Rumble vs. NYT
01:04:56 Share

All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Yo Kratom, YoKratom.com, longtime sponsors of the Part of the Problem podcast. This is for adults over the age of 21 who are already enjoying Kratom. If you don't use

Kratom, I'm not telling you to go try it. But if you love Kratom, you got to get it at YoKratom.com. It's all lab tested. It's delivered right to your door. And it's the best price you're going to find anywhere. $60 for a kilo, which by the way, has been the price since they've been advertising on this show. It's been many years now of them being a sponsor. And I think it is the only price that has not raised

in the world over the last few years. It's still just $60 for a kilo at YoKratom.com. All right, let's get back into the show. What's up? What's up, guys? Welcome to a brand new episode of Part of the Problem, a nighttime episode. I'm Dave Smith. He's Robbie the Fire Bernstein. What's up, sir? How are you? I like an evening episode. Gives you plenty of time to get over your hangover from the day before. Not like this 1 p.m. nonsense.

Yeah, you're already working on your next hangover at the 9 p.m. show. That's the sweet spot. Well, I have. I did warn you guys, but our schedule has been a little off this place. I went on a family vacation to Disney World. First time I've gone since I got... My parents took me when I was a very little kid. But it's been, I think...

like 38 years or something like that since i went last time uh but yeah took the kids down there i know it's a big evil corporation that's in bed with the state to trance all the kids or whatever but you know they really man they really had a good time there uh so what can i say and they both to my knowledge came out not trounced i watched them i kept a close eye on them the whole time uh but anyway so our schedule has been a little bit off i have not been super on top of uh the news cycle i do understand

um that there's drones attacking new jersey evidently so i don't know this might be my last episode guys i don't know if i i would beat these drones out of town i have no answers what those are i know ceos are getting shot in the street there's stuff going on but i did uh so i came back i got back yesterday

And I was just, I had like a moment on the plane home where the, you know, my wife was next to one kid. I'm next to the other kid. And the kid fell asleep for a little bit. And so I got the internet on there and I read this article that came out in the New York Times yesterday. And I just...

As soon as I read it, I was like, this is we're going to do a podcast on this. There's no way not to. And I didn't even I didn't send it to you, Rob, because I almost I just sometimes it's fun to just get the reaction. And this is it's not like a specific thing where it's like, oh, like read up on this. It's like it's our topic. It's the topic that we talk about all the time. And the topic that is such it's hard to explain being in kind of me and Rob's position. But it's a very bizarre topic.

there's just this crazy dynamic that there's this thing that me and you for whatever reason have really been focused on for many years at this point which is like the state of politics and the economy and foreign policy and things like this and then it's almost like because we pay attention to this and we're really interested in it

in the time and place that we were in, it's like, oh, you do a podcast together. You talk about this stuff. That's kind of the thing that people would do. And then this market of the political podcast thing,

Not only does this show kind of blow up, but then like this world blows up. And now the thing that we're talking about is talking about us. You know what I mean? Like maybe not specifically us, but I mean like we've been talking about the news all of these years. Now the news is talking about the podcast scene. The news is talking about... Some real space ball stuff. Yeah, it's very bizarre, but it's fascinating.

And it's just like, I don't know, it's hard for it to not be a topic that me and you would be super interested in because now the topic is how the world that we're in is interacting with the world of politics and news and all of this stuff. It's just fascinating to see this dynamic where here we are in this world all these years and it is kind of like,

and again i don't mean to say it's not like it's just us i just mean like we're a part of this thing this new scene um and we're there's shows much much bigger than us but we're like one of the shows in this space that has like a substantial audience i mean like if we were if this is if you think of the internet shows about news as the new media which is kind of what this piece is about

And you think about it as like a decentralized network. Like it's not a network like MSNBC or Fox. It's all totally decentralized to each show, utilizes one of many different platforms or many of many different platforms. But if you look at that, like again, the...

if you compare this world to the corporate media, we're a show that has much better ratings than many of the shows in the corporate media world. And so it's just, when you're kind of in this game, in this space, it's fascinating to see this thing, the media, the corporate media, that we've been criticizing for so long, finally notice you and have a comment on this world.

Like it's just, it's a very, it's a new dynamic and it's particularly fascinating to me at least. Cause like I'm in this world. Um, so anyway, this is Rob, this is the piece. Uh, it ran yesterday in the New York times. The, the title of the piece, um, is I traded my news apps for rumble, the right wing YouTube. Here's what I saw. This is already a,

very interesting title. Like as soon as I read this title, I'm like, oh, I'm going to be interested in what this article is. Um, no, by the way, you know, uh, rumble, we, we are on rumble. Um, we have a channel there and have for, for a little while. Yeah.

You know... My experience with Rumble is, listen, there's some great content over there, particularly Glenn Greenwald, and there's some other exclusive content over there. I've personally found Rumble very difficult to navigate, which includes when I was posting my content over there, I couldn't search and find my own content. So Rumble has...

Has some I mean, I'm not on the site too often. Sometimes it does have that old YouTube feel where it's throwing information at me that I'm more interested in than what I might be seeing in the YouTube algorithms. But its search function is pretty terrible. And I don't know. I literally don't know if our show is still there or not.

Listen, there's no question in my experience, I would say that the user friendliness of YouTube is just like, and maybe it's just that that's what I'm used to, but it is the best in my opinion. But Rumble, you know, we did start a channel that I think we're still over there. If not, I'm going to make sure we...

continue to be or we go back to posting the episodes there because we should and i do want to do you know what i can to support the platforms that i that i appreciate you know remaining free speech platforms however i'll just say even though we've we've posted many of our shows at rumble we are not like exclusive to rumble and we have a much bigger channel on on youtube than we do over there i mean yeah not only the episodes there but the the trust the science got 108 000 views on rumble alone so wait is that true

Yeah, according, I mean, the last episode I'm seeing is the Hunter Harden Park. Yeah, I mean, we're there and things are getting a pretty decent amount of views, so I stand corrected.

