Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

Bret Weinstein

@bretweinstein

2 usernames

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

1,168subscribers

-5 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001688441468
TypeChannel
Usernames@bretweinstein @BretWeinsteinDH
Created21 November 2021measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held7
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/bretweinstein

Growth

1,1681,1731,170.56 August 2026 — 1,173 subscribers6 August 2026 — 1,173 subscribers7 August 2026 — 1,172 subscribers7 August 2026 — 1,171 subscribers7 August 2026 — 1,171 subscribers11 August 2026 — 1,169 subscribers12 August 2026 — 1,168 subscribers6 August 202612 August 2026
7 measurements spanning 6 days, net -5. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 1,167–1,174 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 20:441,168-1
11 Aug 2026, 07:351,169-2
7 Aug 2026, 23:321,171no change
7 Aug 2026, 19:481,171-1
7 Aug 2026, 00:061,172-1
6 Aug 2026, 12:021,173no change
6 Aug 2026, 10:521,173first reading

Engagement

23 posts held, back to 23 December 2025the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
20.2%
avg views ÷ 1,168 subscribers
Avg views / post
236
8 posts measured
Reaction rate
3.18%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
8
of 23 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 August 2026
Posts held23 (23 December 20256 August 2026)
Views total1,885
Reactions total60
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken7 Aug 2026, 23:32 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

What this channel posts

Video runtime
12h 03m
Average length
45m 11s

Measured directly from 16 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no mark.

Reaction mix

320 reactions across 23 posts, in 13 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 26.3% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
💯8426.3%
👍7523.4%
4915.3%
👏4815.0%
🔥195.94%
🙏113.44%
👎92.81%
🤔72.19%
🤣61.88%
😱51.56%
🤯41.25%
🤡20.625%
🤨10.313%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 23 of the 23 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 320reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 23 December 2025 to 6 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Recent posts

6 Aug 2026, 19:27 UTC101 views2 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

Children on the Front Lines? The 337th Evolutionary Lens with Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying On this, our 337th Evolutionary Lens livestream, we discuss how Western society is treating its children. First, the good news: the Department of Justice, working with AGs in Texas and Ohio, have effectively shuttered two major “gender care” clinics, and extracted promises to create clinics to support people in detransiti

1👍1

6 Aug 2026, 19:07 UTC103 views8 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

"I reject the idea of gender identity." Biologist, Dr. Heather Heying shared that this is one of her foundational beliefs on a recent episode of The Evolutionary Lens on DarkHorse. She goes on to explain, "the idea that you feel like a man or feel like a woman is a fabrication. You just are a man or a woman, or if you have not yet gone through puberty, a boy or a girl. And all boys who go through puberty become men

👏61💯1

6 Aug 2026, 19:06 UTC106 views1 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

A Yale law professor says the insane part out loud. HEYING: "Let me just say that last line again. This is from Yale law professor Samuel Moyn. 'Part of our goal as a society is trying to make sure that children aren't the hostages of their parents as much as we rely on parents to raise them.' He does have children." WEINSTEIN: "Oh, I do not feel good for these children." @BretWeinstein

😱1

30 Jul 2026, 20:17 UTC282 views11 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

Bret Weinstein explains that the best way to think about Fauci after the Senate Hearing is as a made man. "Thinking of him as a made man in a mafia, whose name we don't know makes a lot more sense of what you saw. What he was effectively doing was a flex. He was sitting there and saying I don't have to answer your question, because who the hell are you? Congress? What's that?" @BretWeinstein

👏8👍3

26 Jul 2026, 15:08 UTC316 views13 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

In a recent Locals Q&A, biologist Heather Heying was asked about her opinion on homeopathy. She shared that her thoughts on the subject have recently changed due to careful thinkers she respects. Bret Weinstein's opinions on homeopathy are also changing. Tomorrow's Inside Rail features a conversation with Leslie Manookian about the fight for informed consent and homeopathy being an expression of medical freedom. "

10👍1👏1🤨1

25 Jul 2026, 16:23 UTC299 views11 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

In the aftermath of their son's motorcycle accident, Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying make the difficult case that children must encounter real risk to become capable, courageous adults. @BretWeinstein

👍53🙏3

25 Jul 2026, 16:21 UTC278 views2 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

He's the Front Runner! The 335th Evolutionary Lens with Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying @BretWeinstein

👍2

19 Jul 2026, 21:35 UTC400 views12 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

Larry Sanger named and led Wikipedia in 2001, and he has now been permanently blocked from the site. Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying discuss how Wikipedia has become an ideological racket rather than an encyclopedia, but we need an encyclopedia. @BretWeinstein explains, "Wikipedia is a mess. It's a mess of multiple kinds, one of which would be expected. Obviously, an encyclopedia that is written in the way that

👍10🔥2

29 Jun 2026, 21:40 UTC510 views12 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

Fraud, Tyranny & the Legal Battle to Save America: Bobbie Anne Cox on DarkHorse Bret Weinstein speaks with attorney, Bobbie Anne Cox on the subject of election laws, voter fraud, and the political landscape in blue states. But first they honor the legacy of their friend, Warner Mendenhall, in discussing the Brooke Jackson case and fraud in Pfizer Trials. @BretWeinstein

👍82🔥2

12 Apr 2026, 20:34 UTC846 views6 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

Why Even Try? The 322nd Evolutionary Lens with Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying On this, our 322nd Evolutionary Lens livestream, we discuss the Cartesian crisis, whether going to the moon is valuable, and college in the age of AI. Before the ads, we discuss the nature of knowledge, and whether paying attention all the time, to all the things, can backfire and make a personal less capable of comprehension. Later: wh

3👍3

8 Apr 2026, 06:42 UTC728 views34 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

The President's threat against Iran is genocidal, even by the strictest definition. It may be bluster, but that does not change our obligation. To work, a threat must be credible, and we must act accordingly. We attacked Iran. Any order to escalate our attack with nuclear weapons would clearly be immoral, and must therefore be rejected by every person in the chain of command. Anyone who carried such an order forward

👏18👎9🤔43

2 Apr 2026, 15:29 UTC695 views13 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

It appears big changes are coming where MAHA meets Gov. The objective looks to be technocracy disguised as AI enabled health. Think Covid 2.0. And, as I have said, it won’t look like the Covid "pandemic." Goliath may be a big, dumb giant, but he learns from his mistakes.

🔥8🙏3😱2

Showing the 12 most recent of 23 posts we hold for @bretweinstein. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 550,185 of 1,160,990entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Mentions

Named by 3 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

Names

Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Bret Weinstein” (@bretweinstein), 1,168 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/bretweinstein.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.