‘Unpolished' Rogan's style wins the popular vote
Jordan Baker's article on Joe Rogan started off strong and nuanced, but ultimately fell short in a few areas (' Joe Rogan is unpolished. So why do men idolise him? ' June 15). At least three times Baker calls Joe Rogan a vaccine sceptic, yet does not include any evidence for this (such as a quote) other than just saying he is mates with RFK Jr. I'm a long-time listener of Joe Rogan and I thought this was a bit unfair. Baker also claims that Rogan declined an interview with Kamala Harris, yet the only evidence relating to this actually points to the opposite. Rogan has said he reached out to Harris, as well as Tim Walz, JD Vance and Donald Trump. I consider myself very left-wing, yet appreciate Rogan's generous and accommodating approach to conservatives and people who don't fit into mainstream politics, media and science. What journalists like Baker fail to consider is that to get three hours of unfiltered commentary from these people, you can't hammer them with questions Laura Tingle-style. I believe if a podcast is good enough for Bono and Bernie Sanders to appear on, then it's good enough for me to listen to.
Wesley Thomas, Lilyfield
Motley mobs
Parnell Palme McGuinness is right, of course, about the loathsomeness of online mobs, and some of the treatment she received after appearing on the ABC's Q+A is truly disgusting (' I loved confronting the lefties on Q+A ', June 15), but these extremists aren't the only online group guilty of 'lazy thinking'. If you've ever been on the sewer that is X, formerly Twitter, and engaged with those challenging the Australian election result, the provision of social welfare, the plight of Ukraine, the championing of diversity in all its forms, the human rights of the LGBTQIA+ community and refugees, or the benefits of sunscreen (yes, I kid you not) and the efficacy of vaccines, you'd know what I mean. Idiots, zealots and trolls who subscribe to 'maxi-hatreds' come in all stripes, from far left to far right.
Kerrie Wehbe, Blacktown
Palme McGuinness suggests that the ABC's Q+A audiences didn't reflect the spectrum of community opinion as evenly as they were purported to. She seems not to have considered that they may have been representative of public opinion. Perhaps those representatives of social conservatism, to whom she refers as feeling intimidated and outnumbered when they go on such discussion panels, should consider why their contributions often meet such resistance from an audience that may, in fact, represent a fair balance of Australian social opinion.
Alynn Pratt, Grenfell
Parnell, since you are at the extreme right of opinions, those with views to the left of you aren't the 'left-wing mob', rather they are in the sensible centre.
Peter Kamenyitzky, Castle Hill
Young at heart
The joy and exuberance exhibited in Sam Mooy's photo is simply wonderful (' Want to be bright? Talk to a 90-year-old ', June 15). The regular experience of the youthful meeting of young and old minds raises us all up as a community. Our public schools and our aged care facilities should all be commended for their deep links. It is a very special program and should be widened where possible around the state.
Janice Creenaune, Austinmer
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
41 minutes ago
- The Age
Israel-Iran conflict: Ten maps tracking key nuclear sites, targets and US military bases
Israel struck the Natanz nuclear facility, Iran's main uranium enrichment site, on Friday during the first wave of attacks. Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, told the BBC on Monday the centrifuges underground in Natanz were 'severely damaged if not destroyed altogether.' Iranian state television reported on June 20 that Israel had attacked the unfinished Arak heavy-water reactor, with the IAEA confirming the reactor had been hit and that it had not contained any nuclear material. Iran's fallback site, Fordow, remains a stronghold, and likely will remain unless the US joins the conflict in earnest. Despite Israel's repeated airstrikes on the facility, only the US has the 'bunker buster' bombs, and the planes to transport the bombs, that could damage the subterranean facility. By June 20, about 3200 Australians in Iran and Israel had registered with the Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade for support, Foreign Minister Penny Wong said in a press conference. The Australian embassy in Tehran is closed, Wong confirmed on June 20, with staff leaving Iran by road. Australian Defence Force personnel were also deployed to assist with evacuations, not for combat, Wong emphasised. 'We urge Australians who are able to leave Iran to do so now,' Wong said. Where has Iran struck in Israel? In response to Israel's attacks on Friday, Iran launched Operation True Promise III, firing missiles and drones on targets including the Kirya compound, one of the most sensitive and heavily guarded sites in Israel. On June 13, it was reported at least one Iranian missile had struck near the skyscraper Marganit Tower, a major communications hub inside the compound. Loading Established in Tel Aviv in 1948, the Kirya is Israel's central military headquarters. It's often described as Israel's equivalent to the United States' Pentagon, serving as a symbol of national security as much as it functions as the hub of the Israel Defence Force's operations. By Wednesday morning, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps released a statement claiming it had 'gained complete control over the skies of the occupied territories' after launching two missile barrages at Israel overnight. According to live broadcasts, however, Israel's Iron Dome was still intercepting missiles. On June 19, southern Israel's main hospital, Soroka Medical Centre, was hit by an Iranian missile, leaving several wounded and causing extensive damage, according to a spokesperson for Israel's Foreign Ministry. Iran's Revolutionary Guard, meanwhile, said after the strike that the ballistic missile was supposed to hit the nearby Israeli military and intelligence quarters. Where are Iran's nuclear