“After listening to several episodes, I’ve noticed Sam seems to speak way more than his guests. He will ramble on in a monologue making several of his own points, and then when finished, will only give his guests the time to address 1-2 (of his 3-5) points before changing the topic. What is the point of having anyone else on?
I think he has some interesting points but does not allow much space for any counter arguments- only those which further boost his. This is especially true as it relates to systemic racism in the US, which, as a cis-white-male, he (for some reason 🤷🏻♀️) doesn’t think exists... and selectively cites studies for which there is 2-3x the same amount of studies proving the contrary. Has yet to allow a guest on who contradicts him on his points, after spending a 2 hour episode monologuing (without any guests) around this.
I cannot respect/appreciate an “expert” who only hosts guests who 100% support his opinions (when allowed to speak) thus any cognitive bias he unknowingly has. Maybe he’s let pride get in the way of maximizing his (and his audience’s) intellectual potential.”
E5trella333 via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
09/05/20