Jon Stewart defended Joe Rogan against the first assault over "misinformation." It sounds like the response from that podcast was an object lesson for Stewart on what happens when you say something that goes against the liberal narrative. He's not quite in Bill Maher territory yet, but he may be on his way. So, Stewart sat down with Harvard professor Dr. Joan Donovan, who is, I guess, an expert in "misinformation."

Stewart asks the question few on the left are intellectually honest enough to ask, "Who gets to decide what's misinformation?" He makes the example of when he opposed the Iraq War, which was considered "misinformation." And it was considered "misinformation" by the same media outlets Dr. Donovan expects to tell us what is "misinformation" now.

The whole video is worth your time. Stewart's bit about the Iraq war comes it around 7:45.

Spotify And Rogan: How To Engage With Misinformation | The Problem With Jon Stewart Podcastyoutu.be

"My point is, these are shifting sands, and I think I get concerned with, well, who gets to decide [what's misinformation]? I mean, in the Iraq War, I was on the side of what you would think, on the mainstream, is misinformation. I was promoting what they would call misinformation but it turned out to be right years later. And the establishment media was wrong [...] and never paid a price for it and never had accountability.”

Donovan's arguments are flawed, as well. Least of all, she makes her political bias clear when she mentions Donald Rumsfeld and how she would never engage with someone she hated. The bias of the people who claim "something needs to be done" over what they call "misinformation" all goes one way.

Donovan brought up how there is no mechanism on platforms to correct mistakes like there is with newspapers or legacy media outlets. Right, but the misinformation runs on page one. The correction from the ombudsman is on page 37 a few days later. The tweet from verified blue-checkmark reporters always gets further reach with their misinformation than the follow-up tweet that says, "whoops."

Last year, the media spread misinformation about a border patrol agent "whipping" a migrant. It was based on an out-of-context photo from a political activist. That misinformation made it all the way to the President of the United States without being corrected.

The January 6 riot was based on social media misinformation. How many riots in 2020 were based on social media misinformation about police officers? Misinformation that, again, wasn't corrected by traditional media outlets. They actually helped spread it.

And when Donovan brought up Joe Rogan and his 'rona "misinformation," she also lumped in the n-word tape and claims Rogan is "transphobic" because he thinks biological men have a sports advantage over biological women. Neither of those things is misinformation. One is a word you don't think he should use. The other is science and an opinion with which you disagree. Yet it all gets lumped in as "misinformation," again, because of the political bias of people claiming things they don't like are "misinformation."

Jon Stewart presents a logical argument that's logical. It's something we at the Louder with Crowder Dot Com website have argued many times about the principles involved. Dr. Donovan provides plenty of examples for why we're concerned about the principles involved.

The Louder with Crowder Dot Com Website is on Instagram now!Follow us at @lwcnewswire and tell a friend!

Is Stephen Colbert Threatening to Kill Politicians? | Louder With Crowderyoutu.be