Say it ain’t so, Joe: Rogan floats irresponsible conspiracy theory

Podcaster Joe Rogan is at it again — floating dumb and irresponsible stuff on his popular podcast.

His latest trip into conspiracy theories is that the Jan. 6 insurrection was a false flag orchestrated by the federal government. He’s actually suggested this before, but he did it again this week when he said, “The Jan. 6 thing is bad, but also, the intelligence agencies were involved in provoking people into the Capitol Building. That’s a fact.”

Rogan then talked about Ray Epps, the Trump supporter who is at the center of the latest right-wing conspiracy theory. Epps recently filed a defamation lawsuit against Fox News and former host Tucker Carlson for claiming he was an undercover FBI agent who helped provoke the riot at the Capitol.

Rogan said on his podcast, “I don’t know, but I do know that every other … I think that every other person who was involved in Jan. 6, who was involved in coordinating a break-in into the Capitol and then instigating people, they were all arrested. This guy wasn’t. Not only that, but they were defending him in The New York Times, The Washington Post, all these different things saying Fox News has unjustly accused him of instigating when he clearly instigated, he did it on camera. I don’t know if he was a fed. I know a lot of people think he was a fed. The people that were there were calling him a fed. What I do know is when they asked the FBI, the FBI said we can’t tell you whether or not that they’re people that were there that were doing that.”

In a statement to The Daily Beast’s Justin Baragona, Epps’ attorney Michael Teter blasted Rogan for pouring more gas on the conspiracy theory fire about Epps.

Teter said, “Joe Rogan’s recent comments show the staying power and consequences of Fox’s and Tucker Carlson’s lies about Ray Epps. For years, Fox targeted Ray and spread falsehoods about him, and Fox’s viewers used the lies as a basis to harass and threaten Ray. The absurdity of the conspiracy theory does not stand in the way of it being spread and weaponized to harm Ray. If Mr. Rogan is truly interested in focusing on who instigated the attack on the Capitol, he would find more truth in looking at the mirror than he does in focusing on a wedding venue owner from Arizona.”

In his suit against Fox News and Carlson, Epps claims he and his family  have received death threats and have been forced to move. The suit, filed last month, says, “After destroying Epps’s reputation and livelihood, Fox will move on to its next story, while Ray and Robyn live in a 350-square foot RV and face harassment and fear true harm. Fox must be held accountable.”

Meanwhile, Spotify, who signed Rogan to a $200 million, sits by idly.

The big breaking news Tuesday evening was Donald Trump being indicted on four felony counts for trying to overturn the 2020 presidential election and his role in the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Special counsel Jack Smith told reporters, “The attack on our nation’s Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy. It was fueled by lies, lies by the defendant.”

In one of his posts on his Truth Social, Trump wrote, “Why didn’t they bring this ridiculous case 2.5 years ago? They wanted it right in the middle of my campaign, that’s why!”

In her Five-Minute Fix newsletter, The Washington Post’s Amber Phillips wrote, “He’s now got quite a list of indictments in various cases, but this is the big one, and it’s serious.”

She added, “Essentially, the indictment alleges that Trump orchestrated a subversion of democracy.”

New York Times White House correspondent Peter Baker wrote, “What makes the indictment against Donald J. Trump on Tuesday so breathtaking is not that it is the first time a president has been charged with a crime or even the second. Mr. Trump already holds those records. But as serious as hush money and classified documents may be, this third indictment in four months finally gets to the heart of the matter, the issue that will define the future of American democracy.”

He added, “At the core of the United States of America vs. Donald J. Trump is no less than the viability of the system constructed in that summer in Philadelphia. Can a sitting president spread lies about an election and try to employ his government’s power to overturn the will of the voters without consequence? The question would have been unimaginable just a few years ago, but the Trump case raises the kind of specter more familiar in countries with histories of coups and juntas and dictators.”

Baker’s analysis lays out exactly how disturbing these charges are and what the future might hold.

I’ll have much more coverage in the days ahead, but here a few notable pieces until then:

Years ago — I’m talking 15 or so years ago — I was at a youth baseball practice for my youngest son. While talking to the parents of one of my son’s teammates, I was asked what I did for a living. I said I worked for the local newspaper, the Tampa Bay Times. The father said, “Yeah, we don’t get the paper.”

I said, “Oh?”

And the wife said, “Yeah, the news is all so negative that we don’t want to hear about it.”

I just politely smiled and nodded. But deep down I was judging them for being ill-informed and irresponsible.

As it turns out, maybe they were just ahead of their time.

These days, news consumption has dropped because some previously-regular news consumers are avoiding the news. Washington Post media reporter Paul Farhi wrote about this trend based on the latest research from the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

The numbers tell an interesting tale: 38% of Americans in the survey say they sometimes or often avoid news. Meanwhile, the number of those who are “extremely” or “very interested” in the news continues to dwindle. In 2015, that number was around 67%. Today, it’s 49% — the first time that number has fallen below 50% in the survey’s brief history.

Farhi writes, “Researchers say ‘news avoidance’ could be a response to an age of hyper-information, when updates from the outside world flow not just from every TV set and printing press but also out of our own pockets via smartphones. Digital media has made news ubiquitous and instantly available from thousands of sources representing every ideology, geography and language. And much of it, people say, drives feelings of depression, anger, anxiety or helplessness.”

