are watching CNN. And they're like, that's too left for me. And they're watching Fox News, like, that's too right for me. Well, somebody just tell me to fucking truth." — Unidentified Speaker
The discussion revolves around the phenomenon of Alex Jones and his presence on Joe Rogan's podcast, highlighting his unique ability to entertain while presenting information that is both questionable and occasionally true. Speakers explore how Jones's "Tasmanian devil" persona captivates audiences, with his statements often sounding like lies yet containing elements that listeners want to believe. The role of Joe Rogan's fact-checking is discussed as a way to add credibility, though some speakers express a desire to see Jones's unbridled tangents purely for entertainment value.
A significant portion of the conversation delves into the effectiveness and danger of Alex Jones's narrative-building. While acknowledging that he has sometimes been right about certain events (e.g., Jeffrey Epstein's island), the speakers emphasize that his tendency to attach speculative motivations and unsubstantiated narratives to facts is what loses audiences and creates a problematic dynamic. This approach is contrasted with factual reporting, where the assignment of specific intentions or group affiliations to events, especially those that are difficult to prove, is seen as the most dangerous aspect. The concept of confirmation bias is identified as a key driver for listeners who already distrust institutions and seek validation for their beliefs.
The episode also touches upon the broader media landscape, questioning whether Alex Jones could exist with less scrutiny if he avoided narrative construction and considering the evolution of news consumption. The speakers reflect on the increasing polarization of media outlets and the difficulty for the average person to find objective truth amidst the noise. This leads to a discussion on free speech, its potential dangers when used to spread disinformation, and the societal cost of such unchecked rhetoric, exemplified by the PizzaGate incident. Ultimately, the conversation concludes by considering the responsibility of individuals to be skeptical and discerning when consuming information, especially from sources that blend fact with sensationalized speculation.