You are conflating minority viewpoints with reputability. No serious media source would invite a conspiracy theorist with no credibility. Differing viewpoints are an important part of any discussion.
Stop changing the subject. The issue that you brought up is whether or not Joe Rogan giving air time to something is endorsing it. Which it isn't. It's having a conversation on a podcast.
And why are you comparing Joe Rogan to a "serious media source"? He's a comedian with a podcast, who can talk to whomever he wants that he deems interesting.
The concept of "platform" (and thus no-platforming) is an area where IMO ostensibly progressive society has gone off the rails. It starts with good intentions, maybe as a reaction to the silliness of giving equal time to scientists and unqualified critics on mainstream media.
But then it morphs into this idea that thinking and talking about an idea, or being seen with people who hold an idea, without foaming at the mouth against it is the same as endorsing it, and that is a very dangerous place to be.
Hah! The interesting thing about 'reputability' is this - Your ideas have to be in about the same ballpark as mine. If they are any more, then you're just a crazy conspiracy theorist who I shan't waste my time on. Any less, then you're just one of the sheeple who believes in the propaganda and will not question, so no point in wasting time in engaging in a conversation.
