Apologies if you’ve already read this in my response to a different comment on here, but I feel like the best reply I can give you is similar to the one I just gave to Craig below.

I’m of the belief that platforming a controversial figure does not qualify as “funneling guys down” any rabbit holes. In my mind, that’s not much different than accusing a library of acting as a gateway to religion by selling copies of the Bible or Quran. Exploring an idea, whether by reading about it in a book or asking someone about it in an interview, is not necessarily the same as promoting that idea or pushing your audience towards that idea, in my opinion. To lump those all together in the same basket strikes me as intuitively inaccurate.

Now if Rogan was openly promoting alt-right philosophy, I would certainly feel differently. And if he was routinely gentler with his right-wing guests than his left-wing guests, that would also make me feel differently.

But he doesn’t do either of those things. He just talks to people, gets their perspectives on whatever topics he wants to discuss, and then moves on. Does that constitute acting as a “gateway”? I don’t think so. From what I’ve seen, the alt-righters who count themselves as his fans were alt-righters first, Rogan fans second. And even then, many of those “fans” only behave like fans when they happen to like the day’s guest. I think that says something about just how little influence he actually has over that particular crowd.