So we stand corrected. We're huge on Rumble. It turns out I was so... Well, no, okay, so I... Listen, I confess I have not checked in on the Rumble channel that much. I try, you know, we wanted... I remember when we first started the channel over there, we were like, yeah, we got to, like, have a Rumble, you know, just in our own interest as... Because it's like, oh, if we get banned off other places, we can go there. But also, you know, you kind of feel like...

There are at least there are a lot of people who take the position. I've seen this. I'm sure you've seen this on social media, a bunch Rob, where if you post something to YouTube, people will go not supporting YouTube, like put it on rumble and I'll watch it there or like where, and, and,

I understand why people do that. And for those people, you know, I want them to have the option to watch it at one of these sites that is a free speech site. And really, at least to my knowledge, I think Rumble has been pretty steadfast on that and not buckled and really done a phenomenal job of standing by their, you know, their people, something I value very much. Anyway,

Let me just say before we even get into the piece, the first point is that you already see the bias, the very blatant bias in calling Rumble a right wing site. Well, they call them the right wing YouTube. And, you know, I will say it probably is true.

i don't know this for absolute sure but i think i'm right that the probably the majority of the big shows on rumble lean right what would be considered right by most americans um and so there is you know to some extent a plausible you know justification there to say oh it's a right-wing site but you know for a fact that

YouTube would never be referred to as a left wing site if it was brought up in the New York Times like that. It would just be YouTube, you know. And so the interesting dynamic and why it's, you know, how Michael Malice says, like the corporate press is often factual but not truthful.

And it's not exactly that this is factual. I'm just saying there's an argument to be made on kind of the surface level that it's a right-wing site. But the way in which that's factual but not truthful is that, you know, like, what is Rumble? What is the first thing you would describe it as? We all know, everybody in this space knows that the thing about Rumble, why were the right-wingers even going to Rumble to begin with?

was because you don't get kicked off there, right? So that's why these people went there. It's not as if nobody, there was never any other even plausible reason. If anybody in this space, everyone knows, left, right, just anyone paying attention to this world knows that the reason people went to Rumble over YouTube was never anything else. It wasn't like, oh, they have a bigger audience there or they have, you know,

I don't know, it's easier or there was no other advantage. The whole thing was that for a while YouTube would just kick you off or at least you were always at risk of that.

And so do you get my point, Rob, where it's like to describe it as a right-wing site when you wouldn't describe YouTube as a left-wing site when the dynamic at work here, even if some of the big shows there are right-wing, the dynamic here is that you have one group that's kicking the right-wingers off and the other group going, we won't kick anyone off. Yet the one who won't kick anyone off gets labeled as like having a bias.

And the one who's actively kicking off one side gets labeled as neutral. So you see, like, isn't that a perfect example of how they're like factual but not truthful? And I'm stretching factual a little bit, but you get my point. Like, it's not exactly a lie what they're saying, but the framing of it totally puts like a 180 degree false spin on the actual dynamic. And this is the thing, anybody who pays attention to this world knows it.

Right. And that's that's one of the interesting things. It's like where they still already just in the title. Every time the corporate media acknowledges this world, this world of Internet shows about politics, they can never actually deal with what it is like. They can never just because

they just have to like make it this false framing. But the problem is that everyone in this world knows what's up. No one here doesn't know why people went to rumble. This isn't a mystery to anybody. It's not because oh, that's where the right wing audience was. Or you know what I'm saying? Like, this isn't like a thing like Fox News, that you go there, because that's where the right wing audiences rumble was you go there because you won't get kicked off.

You'll be able to say what you want to say. And if in that environment, more right-wingers flourish than left-wingers, well, what does that tell you? I mean, something. And also the other thing I guess I should add is that like Glenn Greenwald and...

Russell Brand, I think, has a huge show over there. And these guys are just in no way right-wingers. And they do. And they have succeeded over there. So that kind of tells you, like, oh, that's the type of left-winger who can survive in this world. The ones who are honest and talk about the real corruption that's going on. Anyway, if there's anything you want to add to that. It's amazing how there's so much to rant about.

which I think is a justified round just off the title of this piece. I'm with you that even the framing has spin. Yep. Okay. Now this again is, we're not even getting to the article. Imagine me reading this on the plane, Rob, we haven't even gotten to the first sentence of the article. I'm still, and let me explain. We're not going to get to that first sentence for a little while over this next line. That's the title.

Trade I traded my news app For rumble the right-wing YouTube. Here's what I saw by Stuart a Thompson Stuart Thompson has monitored right-wing media since 2020 he watched 47 hours of video on rumble for this article and

It's a pretty good amount of time of sitting around watching, just watching stuff. Well, dude, I just want to say though, it's really not.

And it's, you know, there's something where the thing that I thought of... I guess that's 10 podcasts or 20 podcasts. I guess you're kind of right. That's one week of casual podcast listening for some people. Well, that's the point. It goes, oh, congratulations. You're the newest guy consuming this world's content. And now you're in the position to write a piece for the New York Times. You know, the thing I thought about

it's like okay if you remember you remember when sam harris called me out

Sam Harris's dig on me Which I said at the time not entirely unfairly, you know, I'm not entirely unfair of him But his dig is who the hell is this Dave Smith guy? Like I'm supposed to listen to him like he's fucking Henry Kissinger or something like that now, you know forget the Kissinger example You can kind of get what Sam Harris is saying there, right? He's like what is this a comedian who just like says he reads about this stuff or

Gets to come on the Joe Rogan podcast, the biggest show, and like break down the history of Ukraine or the history of Israel, Palestine. Like what? There should be like an expert who does that. Now, okay, if I'm being completely honest about this here, I do lay that shit down though when I'm on Rogan. Like I do. It is pretty great. But anyway, I get his point there. I get that. But the thing is that

There's two, like, outrages happening here. Like, Sam Harris is right. I shouldn't be the guy doing this. None of this should be. Nothing that's happening, if you haven't noticed that at least in the last four years of America, nothing that's happening here is right. None of this is the way it's supposed to be, okay? But the thing is...

