Connect with us


Joe Rogan Denies Spotify Censorship Rumors, According to Alex Jones



  • The full library of “The Joe Rogan Experience” was set to debut on Spotify Tuesday following Rogan’s licensing deal with the platform in May, valued at more than $100 million. 
  • However, many noticed that dozens of episodes featuring controversial and far-right guests were missing, including Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos, and others. 
  • While some called this censorship, others hesitated and were confused by missing episodes of guests like actor Tommy Chong and comedian Nick Kroll.
  • Alex Jones issued a statement saying he spoke to Rogan, who said Spotify is not censoring him and explained that there were migration issues with corrupted files.
  • Jones also claimed more content will be migrated over, but after the podcast moves exclusively to Spotify on Dec. 31, 100 of Rogan’s favorite episodes will remain on YouTube, where Rogan believes they’ll probably get more views.

Fans Notice Missing Episodes of “The Joe Rogan Experience” on Spotify 

Podcast host Joe Rogan has denied claims that Spotify is censoring his content after rumors circulated online Tuesday, according to controversial far-right personality Alex Jones.

Rogan’s podcast, “The Joe Rogan Experience,” finally debuted on Spotify earlier that day as part of his exclusive deal with the platform– a deal worth more than $100 million. However, the debut was met with a ton of frustration after fans noticed that dozens of episodes were missing from his podcast catalog.

This was a bit confusing since Rogan had previously said his entire library of podcasts would be available starting September 1 before becoming fully exclusive to Spotify by the end of the year. 

Several news outlets and listeners claimed that the missing episodes seemed to be some of his most controversial interviews with far-right figures like Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos, Gavin McInnes, and others. 

Other excluded episodes featured non-political figures like comedian Chris D’Elia, who was recently accused of sexual misconduct involving minors, as well as comedian and podcast regular Joey Diaz, who came under fire when comments from an old podcast surfaced about him coercing female comics into performing oral sex. 

After noticing who was missing, many began calling it censorship, wondering if it was Spotify’s choice or Rogan’s. For example, Mikhaila Peterson, daughter of controversial professor Jordan Peterson, tweeted about her episode’s exclusion, saying: “This is straight up censorship. This is absolutely ridiculous.”

She and several others began sharing lists of all the guests who were left out, which seemed to align with this theory about censoring controversial voices. However, she did note that it was the first day the podcasts were available, leaving some room for an explanation. 

The censorship claims are a huge point of frustration for people because Rogan is known for talking to people from across the political spectrum. When he first announced his deal, he even noted that his show wouldn’t change.

It’s just a licensing deal, so Spotify won’t have any creative control over the show. They want me to just continue doing it the way I’m doing it right now,” he said.  

We’re going to be working with the same crew doing the exact same show,” he continued in his announcement video.

These missing episodes had people worried about the show’s future, but others hesitated to call it censorship after finding a couple excluded guests confusing and not in line with the censorship narrative. For instance, missing episodes also included those of actor Tommy Chong, who is also a prominent cannabis rights activist, as well as comedian Nick Kroll.

Rogan Denies Claims 

Later in the day, Peterson updated her Twitter thread to say, “Alex Jones says these episodes will be uploaded at a later date and it is not censorship.”

Jones posted a video on his InfoWar’s site offering an explanation after speaking with Rogan. “They’ve got 1500+ files and then some migrating over, and they’ve had a few problems here and there with corrupted files, with the naming of them. And Spotify wants to have a first rollout and then a second rollout,” he said.

“Here’s the key. Joe Rogan’s favorite 100 episodes of the last 10 years or so will be left on YouTube starting December 31 when he goes exclusively to Spotify. For this couple months no man’s land the content will be on both platforms and will be migrating over.”

“And so that’s why the Alex Jones interview is not there. That’s why some of the other interviews aren’t there. Because those are going to be the exclusive interviews that are left on YouTube where, in Joe’s words, they’ll probably get more views than if they were on Spotify.”

Jones also added that he asked Rogan point-blank if Spotify was censoring him and he said, “Absolutely not.” He said Rogan explained that episodes were being organized and migrated over, but that Jones and other guests will on be on the podcast in the near future. 

Peterson also later noted that her episode now appears on Spotify. It seems like a few others are as well, including episodes with Joey Diaz and Tommy Chong.

See what others are saying: (Entertainment Weekly) (Mic) (Digg


Plumber Finds 500 Envelopes Full of Cash and Checks Behind a Loose Toilet in Joel Osteen’s Megachurch



Many believe this load of money could be part of the $600,000 that was stolen from the church’s safe in 2014.

Plumber Finds Cash

You may have heard of the porcelain throne being made from gold, but what about loads of money being stashed behind the toilet? That’s exactly what one plumber said he found inside hundreds of envelopes hiding in the insulation of a restroom wall at Joel Osteen’s Houston megachurch.

During a Thursday appearance on a morning show for the local radio station 100.3 The Bull, the unnamed plumber said he made the discovery on Nov. 10.

“There was a loose toilet in the wall, and we removed the tile,” the man reportedly said during the broadcast. “We went to go remove the toilet, and I moved some insulation away and about 500 envelopes fell out of the wall, and I was like ‘Oh wow!’”

“I went ahead and contacted the maintenance supervisor that was there, and I turned it all in,” he added after noting that the envelopes were stuffed with cash and checks. 

