I am very happy to come on here and see that most people agreed with what I was thinking.
This might be the most disappointing thing I’ve ever listen to or read out of Bari Weiss’ sphere.
I agree with the complete lack of pushback. It’s the first time I’ve literally had the thought during a podcast or an interview that Bari did of thinkin…
I am very happy to come on here and see that most people agreed with what I was thinking.
This might be the most disappointing thing I’ve ever listen to or read out of Bari Weiss’ sphere.
I agree with the complete lack of pushback. It’s the first time I’ve literally had the thought during a podcast or an interview that Bari did of thinking “is this just one of Bari‘s good friends that she has coffee with?“
No pushback and the idea of “guru“ sure strikes me as eerily similar to labeling someone “a conspiracy theorist“.
(remember when suggesting the vaccine did not stop the transmission was a conspiracy? Remember when thinking that one of the hypotheses that should be explored is that the virus came from the Wuhan lab was a conspiracy?“ Remember when thinking that the social media companies had banned the Hunter Biden laptop story with no actual evidence that it was Russian collusion was a conspiracy? remember when saying that potentially the mRNA vaccines could heighten the chances of heart issues in people was a conspiracy?
Seems like labeling them a guru does a very similar thing.
Guru sort of implies that someone is “taken in” by listening to these people.
I actually had downloaded Helen’s podcast. Because I heard her on something else briefly, but it was super brief and although on that podcast, I had some red flags as well it seems like an interesting topic. I was not even halfway through the first episode and was also really noticing its lack of integrity. And sure seems like labeling them a guru does a very similar thing.
Guru sort of implies that someone is “taken in“ by listening to these people.
I actually had downloaded Helen’s podcast. Because I heard her on something else briefly, but it was super brief and although on that podcast, I had some red flags as well and seem like an interesting topic. I was not even halfway through the first episode, and was also really noticing its lack of integrity. And sort of its feeling that it was trying to dismantle heterodox thinking. But just using a new word “guru“ instead of “conspiracy, theorist“
After listening to this whole interview, I just deleted Helens New guru podcast I don’t think I need to listen to that woman. It is really disheartening that Bari would have that long of a conversation with that little pushback as a lot of the rest of you have said.
Full disclosure, I listen to the Darkhorse podcast, and in my opinion it is overwhelmingly scientifically, and logically-based conversation that is in no way “sure of itself“ which is what good science should be.
This was absolutely terrible. Of course just because I don’t seem to necessarily agree with this woman’s take on a lot of things doesn’t mean I don’t want to listen to her. That is the point of why most of us would be part of the community listening to the Free Press podcasts and reading it. But it’s the first time it felt SUPER super softball.
This is beyond the fact that if you listen to the most recent Darkhorse podcast, Heather and Brett do bring up this conversation, and I feel like their rebuttal and statements about it hold vastly more water than Helen’s does.
And I’m sure if Helen reads these are comments she’s going to just think that I’ve been “taken in“ by the “new guru“ that is Bret Weinstein. See how you use these things to just dismiss it? Like Brett and Heather talk about in their podcast in reference to this conversation Bari does a very unethical and kind of snide thing in the comment about “being skeptical of Fauci and then all of a sudden you are thinking that Bill Gates is putting micro chips in your vaccinations“
I don’t remember the exact quote. But the slippery slope argument that is very weak is basically akin to this.
It’s so disappointing because it seems so below Bari’s critical thinking. I’m just shaking my head. I don’t know what happened here. I have no problem disagreeing with someone’s point of view, but this was , the least challenging and worst thing I’ve heard come out of Bari’s media entities since I first became aware of her. Which was a long time back and I’ve been a big supporter over the years.
Crap. CRAP!!!
😩😩🙁🙁.
Come to think of it in a way this is more damaging vernacular than “conspiracy theory“ because it one it sounds like someone believes one idea that is just so crazy like “vaccines might not stop transmission of Covid” but the other one discounts everything the person who is the “guru“ says basically. I mean, hopefully in her podcast she talks about even if they are shams they do good for people. I’m sure she does. But saying that someone who listens to the Dark horse podcast, or Jordan Peterson, is following a guru means that they’ve been taken into such an extent that it’s not just one idea it’s a whole catalog of ideas that the stupid people have fallen for. And very didn’t push back against it basically at all. So so disappointing.
I would have to agree that having listened to plenty of Bret Weinstein, it seems awfully familiar the way he’s mischaracterized in so many outlets, even heterodox ones.
I have yet to be convinced of some of his more radical points, but he’s very clear about the distinction between being against vaccines and being cautious about novel mRNA technology, and he’s very pointed about how some of the same derangement he experienced at Evergreen has become mainstream.
He doesn’t have to be a “guru”. You can just listen to him and then think for yourself.
There’s also a significant amount of overlap between Weinstin and Jay Bhattacharya or Vinay Prasad. Not 100%, but listening to this interview (or many others) you wouldn’t know it.
If you watch the best thing that ever happened to HL ( interview with JP) you will see that she is an utter mediocrity trying to score "gotchas". Nothing in this podcast changed that impression for me. A "guru" seems to be someone with a popular podcast plus some rambling about Steve Jobs. The phrase "IDW" was probably a joke, and the fact that it didn't last makes it no different than 99.9% of all business ventures, no deep cultural implications here. The thing that made the term IDW apt is the experiences that some of the participants had, something HL was unaware of when she interviewed JP. But, hey, HL's got street cred because people call her a TERF.