There's two scandals going on here, right? One scandal is that, is that, oh my God, people are getting their news from fucking comedians. This is insane, all right? I'll grant you that that's one issue. But then there's this other issue on the other side, which wouldn't you think if you recognize both of these issues, that this second one I'm gonna lay down is a little bit more of an important one than that one if your concern is the experts and your concern is the expert class?

The New York Times, the newspaper of record, the newspaper that is...

according to every powerful person, the most important newspaper in the United States of America and thus in the freaking world because America is the world empire, okay? So the New York Times, the newspaper of record is gonna report on this phenomenon of how the entire media landscape has changed. And the qualifications for the guy doing this is that for four years, he's been paying attention to right-wing media. Like, listen,

To Sam Harris's point about me, right? I got obsessed with this world in 2007. So that is 17 years, right? Is my math correct on that? 2007 to 2024? - You're grooving, just go with it. - 17 years, I think.

- So in the 17 years, I mean, when I first came in, it was the Ron Paul presidential campaign in 2008. I got fascinated with it. I've been obsessed with this world and the things that Ron Paul was talking about then that I was reading every book I could get my hands on about and trying to learn everything I could about, the things he was talking about was like the war on terrorism in the Middle East and the economy

and central banking and you know uh mosesian economics and boom bust theories and all of these things that when you see me you know ranting about some today like you see me talking about syria or ukraine or the federal reserve or whatever all of the stuff that i talk about

It's shit I've been fucking really paying attention to for like 17 years. And you're right, even with that, that doesn't make me the fucking expert in it. But here you have a guy whose credentials is I've watched this shit for kind of like four years.

You don't fucking understand anything at four years, dude. I wasn't doing any of the things you're talking about. I wasn't the guy ranting on Joe Rogan's podcast four years into paying attention to this shit. You know what I mean? Like I was way, way levels beyond that. And it's not like on this show, it's never, the claim has never been that like, um, we are just so smart.

We're just so brilliant that we understand this shit that you can't understand. We're not dummies, like we're regular people. We're reasonably intelligent people. You meet them all the time. They're all over the place. And if a reasonably intelligent person has paid attention to something really thoroughly for 17 years, they're going to have some things to say about that. They're going to have some insights on that. And then I think the real deception is to...

think that the people at the New York Times or something like that are so much more impressive. They're so much more intelligent. They're so much more professional. They're all, "This guy's been paying attention for four years. That's nothing. You're a fucking rookie, kid. You don't know this world. You don't know the dynamics of what you're talking about." You know how long you have to look into any of these things to really start to get a little bit of understanding of it? And then, you know, to say, "47 hours

What? That's what you put in? So again, Rob, like you're saying to a normal person who listens to a lot of podcasts, that's like a week or two or something, whatever, let's just say, are you the expert now on all those podcasts you're listening to? You're not the expert on one of them. You don't even know one of them. If there's somebody who's a regular listener of any one of those shows and you tried to talk to them about the show, you wouldn't know what the fuck you're talking about, right?

This is the dynamic, like this is, Rob, I've been watching baseball for 70 hours. I'm like an expert on it now. I'm going to write a piece on it. Doesn't that seem like maybe you should have a little more understanding if you're talking about such an important thing like the collapse of your industry?

At the New York Times, they're doing a piece about the collapse of the industry that the New York Times is in, and they have a rookie who doesn't know what he's talking about already. I can already tell you before the first sentence, he has no idea what he's talking about. Am I missing something here, Rob? Well, I think...

The baseball is a good example, but then sometimes they do write pieces where you'll go to a rodeo and it's the perspective of a guy who knows nothing about the rodeo who's like, hey, I spent three days at the rodeo. Here's what the rodeo is like. So I guess it kind of depends on how you're presenting the piece. Yeah.

Yeah. Okay. Fair enough. I'm just saying it's in the New York Times, you know, like this. No, but it's point well taken. I can go watch people do jujitsu for four days and then go, hey, here's my weekend of watching people do jujitsu. But that wouldn't qualify me to do color commentary at the UFC. I guess more the point that I'm really trying to make here is.

is that when I rant about the corporate media on like some huge show, I'm somebody who's been like really in-depthly paying attention to them for 17 years. You know, I was watching them before that, just like not that religiously, but I was like aware, you know, we've all like seen the news in our lives. So it's just like, when I talk about them,

It's with so much more expertise than when they talk about Glenn Greenwald or whoever the other... Dan Bongino is, I think, one of the biggest shows over there. Charlie Kirk, I think, has a huge show over there. But when they talk about any of those guys, they don't know what they're talking about. So I'm just making that point that, like, almost...

for people to understand that like the Sam Harris objection, there is some merit to it, but it's just only when you focus on that problem and not how about this, that actually we are coming from a much more educated point of view when we talk about the corporate media than when they talk about us. They just don't know. All right, so let's, getting into the article here.

