I do not think of Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder, and other diehard, traditional conservatives as “alt-right.” You might feel differently. I also don’t consider Sam Harris, Bret and Eric Weinstein, or Jordan Peterson to be “alt-right sympathizers.”
This is a true statement (except maybe Crowder, sometimes I’m not sure). But the problem is there is a lot of overlap between many of these people and alt-right audiences which creates the gateway effect in the YouTube algorithm. It doesn’t matter whether they are personally sympathetic to the alt-right.
the only conceivable way you could expose yourself to a heavy dose of alt-right politics without also being exposed to a heavy dose of contradictory viewpoints along the way is if you only tune in when has an alt-right guest on.
I’d disagree with this. Rogan has on very few competent left-wing intellectuals. And again, I’d say you’re being idealistic about what should happen and what does happen. All of Rogan’s interviews with Jordan Peterson have 4.5–5.5m views. By contrast, the most popular interview with a left-winger I could find (Kuliniski)has about 1.7m views. This is because of the right-wing character of Rogan’s viewership, and those are the videos that get amplified the most and reproduce the gateway effect due to the audience overlap.
Now I’d actually be okay with Joe having guys like this on if he knew enough to push back when JP insinuates something incredibly sexist. Or if he just took a look at his audience, saw the sheer prevalence of racist/sexist attitudes, and every now and then made unequivocal specific statements directed at his audience about how those things should not be tolerated. I just don’t think he’s even aware enough to consider this though. Even better, I’d like if he had on a competent leftist like Michael Brooks to debate someone like JP on these issues. Otherwise what you get are clips of unchallenged BS circulating on YouTube feeding into the gateway.