As Farhi notes, the topics that send people fleeing from the news are often associated with the divisive politics in the country, particularly since 2016. (Hmm, what happened that year?) The topics that can cause anger or depression include political views on issues and rights involving race, gender and sexual preference, as well as things such as gun violence and presidential elections — both past and future.

As one once-avid news consumer told Farhi, “What can I do about it? Nothing you do gives any control.” Well, Farhi writes, what can one do other than laying the newspaper aside, turning off the TV and going for a walk?

Cable news ratings are down, as is web traffic for major news outlets, including places such as The New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal.

News avoidance certainly is playing a role in that, according to the research.

Check out Farhi’s story for more.

Meta announced Tuesday that it will remove news availability on its platforms in Canada. This is in response to Canada’s government passing the Online News Act, Bill C-18, which requires big tech giants such as Google and Meta to pay media outlets for news content they share or otherwise repurpose on their platforms.

Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, put a statement on its website announcing the latest move. The statement — signed by Rachel Curran, Meta’s head of public policy in Canada — said, in part, “For Canadian news outlets this means: News links and content posted by news publishers and broadcasters in Canada will no longer be viewable by people in Canada. We are identifying news outlets based on legislative definitions and guidance from the Online News Act.”

The move is supposed to take place immediately, but the changes are expected to take a few weeks to implement.

Curran wrote, “In the future, we hope the Canadian government will recognize the value we already provide the news industry and consider a policy response that upholds the principles of a free and open internet.”

Meta says this move is permanent, but is it?

As the CBC’s Darren Major wrote, “Bill C-18 is modeled on a similar law in Australia, the country that first forced digital companies to pay for the use of news content. Meta, known as Facebook at the time, temporarily blocked Australians from sharing news stories on its platform. The Australian government and the tech company ended up striking a deal and the news ban was lifted.”

Former U.S. soccer star Carli Lloyd is seen here at the 2022 NFL draft. (AP Photo/Doug Benc)

Kudos to former U.S. women’s soccer star Carli Lloyd for ripping into the U.S. women’s soccer team after a lackluster performance in a 0-0 draw against Portugal early Tuesday morning in the World Cup. Lloyd, a former captain on the women’s team, is now a commentator for Fox Sports’ coverage of the World Cup.

The U.S. women are advancing to the knockout stage of the tournament, but have not looked good so far in a victory and two ties. Portugal almost won, but a potential winning goal hit the goal post. Had it gone in and the U.S. lost, the Americans would have been shockingly eliminated.

After watching a video of the U.S. women dancing and posing with fans for selfies following the game against Portugal, Lloyd said on the air, “I have never witnessed something like that. There’s a difference between being respectful of the fans and saying hello to your family. But to be dancing, to be smiling — I mean, the player of that match was that post. You’re lucky to not be going home right now.”

U.S. coach Vlatko Andonovski called Lloyd’s comments “insane.” He said, “This team wanted to win this game more than anything. To question the mentality of this team, to question the willingness to win, to compete, I think is insane. It’s not like we played well, by any means. We owned it. We know it’s not good enough. We’re not happy with our performance. But we qualified for the next round. We’re moving on.”

Many on social media and online praised Lloyd’s comments, while others criticized her. But those who criticized should be reminded of Lloyd’s role. She doesn’t play anymore. She’s not a cheerleader. She’s an analyst.

And her analysis was spot on.

And for Andonovski to call her comments “insane?” No, insane would be not calling out the U.S. women for mailing it in so far in this tournament.

• I wrote in Tuesday’s newsletter that Elon Musk and Twitter (or X, or whatever it’s called) was threatening to sue the nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate, a group that tracks hate speech. Well, Musk followed through and has officially sued. The Associated Press’ David Klepper has the details.
• NewsNation will host a live town hall with Republican presidential candidate and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy on Aug. 14 at 9 p.m. Eastern. It will be Ramaswamy’s first presidential town hall with a national TV news network. NewsNation’s Leland Vittert will moderate the event, with additional questions coming from audiences in New Hampshire and Iowa.
• The Guardian’s Manuela Lazic with “Who needs film critics when studios can be sure influencers will praise their films?”
• In a piece for Poynter, Vanessa Otero — creator of the Media Bias Chart and the Founder and CEO of Ad Fontes Media — with “Why I decided to rate the news.”
• NBA analyst Mark Jackson put out a classy statement after being let go by ESPN this week. In a Twitter statement, he thanked his former colleagues and the network, and added, “Finally, I wish greater measures of success to the new NBA team. May they continue to elevate this game that has given me a home and a life. I leave ESPN with nothing but gratitude, all the while knowing that my highest praise goes to God!

A powerful (and long) read from The Washington Post’s Caroline Kitchener (with excellent photos from Carolyn Van Houten): “An abortion ban made them teen parents. This is life two years later.”

For Vulture, Rebecca Jennings with a fascinating read: “Where is Britney Spears?”

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at tjones@poynter.org.
The Poynter Report is our daily media newsletter. To have it delivered to your inbox Monday-Friday, sign up here.
Follow us on Twitter and on Facebook.