Joe Rogan left shocked by 'sinister' Mark Zuckerberg brainwashing experiment that warped minds of 700k people
Joe Rogan was left stunned after discovering that Facebook conducted a secret experiment on thousands of people which allegedly drove some to attempt suicide.
Rebecca Lemov, a historian of science and expert on mind control at Harvard University, revealed on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast that the social media giant quietly altered the news feeds of nearly 700,000 users in 2012.
These changes either made the news feeds more positive or more negative, allowing Facebook to manipulate the emotions of their users to study the fallout in their behavior.
The Mark Zuckerberg-owned platform claimed they carried out the one-week experiment to 'make the content people see on Facebook as relevant and engaging as possible.'
However, the experiment was slammed by the public as brainwashing because it covertly manipulated users by curating their news feed content, showing them only emotionally charged stories, and potentially causing mental harm.
Lemov said that the experiment was similar to the type of brainwashing that takes place in cults, which focuses on changing the way people think by having them 'catch' the 'contagious' emotions of others.
'It's not that it changed my thoughts, it's that it changed my feelings about my thoughts,' Lemov explained.
Facebook never informed the 689,003 people who had their feeds altered that they were involved, and Lemov added at least one person claimed that they believed their negative news feed during the study period pushed them to attempt suicide.
Despite fierce public outrage once the experiment went public in 2014, the mind control expert noted that Facebook users unknowingly agree to be a part of these experiments when they sign up for the platform.
'Whenever you go on the platform, you agree to be tested or A-B testing,' revealed Lemov, the author of 'The Instability of Truth: Brainwashing, Mind Control and Hyper-Persuasion.'
'This is why there was an ethical debate when the experiment was published in 2014,' she added in the May 15 podcast.
The study was carried out by researchers from Cornell University and the University of California-San Francisco.
The experiment secretly changed the algorithm to prioritize either positive or negative posts for different groups, without users' knowledge or explicit consent.
Their goal was to see how emotions spread through social networks and understand whether the emotional tone of certain content influences the viewer's own posts and emotional states.
Simply put, scientists tried to see if they could make people happier or depressed by subjecting them to an altered and biased news feed designed to sway them in one direction or the other.
The study found that users exposed to more positive content did indeed post more positive updates, while those shown more negative content posted more negative updates.
However, Lemov revealed that one person wrote on the research group's Facebook page in 2014 that they were in a hospital emergency room threatening to commit suicide at the time of this secret experiment. Others shared similar experiences.
'Of course, they could never know and it can't be traced backwards,' the expert explained, saying that this person and anyone else had no way of finding out if they were manipulated by Facebook.
'Whenever people have power, unchecked power, and insane influence, particularly influence to manipulate people and influence over people's minds... You could get away with so much,' Rogan warned.
'No matter who you are, you're vulnerable, whether it's through society, whether it's through peer groups, whether it's through community, we're vulnerable. Everyone's vulnerable,' he added.
The public response to the study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, even triggered an investigation by government officials.
In the US, no direct legal action was taken as the experiment was deemed to fall within Facebook's terms of service at the time, which allowed data use for research purposes.
The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) - a nonprofit research group focused on protecting privacy and freedom of expression online - filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 2014.
They alleged that Facebook deceived users by misrepresenting its data practices and violated a 2012 FTC order on user consent.
The complaint argued that the unannounced study manipulated users' emotions using data in their news feeds, but the complaint never escalated into a full-blown lawsuit against Facebook.
The UK Information Commissioner's Office also looked into whether Facebook's actions violated data protection laws.
Despite claims that Facebook's secret project was unethical, the ICO did not impose any sanctions on the company for their controversial study.
The 2012 experiment was not the only case of mind control and manipulation involving unsuspecting people online.
Rogan also referenced research by Robert Epstein, who he interviewed in a September 2024 episode of his podcast, which suggested that internet search engine results can significantly sway undecided voters.
Epstein's research revealed that a substantial portion of online discourse may be driven by automated bots, shaping narratives for political or corporate agendas.
Rogan cited the 2016 presidential election, noting that if someone searched on Google for 'is Hillary Clinton a criminal?' the search engine would only produce results related to Donald Trump being a alleged criminal.
'You wouldn't find things on Hillary Clinton. You had to keep digging and digging and digging. If you wanted to find positive things on Hillary Clinton, you could find them quite easily,' Rogan explained.
Rogan claimed that there were few internet search browsers allow people to search for so-called 'controversial' topics.
According to the podcast host, popular browsers like Google are altering their search results in an attempt to censor what he called malinformation.
'Malinformation is information that is correct, but that would be ultimately harmful. They put vaccine side-effects under malinformation because it would cause vaccine hesitancy,' Rogan said.
