I'm secretly Doctor Octopus.

Rosenhan is the guy who proved that Freud and Analysis don't work using a series of experiments involving pseudo-patients infiltrating mental hospitals. I wouldn't say read him, but read about him?

Yeah, but Frankl pulled the classic Freud move of projecting REALLY REALLY HARD onto everyone and legitimizing that through academia.

They're good movies. That's the central issue: On the one hand, he's a child rapist. On the other hand, we separate the art from the artist when it comes to other people who have done terrible things, but on the third hand they're mostly dead while he benefits financially from continued interest in his work. On the…

Profoundly traumatized people should never be put in positions of power over other people where there is little to no accountability~

On the other hand, his trauma-informed nonsense helped perpetuate nonproductive therapies that had more to do with kierkergaard than science for ages until Rosenhan definitively put analysis to bed in the seventies, which arguably did quite a lot of bad to a large number of people.

Yeah I think we're both kind of getting stroppy and pissy over something that it's not worth getting stroppy and pissy about. I'm sorry that I was a dick.

I'm sorry, but I just don't think that's true. I didn't listen all the way through, but what I did listen to involved a lot of hand-wringing about phone locations, different timelines, changing testimony, etc. I don't really buy that the podcast I listened to four or five episodes of had a sudden turn where it stopped…

I'm sorry for listening to what they presented, how they presented it, on an internationally syndicated radio show and on their website. In future I will listen to things exactly as they're presented inside your head.

Please don't disingenuously compare pointing out how a show is marketed and presented with a conspiracy theory.

First off, you're missing the Point:

Then why did they specifically tell people to approach it that way when hyping it on TAL? Why did they post handy cut-out-and-keep guides to Jay's changing testimony? Why did they continue to churn out what amounts to porn for the conspiracy set?

No, it's really not. You can discuss the facts on the program without posting them online in conspiracy theory style infographics. They're encouraging by presenting things a certain way.

The reason is that everyone's kinda waiting to see how this whole internet thing shakes out before drafting regulations, laws, and international treaties that are probably going to be in place for decades if not longer.

I dunno. I mean, I stopped pirating TV for the most part when I got Netflix. At the end of the day it's easier to go through the one-time task of setting up the streaming service than to sit through the whole boring process of chasing down torrents and waiting for them to download.

That's essentially saying you've got no responsibility for how you present your content because, hey, audiences gonna audience. Posting all the documentation on a website whose background is a pegboard and marketing the show as a whodunnit mystery is something that they actively did because they wanted people to…

I don't think they should have released them at all, because that really encourages the reddit conspiracy theorist brigade to treat it as a whodunnit mystery or an ARG to 'solve'.

Vichyssoise?

Her interactions with Rabia were pretty patronizing, and as for gratuity?

You do it without being gratuitous or patronizing. It's an issue of tone, presentation, and marketing. Serial, for instance, was always presented, marketed and delivered as a whodunnit where Sarah Koenig, the very special white lady, was the central character. That's really inappropriate.