facilities? South of Tehran lies the Natanz Nuclear Facility, a complex at the heart of Iran's enrichment program housing several buidings including: the underground Fuel Enrichment Plant and above-ground Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant. The Fordow enrichment facility is also south of Tehran, and is notably underground, making it harder to destroy. Loading Further south, on the outskirts of Isfahan, Iran's second-largest city, is a large nuclear technology centre that includes the Fuel Plate Fabrication Plant and uranium conversion and storage facilities. On the Gulf Coast is the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, which is Iran's only operating nuclear power plant and uses Russian fuel that Russia takes back once it is spent. Further north, in addition to Tehran's nuclear research reactor, is the partially built heavy-water research reactor in Khondab, formerly known as Arak, which Iran previously informed the IAEA it planned to start operating in 2026. Why is Iran's Fordow nuclear base a target? Dug deep into a mountain near Qom is the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, which is one of Iran's most heavily fortified nuclear sites, built in secrecy and designed for survivability. Loading It was exposed through Western intelligence in 2009, and its capacity to enrich uranium levels close to weapons-grade is what alarms the superpowers and makes it critical to Iran's nuclear program. In 2023, according to the IAEA, uranium enriched to a purity of 83.7 per cent was found at Fordow. Nuclear weapons need an enrichment level of 90 per cent. The fact that Fordow was designed as a fallback facility should other nuclear sites be compromised makes it a key stronghold for Iran, and a prime target for Israel – but it's understood Israel would be hard-pressed to destroy it without help from the US. Why does Israel need the United States' assistance to target Fordow? Fordow's underground nuclear facilities are understood to be 80 to 90 metres beneath the mountain's surface. It's impenetrable, even if Israel used the most advanced 'bunker buster' bombs in its arsenal for targeted aerial strikes. The 13,608-kilogram GBU-57A/B MOP (Massive Ordnance Penetrator) is thought to be the only 'bunker buster' bomb that could reach the core buried below Fordow's surface, though that would still be likely to require multiple strikes. Loading Capable of burrowing through 60 metres of steel and rock before detonating, it was developed by the US and is its largest non-nuclear bomb. Israel has requested it from the US, and the request has been denied multiple times. Only a B2 Stealth Bomber, 20 of which are in the US Air Force's active fleet, could carry the bomb due to its sheer size. How large is the United States' military presence in the Middle East? Iran has said it would target American military bases in the Middle East should Trump enter the conflict on Israel's side. The US has a significant military presence in the Middle East. The Council on Foreign Relations says there is a broad network of sites spanning at least 19 locations, eight of which are permanent. The permanent sites are understood to be in Israel, Syria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Since October 7, 2023, several attacks purportedly by Iran-backed forces have occurred. Notably, in January 2024, three American soldiers were killed after a drone hit the Tower 22 military base in Jordan, near the Syrian border.
Sydney Morning Herald
5 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
‘Unpolished' Rogan's style wins the popular vote
Jordan Baker's article on Joe Rogan started off strong and nuanced, but ultimately fell short in a few areas (' Joe Rogan is unpolished. So why do men idolise him? ' June 15). At least three times Baker calls Joe Rogan a vaccine sceptic, yet does not include any evidence for this (such as a quote) other than just saying he is mates with RFK Jr. I'm a long-time listener of Joe Rogan and I thought this was a bit unfair. Baker also claims that Rogan declined an interview with Kamala Harris, yet the only evidence relating to this actually points to the opposite. Rogan has said he reached out to Harris, as well as Tim Walz, JD Vance and Donald Trump. I consider myself very left-wing, yet appreciate Rogan's generous and accommodating approach to conservatives and people who don't fit into mainstream politics, media and science. What journalists like Baker fail to consider is that to get three hours of unfiltered commentary from these people, you can't hammer them with questions Laura Tingle-style. I believe if a podcast is good enough for Bono and Bernie Sanders to appear on, then it's good enough for me to listen to. Wesley Thomas, Lilyfield Motley mobs Parnell Palme McGuinness is right, of course, about the loathsomeness of online mobs, and some of the treatment she received after appearing on the ABC's Q+A is truly disgusting (' I loved confronting the lefties on Q+A ', June 15), but these extremists aren't the only online group guilty of 'lazy thinking'. If you've ever been on the sewer that is X, formerly Twitter, and engaged with those challenging the Australian election result, the provision of social welfare, the plight of Ukraine, the championing of diversity in all its forms, the human rights of the LGBTQIA+ community and refugees, or the benefits of sunscreen (yes, I kid you not) and the efficacy of vaccines, you'd know what I mean. Idiots, zealots and trolls who subscribe to 'maxi-hatreds' come in all stripes, from far left to far right. Kerrie Wehbe, Blacktown Palme McGuinness suggests that the ABC's Q+A audiences didn't reflect the spectrum of community opinion as evenly as they were purported to. She seems not to have considered that they may have been representative of public opinion. Perhaps those representatives of social conservatism, to whom she refers as feeling intimidated and outnumbered when they go on such discussion panels, should consider why their contributions often meet such resistance from an audience that may, in fact, represent a fair balance of Australian social opinion. Alynn Pratt, Grenfell Parnell, since you are at the extreme right of opinions, those with views to the left of you aren't the 'left-wing mob', rather they are in the sensible centre. Peter Kamenyitzky, Castle Hill Young at heart The joy and exuberance exhibited in Sam Mooy's photo is simply wonderful (' Want to be bright? Talk to a 90-year-old ', June 15). The regular experience of the youthful meeting of young and old minds raises us all up as a community. Our public schools and our aged care facilities should all be commended for their deep links. It is a very special program and should be widened where possible around the state. Janice Creenaune, Austinmer