Could This Be Missing Money From Seven Years Ago?

Why someone would hide stacks of cash in the restroom of a televangelist’s megachurch isn’t the only question people had regarding this story.

In 2014, $600,000 in cash and checks disappeared from the church’s safe. No arrests were ever made and the investigation remains open to this day, but many now are wondering if the plumber’s findings could be that money.

“Don’t you want to know what happened? I mean they stole the money, but they didn’t get it out of the wall.” The Bull morning host George Lindsey said. “Did they have an accident? You know what I mean? It’s like, why did they never go back? If it’s that money, why did they never go back?” 

No official determination as to whether this money is part of that $600,000 has been made yet. In fact, it’s currently unknown how much money was actually recovered from the envelopes; however, since The Bull’s broadcast, Osteen’s church has backed up the plumber’s account.

“Recently, while repair work was being done at Lakewood Church, an undisclosed amount of cash and checks were found. Lakewood immediately notified the Houston Police Department and is assisting them with their investigation,” a representative told KPRC.

In 2014, Crime Stoppers Houston issued a $25,000 reward for information leading to a suspect’s arrest. While that offer appears to still be active, it is unlikely the plumber will receive it since he only found the money, not information on who committed the crime. 

“He’s the one who found it,” Lindsey noted of the plumber during his broadcast. “If he never had been doing that work behind that toilet, they would have never known that money was there.”

See what others are saying: (NBC News) (CBS Dallas-Fort Worth) (KPRC)

Continue Reading


Federal Judge Blocks Texas Law Preventing Social Media Platforms From Removing Users Based on Their “Viewpoint”



The ruling is a preliminary injunction, meaning the law isn’t fully dead, but the outcome doesn’t look bright for its supporters. 

Judge Blocks Social Media Law

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked Texas from enacting a law that would have prevented social media platforms from banning users based on their “viewpoint.”

Gov. Greg Abbott signed the law on Sep. 9 for platforms with at least 50 million active monthly users. Had it not been blocked, the legislation would have gone into effect Thursday. 

The ruling — brought by U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman — is similar to a decision made this past June by a different federal judge in Florida, where another law attempting to block social media companies from censoring users was passed by the state. 

Both laws were largely viewed as Republican-led reactions to multiple social media bans against former President Donald Trump following the Jan. 6 insurrection. A number of Republicans have continually claimed that social media platforms have an anti-conservative bias, and many have taken that a step further by accusing those platforms of stifling free speech.

Wednesday’s block doesn’t signal a definitive end to the Texas law. Instead, Pitman’s order is a preliminary injunction — meaning, at the very least, that it’s on hold until the case against it is over. 

First Amendment Debate

In his decision, Pitman ruled that the First Amendment gives platforms a right to moderate content on their sites.

“This Court is convinced that social media platforms, or at least those covered by [House Bill] 20, curate both users and content to convey a message about the type of community the platform seeks to foster and, as such, exercise editorial discretion over their platform’s content,” he said. 

While adding that he found some of the aspects of the Texas law “prohibitively vague,” he also noted that the law itself — not the social media platforms — violated the First Amendment.

“The platforms have policies against content that express a viewpoint and disallowing them from applying their policies requires platforms to “alter the expressive content of their [message],” Pitman explained. 

See what others are saying: (Texas Tribune) (The Verge) (NBC News)

Continue Reading


New Federal Rules Allow Debt Collectors To DM People on Social Media



Among several limitations, collectors cannot message people publicly, must state upfront that they’re pursuing a debt, and must give people an opportunity to opt-out of receiving additional messages through social media.

Debt Collectors Can Now DM

If you’ve suddenly found yourself flooded with more DMs in the last day, it might not be because you’ve become more popular. Instead, it could be because a new federal rule that went into effect Tuesday now allows debt collectors to message people by email, text, and even through direct messages on social media.

Debt collectors will still be subject to several notable limitations.

For example, if they reach out to someone on social media, it has to be through a private message. It can’t be in a public comments section or anything viewable to anyone except the recipient.

Additionally, if they attempt to reach out by adding a recipient as a friend or contact, they must be clear from the start that they’re pursuing a debt. 

Finally, collectors must allow recipients to opt-out of receiving further messages from them on the social media platform they reach out on. 

Collectors Praise the Rule, Others Express Concern

The new rule, which was greenlit by former Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Kathy Kraninger, has largely been met with praise throughout the collection industry. Kraninger, a Trump-appointee who vacated her office during President Joe Biden’s transition, has argued that the rule is intended to “modernize the legal regime for debt collection.”

Essentially, she and debt collectors have contended that texts, email, and social media are now the preferred methods of communication for many people in America.

Many others, particularly those outside the collection industry, are less happy with the new rule. 

“If left unchecked, this expanded access to consumers could very well contribute to new ways to harass struggling consumers,” Michelle Singletary of The Washington Post said.

“I’ve followed this issue for years, and while many companies operate within the law, illegal operations can do a lot of damage to innocent consumers,” she added. “Debt collection isn’t wicked. But it can lead to embarrassing, unethical and illegal tactics.”

For example, Singletary noted that some companies try to collect debts even after they’re no longer legally collectible. 

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (Business Insider) (CBS News)

Continue Reading