In January 2025, Meta announced it would scrap its third-party fact-checking program, starting in the US, over continued concerns that their censoring campaign on Facebook was hampering free speech.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
21 minutes ago
- Reuters
Moderna falls on fears new CDC vaccine advisory panel could cloud RSV shot prospects
June 13 (Reuters) - Moderna's shares (MRNA.O), opens new tab fell 2.5% before the bell on Friday, on concerns whether a new CDC advisory panel would back the use of the company's respiratory syncytial virus vaccine in a broader age group. The RSV shot, mRESVIA, secured U.S. approval on Thursday for expanded use in at-risk adults aged 18 to 59 years, but needs the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's recommendation before it is made available for the age group. It is already approved for use in adults aged 60 or older. The biotech's stock extended its decline into the second session, following the appointment of the new panel late Wednesday. Some of the new appointees have openly expressed anti-vaccine views, including against the mRNA vaccine technology on which Moderna's shots are based. Earlier this week, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. fired all 17 members of the panel, known as the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), saying it would "re-establish public confidence in vaccine science" - a move health experts warn could undermine public confidence in available vaccines. The ACIP advises the CDC on who should get the shots after they are approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The panel meeting for Moderna's RSV shot, scheduled for later this month, will be the "first time for investors to see the refreshed ACIP in action and will be important for sentiment in the vaccine sector, which continues to decline in our view," said William Blair analyst Myles Minter. U.S.-listed shares of GSK (GSK.L), opens new tab and Pfizer (PFE.N), opens new tab fell marginally and those of smaller Novavax (NVAX.O), opens new tab were down 1.7% at $7.03 in premarket trade. The CDC currently recommends Moderna's vaccine for adults aged 75 and older, as well as for at-risk adults aged 60 to 74. In April, the ACIP recommended the use of approved RSV vaccines in at-risk adults aged 50 to 59. However, the CDC is yet to sign off on the recommendation.
Medical News Today
31 minutes ago
- Medical News Today
Do people consider T2DM an autoimmune condition?
No, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is not an autoimmune disease. The term autoimmune disease describes when the immune system attacks and damages healthy cells in the body by mistake. Although some research suggests that the immune system may play a role in the development of T2DM, most health experts classify it as a chronic metabolic disorder . This describes conditions that affect any aspect of metabolism. Conversely, unlike T2DM, type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is an autoimmune disease. Health experts consider T1DM an autoimmune condition because it occurs when the body's immune system mistakenly attacks and destroys the beta cells in the pancreas, which are responsible for producing insulin. T2DM happens when the body cannot use insulin effectively and the cells in the body eventually develop insulin resistance, or impaired insulin sensitivity. This causes insulin to be less effective. As a result, more insulin is necessary to enable cells to use glucose in the blood. Over time, this can cause the beta cells in the pancreas to wear out. Eventually, the pancreas is no longer able to produce enough insulin to overcome the cells' resistance. This leads to higher blood glucose levels, and ultimately T2DM. While researchers do not fully understand what causes problems with insulin production and resistance, risk factors for T2DM can include : having obesity being 35 or older a family history of T2DM or personal history of gestational diabetes not being physically active smoking having prediabetes being African American, American Indian, Asian American, Hispanic, Latino, or Pacific Islander
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Simple blood test could reveal your body's REAL age and how long you have left to live - would YOU take it?
It may sound like the premise of a science fiction film. But, believe it or not, US and French scientists claim to have discovered a game-changing test that could help predict lifespan. Intrinsic capacity (IC)—all the physical and mental capacities a person can draw on, including their ability to walk, think, see, hear and remember—has long been considered a good marker of healthy aging. But until now, measuring IC has been considered a costly and time-consuming assessment of physical health. Yet the researchers say a simple saliva or blood test could measure IC by monitoring DNA methylation patterns—chemical tags that regulate gene activity in the body—to estimate a person's biological age. In a 10-year-long study, tracking more than 1,000 adults aged between 20 and 102-years-old, they developed IC scores for each based on five age-related risk factors—cognition, movement, vision and hearing, vitality and mental well-being. They found those with high IC scores lived 5.5 years longer on average. People with the highest IC scores had better lung function, faster walking speed, stronger bones and were more likely to view themselves as healthy. Maria Branyas Morera, who was the oldest person in the world, celebrating her 117th birthday in March A low IC was also significantly associated with an increased risk of death from age-related diseases, such as cardiovascular disease and stroke. Professor Thomas Holland, from the RUSH institute for Healthy Aging, who was not involved in the study, said: 'A blood or saliva-based test for intrinsic capacity is a very promising tool in ageing science.' 'One of the most critical aspects is that this test can be done with a simple blood or saliva sample, making it accessible and noninvasive. He also told Medical News Today: 'It tells us not just how old you are, but how well your aging, which is much more meaningful to help inform which interventions should be implemented, if any, to help prevent future health problems. 'This test doesn't just give a snapshot of your current state, it may also offer a glimpse into your future health.' The researchers also looked at the relationship between diet and biological aging and found that those who ate oily fish such as salmon and mackerel, and limited their sugar intake, had higher IC scores. Writing in the journal Nature Aging, they said: 'We found that individuals with higher IC consumed more beer and dark meat, fish like mackerel, salmon, sardines, bluefish and swordfish, but fewer calcium supplements. 'Consuming sugar at the recommended level was also associated with a higher IC.' Dr Tunç Tiryaki, a board-certified plastic surgeon and founder of the London Regenerative Institute, who wasn't involved in the research, said: 'Oily fish are rich in long-chain omega-3 fatty acids, which have anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective properties. 'Conversely, excessive sugar intake is known to accelerate oxidative stress, insulin resistance and chronic inflammation, all of which impair IC. 'Staying within recommended sugar limits likely supports metabolic flexibility and reduces inflammatory burden, preserving cognitive and physical function.' Dr Tiryaki also recommended regular physical exercise, including aerobic activity and strength training exercises, to keep the body young. He also emphasized the importance of maintaining social connections and keeping the brain stimulated to ward-off age-related diseases.
