Joe Rogan Experience Review podcast - View JRE review of 1258 with Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde & Tim Pool

Episode Date: March 8, 2019

HERE WE GO! Round 2 of the Twitter debate. This time Joe brought on Tim Pool, a journalist that has very strong opinions about what Twitter is doing, and Vijaya Gadde the Twitter lawyer. Their conversation was a pretty intense 3 hour event and starts to paint a more clear picture of what’s going on over at Twitter. This is basically a freedom of speech conversation in regards to social media. Enjoy! Enjoy my review folks! Please email me with any suggestions and questions for future Reviews: [e-mail]

Hello and welcome to this episode of the JRE Review. This one's a good one. The return of Jack Dorsey from Twitter now. This podcast and this conversation with Joe has been greatly anticipated in the podcasting world and in the rest of the world, for online social media type users and the free speech debate. Basically, Jack Dorsey is the CEO of Twitter. And if you listen to Joe all the time, you remember. Recently, he had a pretty controversial conversation with Jack where he didn't,

people felt like he didn't push Jack enough to really get to the bottom of what's going on with Twitter, who's getting banned and all the rest of it. Well this time around he has Vijay, Gide, Gadeon, who works for Twitter, she's like a lawyer that decides who gets banned or not, and then Tim Poole who's a journalist and is pretty wary of Twitter, and it makes for a pretty intense conversation so let's start the review. Welcome to the Joe Rogan Experience Review! Where each week I review every single episode of the Joe Rogan Experience. What more do you want?

This was a very interesting conversation and one that I was really looking forward to. I didn't necessarily think Joe's last conversation with Jack was quite as boring and controversial. As people were saying, I didn't necessarily think Joe needed to push him harder, harder. I was kind of just surprised that this guy even came on. And as a result of that, I thought that it was kind of Joe's job in a sense to not necessarily, I mean, Joe's not one of those confrontational talk show host guys. I mean, it's not like going on up against Bill Ma or one of those guys and challenging ideas and it's definitely not like a Sean Hannity type show. You know, so Joe just talks to people he likes to get to know people, but anyway, people wanted to know they wanted to get to the bottom of what's what's allowed, what's not allowed.

So Joe brings on this guy, Tim Paul and Tim Paul is a journalist that's done a ton of research. And you'll hear it in, he's pretty fucking adamant about what he's saying about Twitter. He doesn't like their policies. He doesn't like what's getting banned in the way it's going. He says it's like a real problem globally because people's free speeches are getting fucked with

and who decides who gets banned and when. And then Vijay Vijaya who is basically the Twitter lawyer is saying that you know we're doing our best to mitigate these problems and we review as many accounts as we can to make sure people aren't getting banned unfairly and that everything makes sense and so on. So they kind of come to a head with it, but you do get a little bit more understanding. And at least to me, and you get a feel for it in this conversation, if this sort of discussion is important to you, this is a it in this conversation. If this sort of discussion is important to you,

this is a must listen to conversation. I mean, really, it should be for anyone. If you have any social media presence, or you plan to, or like you do a podcast, even if it's, you know, a stupid one like this one, it's worth understanding the rules of the people that in a lot of ways are controlling social media and controlling these these outlets of free speech. I mean I never want anyone to tell me look you can't cuss on your podcast or you can't just discuss anything that you want to. You know I want the freedom to just discuss things that are interesting to me and the Rogan podcast is obviously that. So I like to talk about it. They talk a lot about machine learning interactions to ban people. So I guess they have these

programs that just go on Twitter and they look for patents in behavior and then they can decide the ban thing. So then there's like a non-an-apial process, but there's a group of people that, when they're ready to ban an account, they kind of go back and manually examine it. But a lot of times things get flagged just based off of reports, somebody reports something that was said, and then therefore they get banned. So Tim jumps in and he's like,

well, why did Milo get banned? And if you don't know who Milo is, I'm not gonna explain, he's just one of those, you know, he's on your own before, he's like an almost like alt-right guy that very controversial, but he's been banned. Obviously Alex Jones has been. So it's kind of getting to the bottom of like what was happening. And they went over these specific cases. so you get to kind of decide and get a feel for like how it's going. To me, in a lot of ways, I'm to Joe, like the stuff Milo said didn't sound that bad.

Like he's obviously lunatic as a person, he's probably said really fucked up things, but Tim Paul, again the journalist, is trying to make the point that listen. Some people are getting banned for some things that are bad, and for some things that are not that bad. And then there's other people that aren't getting banned at all, and they're keeping, they're saying very threatening things, and they're getting to stay. And a lot of Tim's points are that the conservative side of things is getting more harshly reprimanded

than the liberal side of things. So it's like a far right, far left ideology issue. And he stays on this point very, very strongly. Now I've read a few articles about this, because they pop up in my news feed, because obviously this is the shit that I, you know, I'm like googling and thinking about all day. So Google knows that I'd be interested,

but some of the articles are interesting. Basically, there are a lot of people out there now that work for different publications. And the one I read I think was Forbes magazine, while not the magazine, but the article. It was just online. And they do reviews like I'm doing for the Joe's podcast. And they write about what happened and what they what they hear but you know

There's some major agendas in there too. I mean they came down on Tim really hard I don't think Tim's a conservative and he wasn't necessarily choosing the conservative party or agenda to like protect I think he would have done it if it was the other way around. If it was the conservative agenda pressing back against liberalism. I think his point is, as far as I could tell, he's just saying that look, neither side should be pressured. It should be consistent across the board so everybody knows where their voice lies and what they can say. Like things have to be consistent, they can't be bias, which is important. Even the article I read had a major bias in and they were making Tim out to sound like some sort of Republican nut job.