As soon as President-elect Donald Trump won the presidential race, influencers on Rumble, the right-wing alternative to YouTube, flooded the platform with a simple catchphrase: "We are the media now." The idea seemed to capture a growing sense that traditional journalists

have lost their position at the center of the media ecosystem. Polls show that trust in mainstream news media has plummeted and that nearly half of all young people get their news from "influencers" rather than journalists. In its place, they argue, our right-wing digital creators

Who have found hordes of fans online? Rumble for instant is tiny compared with YouTube But it is a primary source of news for millions of Americans according to Pew Research Center so

It's very interesting, as we've pointed out many times, to see since the election, the corporate media dealing with this dynamic, mentioning it, it's beyond the point where they can't mention that, oh, we're dying and this other industry is flourishing.

you know, you get to a certain point where you can't not admit that. But isn't it crazy that you already know every time you hear it that they will never really deal with the issue, the reasons why this dynamic exists. They will never look into it. It is, Rob, I know I've used like examples before where it's like cheating on your spouse or something like that and they catch you. But when I read this, what I

What I think about almost, and I guess because me and you have been doing stand-up comedy for a long time, but it's like imagine if me and you were talking and I was like, you know, there's a real problem where the crowds don't laugh anymore.

you know isn't that almost the comparison to like the new york times talking about how people don't trust them anymore like that's the dynamic it's the same but there's you in the audience imagine you came to me rob you're like you know the problem is like the amount of laughs i get has been plummeting and you know the reason for that is i think somebody's poisoning these people against me or something you know and like to to actually not just have a conversation about this but to like write a piece and put it out there and not

you know, the focus be some self reflection, some introspection. What have we done? How have we gotten to this point? You know what I mean, Rob? They never seem to get there. Sorry, where were we here?

Okay, on election night, its active viewership, we're talking about Rumble here, topped out at more than 2 million. And the company said in a statement that it averaged more than 67 million monthly active users in the final quarter of 2024. So, I mean, in other news, there's a lot of people who watch Rumble. I mean, we checked just earlier in this show, and we were kind of surprised to see that a lot of people are watching Rumble then.

We didn't even realize on our own channel. Okay. Dan Bongino, host of The Dan Bongino Show, says viewers should follow his program with other Rumble creators in a bid to replace mainstream media. If Rumble was the media now, I wondered what would it be like to consume an all-Rumble diet? So on November 18th, about two weeks after the election, I deleted my news app, unsubscribed from all my podcasts, and filtered all my newsletters to the trash.

And for the next week, from early morning to late night, I got all my news from Rumble. That's a very funny time to do that because that's also when you would have had two weeks of admissions of, oh my God, we've been wrong for two years. In fact, completely removing mainstream media to not parallel with what's going on in another platform, I would think would really remove your ability to...

See what the accuracy of that other information, like if you're not comparing it to, you know what I mean? It's you almost kind of have to compare it to, hey, how is the New York Times showcasing this piece versus how are how are these people breaking it down? Yeah. Two weeks after the election would have been an excellent time to actually probably see a very similar story on both places.

Yeah, no, this is, that's my whole point, man. It's like something would have been a real, like you'd expect from the New York Times, if you're going to tell me like, yeah, but you know, you guys are just comedians. Like what the fuck do you know about this shit? You don't have the credentials. But then I'm looking at the New York Times and you're like, wait, so the way you would tackle this wouldn't be like, hey, where were these Rumble influencers and where was the New York Times on say like the 10 biggest stories of the election?

What side of this, what were they saying? What were they saying? What were people interested in this news for? What were people interested in this news? Instead of being anything like that, or having someone, like, why is this so crazy, Rob? Having someone write a piece for the New York Times who actually knows what the fuck they're talking about when it comes to this subject.

We are not the only ones. I'm not the only one who would have made the point that, like, no, they're going over to Rumble because they don't censor people. Right? This is not some brilliant insight that it is. Why is it, if we're just the dumb comedians and they're the respectable ones, why is it that they...

can't have the standard of just knowing what we know, of knowing some basic thing. Why can't we expect that the New York Times would have someone write a piece who knows something about this? This piece is almost already, the premise of it seems like it should be in Seventeen magazine.

You know what I mean? Like, it should be some, like, I wanted to see what it would be like to have a sleepover for nine straight days. And so I just jumped into it. And now I'm in sleepover world and blah, blah. You know what I mean? Like, this is like a silly little puff piece. This shouldn't be running in the serious newspaper. This shouldn't be their take on how...

I mean, he just said it right there, right? Like he in fancy New York Times words said what I said, your industry is evaporating and this other industry is flourishing. He went, hey, none of these people really trust the, you know, the corporate media anymore. And look, you know, Rumble is pulling in tens of millions of fucking downloads every month.

Right? That's the story here. And so we get a 17 magazine, like, I don't know. I'm going to dive in for two weeks and tell you what I think. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is Sheath Underwear. Love this company, love the people who run it, and I love their product most of all. Sheath uses moisture wicking technology to create underwear that keeps everything breathable and incredibly comfortable for you downstairs. Sheath

smart underwear comes in a number of different styles, including a brief with a dual pouch that just

It separates everything, keeps them where they're supposed to be. It's a real game changer. I am wearing a pair of sheath underwear right now as we speak. And that's true every time I speak to you because they're the only underwear I own. I say this with full sincerity, the most comfortable pair of boxer briefs I have ever worn in my life. And right now, you can get your new favorite pair of underwear by going to sheathunderwear.com and use the promo code PROBLEM20 for 20% off your order. That's

sheathunderwear.com, promo code PROBLEM20 for 20% off your order. All right, let's get back into the show.

This does feel like puff piece. The second you said that I got rid of everything, it feels like puff piece template of, I decided to go see a health and wellness. I went to a health and wellness retreat. So the first thing I did is I got all the junk food out of my apartment and now I get to experience what is being on this health diet for a week actually feel like this is that classic. I decided I'm going to move on from Dylan. So I,

I threw out all his stuff and all the pictures we had together and I was just living a Dylan free life. That's literally what it sounds like. There's nothing serious about this. And after the two paragraphs, again,

we're dying they're flourishing you would think that would take like some seriousness to follow it not this nonsense does he slowly start getting one over he was like these people seem a lot more masculine and they talk about eating meat and i started eating meat and wow i felt better too

Now I'm thinking about shooting guns and drinking beers and actually hanging out with all those friends that I was calling a racist thing. The end of this article is he just gets cool. Yeah. That's all that happens. He goes, anyway, yeah, I'm actually a cool dude now. Yeah.