7NEWS
9 hours ago
- 7NEWS
Social media ban for children is ‘destined to fail' unless parents address their own smart phone addiction, pyschologist warns
Australia is just six months away from bringing in a world-leading law to ban children under 16 from social media but experts say more needs to be done before it comes into effect. Psychologist Danielle Einstein, who briefed the draft legislation for the ban, was on Weekend Sunrise on Saturday to address how it could work. Previously Einstein warned the ban would 'fail miserably' unless the federal government tackles screen addiction first. 'We need a few different things. First of all, we need doctors and psychologists asking patients when they come in with mental health issues about their tech use,' she told Weekend Sunrise. 'It should just be part of normal conversation — 'let's have a look, how many hours were you on here?' 'It's a part of the way we are trying to handle ourselves, and if someone has anxiety and depression, and you miss it because it's not seen as alright to ask about it and the doctors are embarrassed or if the patient makes it seem as if it's not OK (for asking).' Einstein said she didn't mean doctors had to go into extreme detail of how a person uses social media and technology but said conversations around tech use needed to be a part of a 'digital health check' in the same way doctors use a suicide screening. She also said a big public health campaign would be needed to 'expose the addictive' nature of social media and the corresponding health effects it may have on Australians. 'Both students and parents may realise that this isn't actually healthy for them,' Einstein said. For parents wondering what to do now, before the ban is imposed, Einstein encouraged adults to lead by example and cut back on their own technology use. 'The most important thing a parent can do is model,' she said. 'Parents need to be aware of what we do when we walk into the house (or when) at the dinner table: 'Do I have a phone that's near me?'' Einstein said using phones during arguments between parents to show the other person they were wrong had also become common practice but this could be easily stopped if phones are put out of sight. Despite the potential difficulties with executing the ban, Einstein said the federal government's decision to prevent harm to young Australian's should be looked at as a 'tremendous success' as other countries look to follow our example. 'We are leading the world, and we should be very proud of that,' Einstein said. 'Around the world, we've seen people wake up and start to question tech use. 'In Spain, there are paediatric guidelines coming out to show children from zero to six shouldn't have technology, aside for supervised use.' The social media ban for children under 16 years old is expected to come into effect in December 2025. The ban was first announced by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese last year, who said he was 'calling time on it' due to a number of tragic deaths relating to bullying on social media. But there is yet no guarantee technologies aimed at blocking young kids from social media will always work, according to early trial results. While the early findings of a federal government-commissioned trial found age assurance technologies are available, there's no silver bullet. 'Age assurance can be done in Australia and can be private, robust and effective,' the report found. 'We found a plethora of approaches that fit use cases in different ways. 'But we did not find a single ubiquitous solution that would suit all use cases, nor did we find solutions that were guaranteed to be effective in all deployments.' Under the social media ban, platforms will have to take reasonable steps to prevent under-16s from creating new accounts and could face millions in fines for systemic breaches of the new rules. Cabinet minister Murray Watt maintained the need for restrictions around social media. 'The Australian people believe that we do need to see some restrictions around social media use when it comes to young people,' he told ABC News on Friday. 'Unfortunately, it has become an insidious force, both for young people and more widely.' Australia's ban is world-leading and, in the aftermath of the November passage of federal laws, other nations indicated a desire to emulate the measure. However, the legislation does not indicate how exactly the ban will be executed. The report found parental control and consent systems could be effective when first introduced. But there is 'limited evidence' that they would be effective as children grow up or allow kids the right to participate in the breadth of digital experiences. Even after the coalition helped secure an amendment to ensure Australians wouldn't have to provide any form of government identification to verify their age, the trial found there was a risk of privacy breaches. Some age assurance service providers had over-anticipated the needs of regulators and built tools that led to an 'unnecessary and disproportionate collection and retention of data'. Opposition communications spokeswoman Melissa McIntosh has urged Labor to confirm what technology or verification tools will be used to protect kids online. 'No more young lives can be lost or families destroyed because of the toxicity of social media,' she said in a statement. The Age Assurance Technology Trial's final report is expected to be published later in 2025.
