Science Vs Podcast Chooses Science Over Spotify In Its Joe Rogan Episode

No, I'm not trying to "cancel" Joe Rogan. And neither is the Science Vs podcast. No, instead, this article is about a podcast, its host, and its staff taking a principled stand against misinformation, science fiction dressed up as science, and conspiracy theories fed to listeners to juice up grievance, rage, hate, and ratings. 

Yes, folks, it's always about the money.

Last week, the Science Vs podcast, which is also a Spotify show like Rogan's, released an episode that debunks considerable misinformation floating throughout “Joe Rogan: The Malone Interview.”

 The Malone interview episode was the catalyst to 270 doctors signing a letter condemning Rogan and Malone for what they considered an "egregious warping of scientific data."

Hosted by Australian science journalist Wendy Zukerman, Science Vs uses scientific investigative techniques to separate fact from myth – sparks interest, controversy and insight. In a post-truth world, Zukerman and her team of scientific detectives take on incendiary topics in today’s zeitgeist, such as gun control, COVID, climate change, organic food, and now vaccines.

Science Vs has historically refused to take itself too seriously, but the podcast is deadly serious about facts, research, facts and conclusions. But it never seems to get too far ahead of its skis, making claims it cannot substantiate

And they do so tongue-in-cheek, but also with no fear of proclaiming “the data isn’t clear” or “we need more data for greater certainty.”

In the Science Vs episode, host Zukerman and her producer Rose Rimler don't try to refute Rogan's guest, avoid the low-hanging fruit of debunking every falsehood or misleading claim in the "Malone" episode. Instead, Zukerman and Rimler focused on the most appalling attempts at deception, such as misleading claims of fertility issues from a COVID vaccine. In addition, Science Vs does their best "paying attention to the man behind the curtain," by exposing how Malone makes a misleading case against vaccines by cherry-picking data that supports his theory and ignoring all data that doesn't fit his narrative.  

Science Vs has worked overtime since March 2020  to counteract COVID misinformation with its typical rigor. 

When Spotify sided with Rogan to protect its $100 million investment,, Science Vs executive producer/host, Wendy Zukerman, and editor, Blythe Terrell, issued a statement saying that the podcast will no longer be making new episodes, “except those intended to counteract misinformation being spread on Spotify,” until the company implements “stronger methods” to prevent the spread of misinformation on the platform.

When a witness is sworn in a court of law, they swear to "tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."

Truth is, by its very definition, based on objective facts that have been stress-tested for accuracy. Can truth change? Sure. The world is not flat, and the earth is not the center of our solar system. And Lance Armstrong is not a good guy. But truth should not be tethered to your political beliefs either. Nor should it be a toy to be played with for the sake of ratings or to juice ad sales.

I've listened to Science Vs for years, and I've found that the podcast adheres to a science-based approach and ignore ideological rhetoric when dispensing facts to its audience. And true to its mission, Science Vs often says "we don't know for sure" or "the data is muddled."

What Science Vs is battling is what Bill Moyers once observed is "the mass production of doubt to compete against fact. It's a quiet revolution." 

Moyers continued that today, "the delusional is no longer the marginal."

Kudos to Science Vs for its refusal to accept distortion, deception, and deceit and support a fact-based world where objectivity still matters in this cauldron of "alternative facts."