Alright, let's go back to the piece. I started by visiting Rumble's homepage on Monday morning where I saw my first recommended video. It was about the risk of nuclear war with an AI-generated photo of President Biden laughing maniacally above a headline that read, "World War III incoming?" Biden authorizes strike on Russia ahead of Trump taking office.

So that's the first, like, piece of news that he points to. And again... Headline packs a punch. Yes, well, look...

There's I don't know the piece. I have not read it. I believe there is a link in the article, I believe, but I have not jumped into. I don't know if I'd agree with the argument or not that's being made in the piece. But there is just on it's on the face of the title that they're putting again. They're still so clueless when trying to deal with this world that they think that title is damning.

They think that title is like it's World War III incoming question mark. Biden authorizes strikes on Russia ahead of Trump taking office. Dude, the story, that right there, the headline, nothing to disagree with. That sounds great. Yeah, that's a huge story. And it's worth making the question. After Donald Trump has been running and campaigning online,

on ending the war, stopping the killing, negotiating a deal while Biden for years now has been all in on the war. And then after Trump wins the election, Biden decides to approve strikes deep within Russia with US weapons, which all reports on the ground indicate can only be operated by like either NATO or the US. But yeah, that's a huge story. Why wouldn't that be right up there?

And how would your take away from that not be like, "Oh yeah, maybe we should be covering it that way."

Rumble was once an obscure video platform featuring mostly viral cat videos. Founded in 2013 by a Canadian entrepreneur, it was designed as a home for independent censors who felt crowded out on YouTube. I'm sorry, independent creators who felt crowded out on YouTube. But the platform took a hard right turn around the time of the Capitol riots on January 6, 2021. So...

They say in 2021, when social networks and YouTube cracked down on users who violated their rules. Now, I just want to already say this is so this is where they finally get to addressing, you know, at least kind of that there was some censorship out there. And I guess that is part of the story. That wasn't the birth of the censorship. It would have been COVID stuff. Oh, Rob. That does not sound accurate.

rob we are not gonna let him rewrite history like that dude that is not what happened no it is not yes there were some people who got kicked off after january 6th but that was just how it was back then anytime there was like a big thing they'd use it to kick some more people off but i'm sorry the year the whole year of 2020 okay january 6th was in 2021 and the entire year of 2020 was a

Mass censorship spree. And it didn't start then. The wave really started back in like 2017. It was right after Donald Trump got elected the first time, after they hauled the big executives in. That's when it happened. We remember, Rob. Me and you were there.

- Yeah, that sounds, I mean, if you're gonna write an expert piece and say that people ditched the platform because of censorship over January 6th, that just, you're neglecting the entire COVID story. - And you're obviously, again, just trying to like kind of, you're doing this thing, it's like,

The tactic doesn't work. So you're just going to write and do another piece where you're like, we're going to frame it as this. It's like, oh, yeah, you remember. Hey, reader, you remember those January 6th people? Well, that's who went over there. And it's like, and that's just not true, man. That's not like that's that's not what actually describes the dynamic of what happened with Rumble.

Also, COVID is a little bit like anti-war and that that should not be a right wing talking point. It's almost a shame on the classic liberals that they took the side of government authority and censorship because of this, you know, that this this virus we're all going to die from. I'm just saying that there's no reason why that should be considered a core conservative issue.

Oh, no, it's the idea. And that's part of why they can't frame it that way, because it's like the idea of if you really get to like it's not they're trying to tell you, OK, conservatives took an issue with big pharma and its control over government. Right, right. It's like they're trying to tell you that the real issue here is like it's right wingers and it's January 6th type people. And and and

We all know like that the implied thing here is that what it's that they believe conspiracies, misinformation, they believe all of these things. But if you just mentioned that the whole thing again, the whole it's not this, you know, the way he frames it, oh, the January six people and then some of them got censored, like some of them got kicked off. It's like, no, the there was censorship for years and years and years. And

enough people, you know, many of whom could. I don't think the way the dynamics are right now, I think that

Glenn Greenwald probably could have a show on YouTube permanently and just be huge and make lots of money. I don't think he's getting kicked off right now. I don't think all the big shows over there, I don't think any of them are like getting kicked off if they were on YouTube right now, okay? And like me and you, Rob, we've managed to stay on the platform over the years. And lots of good people have. During COVID,

There's certain topics. Run your mouth did not. Huh? Run your mouth did not. I mean, COVID. That's right. I was repeatedly done temporary or long-term bans. I never got the channel completely banned, but I had repeated strikes on the channel. Right.

Right. Yeah, no question. And a lot of people... Look, there were a lot of topics and there were a lot of things... There's still a lot of topics that you just know you cannot talk about on YouTube, that just you kind of have to stay away from that. There's always been... And right now it's calmed down a lot. It seems to be one of the better periods of time in recent memory. But...

There are things you cannot do, and throughout the years there have been things you really couldn't do, things you could not say or you would get booted off the platform.

For a lot of people, I think like Dan Bongino and Glenn Greenwald, and I think a lot of them, they could just do a show on YouTube right now. I don't think they would get kicked off, but I think a lot of them have something in common, even though they have, by the way, the two people I just named, like Glenn Greenwald and Dan Bongino, have radically different politics, radically different politics.

But what both of them have, I think, is kind of like, well, I don't even want to be worried that I could get kicked off for saying something. You know, like, I don't want to be when the big thing happens when it's January 6th or when it's, you know, whatever the war in Ukraine breaks out or the COVID vaccine is being pushed. Whenever you have the big thing, maybe these guys who have gigantic audiences are.