And I'm just like, I don't think that's right. Listen to yourself. This is what you're going to have to pick up on. But going to the lawyer, the Vijaya lady, I wish I could remember her name, Joe was having problems with it too, but she's very smart, right? And she stays very calm, the entire conversation, just the same as Jack. They speak calmly, they wait their patient, people weren't talking over each other. It really was an excellent debate all the way through, which is nice. It's not a lot of shouting and stupid things. And she has a lot of excellent points, and she really stands by them and backs them up. And then, you know, I think she just represented

herself really well on that. And it's important, I feel to talk about because regardless of what you think of ideologies or whatever at Twitter, it's nice to know that these two are willing to put themselves out there, Jack and Vajaya, they're going to put themselves out there, they're going to calm these shows, they're going to discuss these things calmly and clearly, and they're going to, you know, even as Jack Dorsey said, this is ongoing. There's going to be no perfect system because, you know, Rogan said time and time again, this is unprecedented. What Twitter is and how powerful they are. It's never happened before. The voice for presidents, world leaders, billionaires, millionaires, I mean,

it's across the board. Everyone has something to say on Twitter and You know, I'm saying all this and I don't even use it. I don't use that app, but things get referenced you hear about stuff There's always news articles on things people have tweeted you see it on the TV and oftentimes it will pop into your Instagram feed that I occasionally check into your Instagram feed that I occasionally check. Generally though, I kind of stay off social media as a whole because the more I'm understanding about it and the more that I see from friends and people like what Rogan is saying and guess that he has on, it kind of takes up too much of your fucking life and I think it's kind of driving people a little bit nuts. You know, if it's important, you're going to hear about it anyway.

But whatever you do with it, it's totally up to you. I mean, people love this shit. So it's fine. Tim does suggest that Twitter should be regulated by some kind of law, like a free speech law issue. That seems dicey. I mean, putting the government in charge of things, but I think the point he's making there and, you know know really correct me if I'm wrong because I often am because I'm not very smart but what I think he's saying is that these regulations need to be consistent. They need to follow kind of free speech laws in the US and they need to also make sure that since the things like Twitter do have major influence over like who gets elected, foreign government stuff, foreign governments or foreign bodies can like influence our elections through Twitter, that Twitter

needs to take massive responsibility for it. And that's what Tim's really scared of. I think that's legitimate concern. And Jack didn't seem super concerned about that. I don't know how concerned I expected him to feel or sound, but it's a big deal. I mean, the platform itself is gigantic. It cannot be understated and how it goes about finding a solution to these problems is very important. That's why I'm pretty optimistic about it after hearing this podcast because that's now like six hours of Joe talking at Jack essentially through

two podcasts. It starts to give you a real idea of who the guy is and he's thinking hard about this. He's not just sitting back and going, yeah, whatever. You know, again, the big, the big focus was like, it seems like liberals don't seem to be being banned in the same way as different kind of conservative ideas. And why is that? And what does that mean? And, and really, if that is true, then that's a dangerous ideology. The Twitter guys were saying no, that's not what it is. It's individual cases that we're looking at, but Tim Pools issue was like, well, I think they already have a liberal bias, so they're not even noticing that they're doing it, and

it's a real problem. So, you know, and Jack really takes responsibility for the mistakes of Twitter. He does say that. He says the rules will change. They will evolve. Like, he understands there's real problems. And I think through that, and Joe kind of expressed that he's very impressed that they're being so open, you know, that it was Jack's idea even to come back on the podcast.

And even though time and time again, Jack says that this is an evolving process and they're going to keep working on this and find the best solution for it. Tim really ends just by saying that he doesn't like what Twitter is doing. He thinks that the oppression is there and Jack is just kind of justifying what's happening. He's not really trying to fix it, right? That's pretty controversial, but you know, that's how these debates go. And towards the end of it, they're saying that free speech is disappearing and people are getting more and more sensitive, which oftentimes it does sound like that's happening. But Joe kind of finishes up by saying, listen, the demise of free speech is greatly exaggerated.

He knows he's a comedian, he deals with this all the time. He doesn't think it's quite as bad as people are making out when it comes to free speech. You know, obviously, they're a sensitive people. People that get really worked up about it, but we got a lot of leeway, and we can still speak freely, and this is how we're going to get to the bottom of it. But I really enjoyed this podcast, especially you've got to check it out, and see what you come up with with it. See what you get out of it, and yeah, see if anything I said makes any sense. So who knows? Thanks guys, I appreciate it, take care.

you