Exactly this. The channels through which people an anonymously communicating (also a part of the problem) are biased towards sensational and controversial content, which sends dialog down this path no matter what.
An important consideration is that many different cultures are experiencing very similar radicalization / polarization trends. The facts on the ground are quite different but the tooling by which these conversations happen is the same.
Yes to all this. I think he has gotten more curmudgeonly over the last couple of years, and definitely seems to let the "emeritus" set hold court for awhile, while being much more curt and critical of others.
I think part of his sharpness with scientists is rooted in a commitment to making specialists speak plainly and understandably for the audience, without jargon or insider-y concepts.
I definitely know what you mean, and you can see it mentioned in reviews on Apple's podcast app quite frequently. I think it's mostly a cultural difference.
It feels like he conducts the show sort of like a stern professor at storied British school or something along those lines. Very concerned with concision and clarity. I don't tend to mind it but I can see why it would seem odd or off-putting to people.
An important consideration is that many different cultures are experiencing very similar radicalization / polarization trends. The facts on the ground are quite different but the tooling by which these conversations happen is the same.