You have responsible content creators. Personally, if I had the biggest podcast in the world I'd wouldn't give any air time to conspiracy theorists, there's no real merit, for example, of watching a scientist debate some lunatic for 4 hours about whether the Earth is round. However, if you feel the need to give air time to these cretins then at the very least make your audience aware of the facts by either challenging them yourself or getting respected people in that field to challenge the conspiracy. You don't just let them rant for 4 hours and call them a national treasure. That would be a good start.
You Say that, but the traditional meaning of 'conspiracy theory' has been corrupted in recent years, and now is used as a pejorative against people who disagree with someone.
There's a saying going around, that the difference between a conspiracy theory and government disclosure is about 6 months.
Let's put a conspiracy into a specific. CNN named Rogan a conspiracy theorist and a perpetrator of misinformation, and claimed he took a horse dewormer when he made a video about catching COVID. Now a lot of people, including medical professionals were named conspiracy theorists around this time, for offering well informed and basic info. A CNN Dr later was a guest and had to walk that CNN claim back, and even Cuomo who.mocked and ridiculed Rogan recently made the claim he never claimed Ivermectin to be a horse dewormer, and that he never ridiculed Rogan, despite the clip being played to him.
So in this scenario, was Rogan, who was prescribed a number of medications, including Ivermectin a conspiracy theorist?
I only ask, because, and I don't think you mean to, the trap being set with labels is a nefarious politicised thing, and falling into that trap benefits nobody IMO.
I'm not saying all Conspiracies are true, that would be insane, but I think it would also be insane to make the claim none can be true.
I was called a conspiracy theorist recently, for claiming the bag of Cocaine found at the whitehouse last year was likely the Presidents son, who has a history of cocaine use, has regularly attended the White house, and the powers that be would have reason for hiding any video, audio or eye witness evidence in which there would 100% be.
Now technically I've taken an action, and without the knowledge of direct evidence made an assumption, but I think that's a pretty safe bet given the alternative. Would you also have labelled my theory a conspiracy
