what do you propose YouTube does about their algorithm, not show people more content that they might like?
YouTube makes decisions about which channels to promote and tweaks their algorithm all the time. They are responsible for the sort of content that’s promoted on their platform. So yes, YouTube ought to figure out a way to prevent the sort of YouTube ‘community’ formation that happens when you start the slide into the alt-right YouTube sphere. Right now, your recommended box gets stuffed with alt-right and white nationalist videos which reinforce each other because those viewers also watch other alt-right channels. This forms a bubble where viewers in that network are almost exclusively exposed to related right-wing videos.
These are all decisions by YouTube. Consider one way they could set up the algorithm: every new video posted to YouTube goes to the top of your recommended. Obviously that’s not a great way to do it. On the other hand, right now YouTube’s recommended system forms insular ideological networks. These networks produce a toxic political environment which has manifest as violence in the real world. That’s a problem. I don’t have the technical knowledge to give specific recommendations on how the algorithm ought to be changed. But I do know that these algorithms are the product of choices, not nature, and can be changed to produce a better social result.
Rogan is a progressive and JP doesn’t even label himself as a right-winger.
Rogan is ‘progressive’, but he’s not really politically informed and often seems to change stances based on his guest. There are times when he actually does a great job, like when he castigated Dave Rubin for his moronic suggestions about deregulating building codes. But that’s because Rogan actually knows something about that topic. Most of the time he’s just a sponge for whatever his guest is going on about. Also, JP is socially right-wing whether or not he classifies himself as such. I don’t think that’s even really debatable. He’s a spearhead for anti-feminism, traditional gender roles and a prior social order. That’s right-wing by definition.
as I mentioned before, it can be used (and is used) very disingenuously by people on the left to try to shame and silence opponents.
I think JP is wrong about 95% of the time, but that’s not what I’m talking about. Again, I’m talking about a very specific phenomenon whereby certain viewers get funneled into alt-right networks because of the way YouTube (and some other media) works. For example, I also disagree with The National Review and The Washington Times, both right-wing publications, but this dynamic does not exist in those cases. Whether the transition is A to B or A to D, it is undeniably happening.