Just want to say hey, you know what? I'm gonna go with the company that says no matter what I say You got my back. I have a right to say it that that in itself is like a Big part of the reason why so many of these people went over there, but it's all about that It's all about the free speech issue and to the point you were making Rob if you admit that it's all about the free speech issue well, then you can't frame it as this fringe right-wing issue and

Because free speech is just not a fringe right-wing view. It's like you could place it wherever you want to on the political spectrum, but that can't be it. It's not a fringe right-wing view to believe in free speech. In no sense of the like...

Like philosophically or historically, the far right wing are not the free speech people. Like that's not what that means. And if you are calling the free speech people far right wing, you probably have something all messed up in your head.

Free speech is a liberal value. And you know what I mean? And always has been. And until the last few years, until the last few years, it's always been like a bedrock liberal value since the term liberal was invented. So anyway, that's why they can't frame it that way. Any other thoughts, Rob? No, I'm curious to hear what else this guy gets flagrantly wrong. All right, let's see. Oh.

Okay, I chose a selection of popular "news shows" to watch, along with political content from other areas, like its active conspiracy section. Because my experiment began so soon after Mr. Trump swept to victory on November 5th, I expected many of the videos to feel triumphant. There were a few moments of joy,

After the hosts of Morning Joe, the MSNBC talk show, visited Mar-a-Lago, hosts of Rumble shows gleefully mocked them, saying they went to kiss the ring and bend the knee. Clips of NFL athletes doing Mr. Trump's dance moves were a sign. I'm sorry, were a sign the host said that Mr. Trump had from the clutches of Hollywood liberals. Sorry, one second here. Okay, so, you know,

Again, the other thing that they do here, which you may have noticed, is that when you do these things, they'll kind of—already he's talking about how he sees all these things that are kind of like mocking and shitty. And it's like, Rob, me and you have watched the corporate media. They also do the same thing, right? Yeah.

I mean, did they not engage in that tactic as well? Yeah, turning Joe Rogan green and saying that he's taking horse to warmer. I mean, that's just the top example that comes to mind, but I've seen it hundreds of times. Do you believe these lunatics is essentially the characterization on the news? The Rogan one is a great example to mention, but...

It's all the time. It's like every single show. That's what they do. They look into the, they're constantly just saying like, oh my God, these fucking Rita, really? You believe this? You believe Donald Trump? And can you believe there's people out there who actually think they know better than the experts and all this shit? That's what the whole, that's what all of them do. So,

Can you believe that people are going to back this criminal Donald Trump who's been found guilty in all these court cases? And can you believe that they're willing to pretend like our president has dimension? We'll put out deep fakes out of context. Can you believe what these people are doing? Did you see today, Rob, that fucking Stephanopoulos cost fucking ABC 15 million bucks? You see this shit? They just settled with a fucking over a defamation suit. And I remember watching it. I think we talked about it on the show.

Because we were saying like these guys in the corporate media will literally just say Donald Trump was like convicted of rape or something like that. And you're like, what? No, he fucking wasn't. And you can't say that. I mean, by our current laws, like you're not allowed to say that. What do you mean? And it was Stephanopoulos in that interview where he was trying to press that Congress lady. And he just goes, I think he didn't say convicted, but he goes, Donald Trump was found civilly guilty of rape. But that's not true.

It was like a defamation suit. Like, she somehow argued that he defamed her by denying her allegations. But that's not being convicted of the crime, right? And like, so anyways, so Donald Trump fucking...

He's got 15 million dollars that they had the ABC had to donate to like his library or some shit like that So again, it's always like and I hope every book in the library is a George Stephanopoulos How I won 15 million dollars like it's just all all petty books or it's nothing but the art of the deal It's an entire section of it. Yeah. Well, I also like I

You know, you just, you get it a lot where people will use these standards to smear someone or to smear a group of people where they just, they use these very, you know, these blatantly unfair things where like, you know, they'll talk about like, oh, you know, so-and-so's Twitter followers are known for attacking people, you know? But then like, they'll never point out that like everybody's Twitter followers are known for attacking people.

Like all of them. What does that even mean? Like, that's just how Twitter is. You know what I mean? Like, that's one aspect of Twitter. If you're looking for that, you'll find it very easily on that website. But like, that's not but they use it just about you. So they'll point out like, oh, I saw that, you know, whatever, that's random things that aren't, they're not really taking on like,

what Glenn Greenwald is saying. You know, like, you want to do something here, the newspaper of record, take on Glenn Greenwald, take on the arguments that he's making and make a compelling case against it instead of just, like, the constant framing, the constant, like, you know what I mean, Rob? Like, they're writing, it's like they're writing a horror novel or something. They're trying to scare you. We're trying to write in this language that convinces you these are the boogeymen, okay? And by the way, one of the, you know, things is that

at least by traditional standards, when I say traditional standards, maybe that's not the right term. I mean, by the standards of my lifetime, the way things have been throughout my life, none of those people, whether it's Bongino or Charlie Kirk or Glenn Greenwald, I don't know if I'm missing like Russell Brand, I think. I don't know if I'm missing like who the other big names on exclusive to Rumble are, but none of those guys by the standards of my lifetime are even...

somewhat radical. They're all like within well within the spectrum of like just reasonable politics. None of them are like

fucking anarchists or communists or fascists or like anything like that. They're all Democrats and Republicans. They're all just kind of have like Glenn Greenwald is like economically like much more, you know, the leftist than than me or you. And I think he would have the government having a huge, huge role in major industries, but

But I certainly don't think he's like, he's not trying to have a workers revolution of the people or anything like that. Like Glenn Greenwald knows enough about like authoritarianism. He's like, yeah, I don't want to do any of that. I just want to have like these government programs or something. I think, I think I'm right in saying that. I probably, I'm not 100% about that, but I'm pretty sure that's where he would fall. He's just a moderate person.

Like he's not I shouldn't say he's a moderate like he's a left wing guy, but he's just he's with well within the realm of like the political spectrum that was allowable opinion up until the last few years up until say like 2016.

