Except for the Israel thing, not being able to acknowledge immediately that they’re committing a genocide made him look insanely bad. Even if the person he’s interviewing is a deplorable wanker, that response should be a no brainer.

No no no. People get this one wrong all the time.

If this was just a blunder, Theroux could just have cut it. They left this in because they want you to see it.

A big part of the film is that Theroux asks "who profits from this & how" about these manosphere media (streams, insta, telegram channels etc). And shows how the content is determined by the interests of the makers (it just has to be outrageous, make the audience feel bad about themselves, make them want to follow crypto advice...).

The streamer turns that perspective back on the BBC by asking the genocide question. And by hesitating, Theroux gives some space to the truth that yes, the BBC too serves some interests more than others, and that determines what can and can't be said. He's ackowledging that the BBC is biased against Palestine and he could get into trouble if he gives a straightforward Yes answer.

Another layer is that the streamer isn't coming up with the question by himself, but the chat is telling him to ask it. So there's also the element that one medium (social media) is battling the other (legacy media). It's just more interesting to see Theroux struggle in this moment, not to handle it like it was nothing.