I am very happy to come on here and see that most people agreed with what I was thinking.
This might be the most disappointing thing I’ve ever listen to or read out of Bari Weiss’ sphere.
I agree with the complete lack of pushback. It’s the first time I’ve literally had the thought during a podcast or an interview that Bari did of thinking “is this just one of Bari‘s good friends that she has coffee with?“
No pushback and the idea of “guru“ sure strikes me as eerily similar to labeling someone “a conspiracy theorist“.
(remember when suggesting the vaccine did not stop the transmission was a conspiracy? Remember when thinking that one of the hypotheses that should be explored is that the virus came from the Wuhan lab was a conspiracy?“ Remember when thinking that the social media companies had banned the Hunter Biden laptop story with no actual evidence that it was Russian collusion was a conspiracy? remember when saying that potentially the mRNA vaccines could heighten the chances of heart issues in people was a conspiracy?
Seems like labeling them a guru does a very similar thing.
Guru sort of implies that someone is “taken in” by listening to these people.
I actually had downloaded Helen’s podcast. Because I heard her on something else briefly, but it was super brief and although on that podcast, I had some red flags as well it seems like an interesting topic. I was not even halfway through the first episode and was also really noticing its lack of integrity. And sure seems like labeling them a guru does a very similar thing.
Guru sort of implies that someone is “taken in“ by listening to these people.
I actually had downloaded Helen’s podcast. Because I heard her on something else briefly, but it was super brief and although on that podcast, I had some red flags as well and seem like an interesting topic. I was not even halfway through the first episode, and was also really noticing its lack of integrity. And sort of its feeling that it was trying to dismantle heterodox thinking. But just using a new word “guru“ instead of “conspiracy, theorist“
After listening to this whole interview, I just deleted Helens New guru podcast I don’t think I need to listen to that woman. It is really disheartening that Bari would have that long of a conversation with that little pushback as a lot of the rest of you have said.
Full disclosure, I listen to the Darkhorse podcast, and in my opinion it is overwhelmingly scientifically, and logically-based conversation that is in no way “sure of itself“ which is what good science should be.
This was absolutely terrible. Of course just because I don’t seem to necessarily agree with this woman’s take on a lot of things doesn’t mean I don’t want to listen to her. That is the point of why most of us would be part of the community listening to the Free Press podcasts and reading it. But it’s the first time it felt SUPER super softball.
This is beyond the fact that if you listen to the most recent Darkhorse podcast, Heather and Brett do bring up this conversation, and I feel like their rebuttal and statements about it hold vastly more water than Helen’s does.
And I’m sure if Helen reads these are comments she’s going to just think that I’ve been “taken in“ by the “new guru“ that is Bret Weinstein. See how you use these things to just dismiss it? Like Brett and Heather talk about in their podcast in reference to this conversation Bari does a very unethical and kind of snide thing in the comment about “being skeptical of Fauci and then all of a sudden you are thinking that Bill Gates is putting micro chips in your vaccinations“
I don’t remember the exact quote. But the slippery slope argument that is very weak is basically akin to this.
It’s so disappointing because it seems so below Bari’s critical thinking. I’m just shaking my head. I don’t know what happened here. I have no problem disagreeing with someone’s point of view, but this was , the least challenging and worst thing I’ve heard come out of Bari’s media entities since I first became aware of her. Which was a long time back and I’ve been a big supporter over the years.
Crap. CRAP!!!
😩😩🙁🙁.
Come to think of it in a way this is more damaging vernacular than “conspiracy theory“ because it one it sounds like someone believes one idea that is just so crazy like “vaccines might not stop transmission of Covid” but the other one discounts everything the person who is the “guru“ says basically. I mean, hopefully in her podcast she talks about even if they are shams they do good for people. I’m sure she does. But saying that someone who listens to the Dark horse podcast, or Jordan Peterson, is following a guru means that they’ve been taken into such an extent that it’s not just one idea it’s a whole catalog of ideas that the stupid people have fallen for. And very didn’t push back against it basically at all. So so disappointing.
I would have to agree that having listened to plenty of Bret Weinstein, it seems awfully familiar the way he’s mischaracterized in so many outlets, even heterodox ones.
I have yet to be convinced of some of his more radical points, but he’s very clear about the distinction between being against vaccines and being cautious about novel mRNA technology, and he’s very pointed about how some of the same derangement he experienced at Evergreen has become mainstream.
He doesn’t have to be a “guru”. You can just listen to him and then think for yourself.
There’s also a significant amount of overlap between Weinstin and Jay Bhattacharya or Vinay Prasad. Not 100%, but listening to this interview (or many others) you wouldn’t know it.
If you watch the best thing that ever happened to HL ( interview with JP) you will see that she is an utter mediocrity trying to score "gotchas". Nothing in this podcast changed that impression for me. A "guru" seems to be someone with a popular podcast plus some rambling about Steve Jobs. The phrase "IDW" was probably a joke, and the fact that it didn't last makes it no different than 99.9% of all business ventures, no deep cultural implications here. The thing that made the term IDW apt is the experiences that some of the participants had, something HL was unaware of when she interviewed JP. But, hey, HL's got street cred because people call her a TERF.
C'mon Bari, let's move on to meatier stuff.