I used to love Sam Harris, but he began to become a bit stale and repetitive to me which allowed me to branch out and see not only the vast array of other opinions regarding topics he indulged in, but also how ignorant he actually was to such perspectives.
The most obvious example of what I'm referring to can be seen in his extremely broad critique of "the left" which he essentially equates to the liberal outrage machine, but completely ignores the foundational tenets of leftist ideology and in doing so, a vast spectrum of more nuanced "left" opinions. Any critique of Sam's opinion's (a non-political example would be from Sean Carroll regarding his stance on "objective morality") he usually equates to unreasonable slander, without actually deeply considering what these critiques are in substance or giving any actual reasons as to why these opposing views are wrong. It's an easy methodology to perpetually be correct in your own mind, but it's fundamentally uninterested in truth.
Essentially Sam has become the victim of his own ego, which is especially ironic considering his actually decent understanding and preaching of the ego's illusory function.
A parallel to my broader view of Sam came from my reading of The Moral Landscape, which I initially loved. After taking a few philosophy classes however, it is almost too clear that Sam has not, as he effectively ignores 300 years of philosophical debate in favor of believing he has stumbled upon some revelation of viewing morality.