He was yeah, you would always everyone in the media would always place him on the left wing as like well within the the normal left-wing space of like yeah He probably wants a little bit more social services and a lot less war and a lot less spying and a lot less Three-letter agencies and a lot more free speech, you know, like that's pretty standard. Um, Dan Bongino is just a Republican and

he's just a guy who would have voted for reagan when he was running voted for trump when he was running but i don't mean that as a knock on him i just mean that's where he falls on the political spectrum you're not talking about a group of radicals this isn't a group of far right-wing extremists or something it's just not true and that's why they're you know that's why they don't want to take on that uh the department of

Sorry. But their happiness quickly gave way to a relentless outpouring of anger and frustration as they fixated on the cast of perceived enemies to blame for America's troubles, from Democratic politicians to TikTok personalities to Republican adversaries. Just a few hours into the experiment, it was clear that I was falling into an alternative reality fueled almost entirely by outrage among the claims I heard.

Okay, before we go through these claims, again, what he's describing is all media, all media, including the New York Times. Right, Rob? He's going to say it's fueled by outrage. The entire corporate media was literally telling us that Adolf Hitler is taking over the White House. That's what you were telling us for a full year.

Democracy is on the ballot. We now live in a fascist country. I mean, then you stopped as soon as we now live in a fascist country, evidently. Am I missing something here, Rob?

It was like the irony of Kamala Harris saying she was running the joy campaign and then completely fearmongering and demonizing the other side. Yeah. I mean, it's like, it's just so wild for them to come over here and go, oh, they have, you know, the thing, it's like James Lindsay describing the woke right. And then like the definition is the vaguest thing ever that you could apply to anyone if you wanted to.

They think of politics in identity purposes or something like, okay, what? It's like the similar thing, this is nothing. You're like, oh, it quickly turned into a relentless outpouring of anger and frustration. Yeah. Are they angry about something that's worth being angry about? What are they angry about? Or they blame other people. Who do they blame? Just saying they're angry and they blame others.

That's everyone. That's everyone making comments about politics. You're almost just describing the genre of talk radio. It's almost like if you're like, this WWF thing where they're all in a ring wrestling with each other. Yeah, that's kind of what it is. It's on the level of, yeah. I go to Rumble and I click on news and everyone's just ranting about politics. Huh?

It's just all, again, all of this is just, it's like fluff and then just framing, all framing. Imagine like that was our beef. If like our beef with the corporate media, you know, like I said before, and again, this is just objectively true. When I criticize the corporate media, I'm somebody who has like, um,

just extensively consumed corporate media, really very, you know, like to a pretty large extent, you know, for at least 17 years. This is somebody who's like a week in to experiencing this world. It's just, that's the reality. But when I'm criticizing the corporate media, as I've been known to do,

I'm never criticizing them. It would never be something like I turn on the corporate media and all right, let's just see what this is about. And oh, they're so angry. And oh, look, everyone's always pissed off. And then I turn on the far left MSNBC, and everybody's just so mean. And they're always trying to get you scared. It's like, whenever we criticize them, it's like, they said this, it

It was a lie because they knew this then and this then, yet they still told you this then. They are lying to you. It's not just this empty framing and fluff. Like, get to the argument. What did someone say that was wrong? All right.

Just a few hours into the experiment, it was clear that I was falling into an alternative reality, an alternate reality fueled almost entirely by outrage. Among the claims I heard, some people at think tanks in Washington were, quote, morons and, quote, crazier than any schizophrenic.

The Department of Homeland Security was running a sex trafficking operation, a claim apparently based on a misreading of a government report. The report by the Department of Homeland Security's office on the inspector general indicated that more than 300,000 unaccompanied minors had not received a notice of blah, blah, blah, blah. Okay, so she's claiming that there was a story that was wrong.

A story that was wrong that was about a sex trafficking operation in the government. Now, by the way, I'm not saying I'm not up on this story. I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm saying that's essentially the point here. She found a story that was wrong. I mean, like, or he, I'm sorry, he found a story that was wrong. Anyway, like, we could even wrap up here.

But you just, the article goes on, but you understand like this is what it is. I feel like you only have to go like that far into the article to just kind of go like, okay, I just see what you're going to do. Cherry pick some bad information here. And, you know, no one in the corporate media, including this article, I just do not believe it's like a genuine attempt. Let me say this. It's not that...

I don't know enough about this particular writer. Maybe he is like just really shallow and thinks he made a real attempt to like understand this world. But for the New York Times as an organization, for this to be their attempt to grapple with this, it just shows like they don't actually want to. They don't actually have any interest in doing it. They just want to frame it as something that they can – because –

The truth is, if you wanted to really take it on, it is true that in this new kind of like decentralized world, you can get a lot of bad information. Like that is true that you can get articles that are wrong.

You'll get fit. There are bad sources on the internet. There's a lot of Misinformation that much is true. But the thing is that there's also some truth out there There's also some really good people who really actually like call out the rampant corruption of the regime that we live under So there's also some really great stuff out there in the corporate media world. It's like all garbage and

It's all it was all garbage and Tucker Carlson and then you guys fired Tucker Carlson. So now it's pretty much all garbage I shouldn't say that there's a few people out there in the corporate media who are actually pretty good But those people who are pretty good They all know exactly what I'm saying and those people the few people in the corporate media who are good would like be clapping When they heard me say it's all garbage There's just

So at least in the decentralized world, we have a shot. We have a shot to get some good stuff. And I'm sorry, but Glenn Greenwald and Tucker Carlson, those guys are better than anybody in the corporate media. Anybody. Anything you want to add, Rob? I got to read the rest of this piece. See what this guy was trashing Rumble for. It doesn't sound like he's got a whole lot. Yeah, it's just like it's it's you know, look, we can here we could read a little bit more of it. We'll see what he he gets into. Yeah.

Also, that's funny. Do you want to take the other side of that?

Do you think the debt's not a problem? Do you think these wars aren't a problem? Do you think the border wall is not a problem? Do you think inflation is not a problem? What particular topic are these people addressing that you think we're doing great on? Yeah, really. In fact, is the New York Times just a paper of sunshine and roses? Hey, this morning, you wouldn't believe there are more roses in the Capitol than last week because everything's going great and we have absolutely nothing else to report on. Is that usually what's in the news?

- Yeah, and 100%. And again, to just be like the whole thing, I mean, what essentially is being said here other than like the whole thing leans pro-Trump.

And the whole thing, I mean, what did she say here exactly? They don't care about objective details about complex situations. That matters less than how these situations could be contorted to support Trump. So always trying to get Trump over and then they're always like deriding Democrats and saying that we're going from crisis to crisis. Okay, well...

Like okay, let's take a few of these things apart here. So yeah, I mean that's probably true, right? It is probably true that during the election season and even like right now after the election People are on on the Trump side like spinning every argument to favor Trump probably a little bit more than even than is even fair at times no question we've seen a lot of that me and you Rob, you know, and yeah, they're deriding Democrats in there, but I

It's like, look, if you turn on the corporate media, it's all the same thing but reverse. And here's the dynamic. The system is set up and not by the people but by the powerful. The system is set up so that like either Donald Trump or Kamala Harris was going to win the presidential election. Those were the options. And, you know, my point is just that.

You know as somebody who's been in a third party for some years, you know the entire system is so rigged against third parties and that's not because of anything that's written in the Constitution. That's not because of anything that was like the true supreme law of the land of this country or whatever. It's just that the Democrats and Republicans are the ones that write the laws and so they decided to write the laws to rig the fucking whole election systems against third parties. And

So, okay, I'm just saying that the system is you're gonna get one of these two options. And so of course that pushes people into being on one of those sides or the other, you know? And when obviously the entire corporate media apparatus, the one you represent, the one that is collapsing, is pushing this one candidate, why is it so unreasonable that, hey, we happen to find that this other media apparatus that is very critical of us

And the candidate that we're pushing, of course, they won't admit that they're just pushing this candidate, but everyone knows they are. And hey, corporate media, by the way, a little secret here. You'd be better off to just admit it at this point. It's the secret's out. You were all trying to get Kamala Harris elected and before that Biden and before that Clinton. But OK.

But now you're outraged at somebody who opposes everything you stand for, opposing the binary other option that they have besides your candidate. And the only other option they have who might actually win, might actually be president, was Trump. And now because Trump's in there, there's at least a shot that they get some people who are going to try to stop what we don't like that you stand for. And so why would you be—what does it say for your comment to be,

Yeah, they like that guy. We like this girl, but they like that guy. That's what I found when I was over there. But you can't just say that, so you have to write it up in like scary language. Ooh, they were only trying to support Trump. They didn't care about objective facts. That's right, you know, the corporate media who said Biden was sharp as a tack, they cared about objective facts so much. And that's not, you know, is that a petty thing to be an objective fact? Like, is that a petty issue?

That the commander-in-chief is fucking Leslie Nielsen in, like, one of his later movies? We're not supposed to point that out, and you're going to lie about that? Anyway. But they don't care about objective facts because they're trying to get a candidate over. I mean, the fucking...

What would the Jews say? The chutzpah, Rob, for the corporate media to turn around after, you know, saying Joe Biden is not senile while you could see he was senile. They're going to say these guys don't care about objective facts as much as they do about getting their candidate over. That's the complaint. OK, progressives were getting away with galling levels of incompetence or corruption and

The host said over and over again, even though Mr. Trump and the Republicans would soon control the White House and Congress and conservatives have a majority on the Supreme Court, there were, quote, more battles to come. I shouldn't say quote, but it's a link. You know, again, because they can't actually grapple with any of the substance of the dynamic here.

What he's going to just keep doing, and we can wrap on this, but what he keeps doing here is, you know, like without addressing the core of why you guys fell apart, particularly over these years. And I know a lot of it has to do with technology, but come on, man. Couldn't you look at like after this?

We're coming right after the COVID regime and the Biden administration and trusted media has collapsed. And you don't kind of see some of the dynamics here, that some of the dynamics are that, you know, because when he sits here, he goes, oh, man, they just essentially the last two paragraphs are it's it's.

somehow like paranoid or it's not based in fact, it's just designed to scare you because they have this idea that like we're going from crisis to crisis and that even though Trump has won, there's still this huge battle to be fought, even though they have the Congress and the White House. And you're like, well, who could say we haven't been going from crisis to crisis for the last few years? Could you say that? Like,

from 2020 to now, we're almost at a hot war with Russia. We went through lockdowns. We went through inflation. We went through just so many major things. The whole vaccine debacle. Just all of this stuff. And to say there's still work to be done, it's like, yeah. The thing is, dude,

You can't just say that's a ridiculous position without like getting into it. You know, you can't say that without taking that down. Who wants to argue that any of those things I just mentioned were not a crisis, that we weren't going from crisis to crisis and that Democrats certainly had a lot of blame in that. What's the argument against that? Anyway, this is why this is why they're destined to lose. Rob, anything else? Anything else you want to say?

Doesn't doesn't seem like they did their homework or put together a good article. Yep. Yep. That's right. All right, guys. Thanks for listening. We will catch you next time. Oh, wait, go ahead. I do have two shows coming up this week. First is Thursday out in Jersey, the political comedy jam, which are probably going to relabel. We the stupid down the line. But anyways, it's going to.

uh, hybrid show, standup comedy, news clips, podcasts, the works, everything I do filming sketches for, it's going to be a good time. And then on a Saturday, I'm in San Antonio, Texas with a roster of great comics. So, uh, if you're out in that area, please come, come hang out both shows in the episode description. Just click the link. You're right there. Hell yeah. All right. Catch you guys next time. Peace.