The Joe Rogan Podcast Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

x Tame Impala

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 24, 2011
27,427
11,773
I do. Rogan STILL gets flak for being the host of Fear Factor and a UFC commentator so some people don’t take him seriously.

I think he’s a great interviewer and his format of giving someone 2-3 hours to talk about something (especially important issues) is way better than the 7 minute snippets people get on television.

I just listened to the one with the sleep expert, Matthew Walker, and it was great.

 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Stylizer1

SENSimillanaire
Jun 12, 2009
19,276
3,689
Ottabot City
I do. Rogan STILL gets flak for being the host of Fear Factor and a UFC commentator so some people don’t take him seriously.

I think he’s a great interviewer and his format of giving someone 2-3 hours to talk about something (especially important issues) is way better than the 7 minute snippets people get on television.

I just listened to the one with the sleep expert, Matthew Walker, and it was great.


That was an excellent interview. I learned a lot.



Jocko Willink is the godfather of Bro's but they have an excellent conversation about the protests last month.


There are just too many that are really good. Since last summer he has added 3 million subs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: x Tame Impala

Roo Returns

Skjeikspeare No More
Mar 4, 2010
9,255
4,783
Westchester, NY
I'll listen depending on the guest. Last one I heard was parts of the Bob Saget.

He's essentially the new Howard Stern.

He has a lot of different guests on and its good. Some people consider him a bro but whatever.
 

Spring in Fialta

A malign star kept him
Apr 1, 2007
25,085
14,267
Montreal, QC
I don't get why people are negative towards him. He has such a wide cast of guests. I love when he has scientists on and they are able to breakdown really complex topics in easy to understand pieces, guys like Brian Cox, Sean Carroll, etc.

Eh...I think he gets a lot of somewhat undeserved flak as well but bringing people like Gavin McInness on and letting them spout their blatantly false pseudo-political science is bullshit that is deserving of scorn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkusNaslund19

member 51464

Guest
I do. Rogan STILL gets flak for being the host of Fear Factor and a UFC commentator so some people don’t take him seriously.

I think he’s a great interviewer and his format of giving someone 2-3 hours to talk about something (especially important issues) is way better than the 7 minute snippets people get on television.

I just listened to the one with the sleep expert, Matthew Walker, and it was great.


I don't think many people give him flak for hosting Fear Factor or being a UFC commentator. If anything, I see haters preferring he only stick to commentating, haha.

Amerika also hits it on the head. If you have a massive platform, you do have a moral obligation to be thoughtful about your approach to it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkusNaslund19

bleedblue1223

Registered User
Jan 21, 2011
51,758
14,662
Eh...I think he gets a lot of somewhat undeserved flak as well but bringing people like Gavin McInness on and letting them spout their blatantly false pseudo-political science is bullshit that is deserving of scorn.
He has people from all sides of the political spectrum, and he pushes back on plenty of what he views as bad ideas. People act like he's on the right or a gateway to the alt-right, but he's pretty clearly more on the left side of things. He's one of the main reasons Candace Owens got exposed and he had some long battles with Shapiro and Crowder. He just doesn't view things in absolutes like many in the political arena do.
 
Last edited:

Spring in Fialta

A malign star kept him
Apr 1, 2007
25,085
14,267
Montreal, QC
He has people from all sides of the political spectrum, and he pushes back on plenty of what views as bad ideas. People act like he's on the right or a gateway to the alt-right, but he's pretty clearly more on the left side of things. He's one of the main reasons Candace Owens got exposed and he had some long battles with Shapiro and Crowder. He just doesn't view things in absolutes like many in the political arena do.

Doesn't matter. Giving a large platform to McInness goes beyond giving a voice to all sides of the political spectrum. This is not having a run-of-the-mill Republican stooge on the show. I don't care where Rogan leans politically. He should vet his guests to make sure they at least have some credibility. If he can't do that, he deserves to be criticized for it. 'All sides are valid' is not always an honorable position and posturing like it is (not saying that this is what you're currently doing) is often a sign of vapidness and stupidity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkusNaslund19

ORRFForever

Registered User
Oct 29, 2018
17,677
9,219
Very good interviewer with a foul mouth - which I think is unnecessary.

He`s not as smart as he thinks he is - but, then again, no one is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Perennial

bleedblue1223

Registered User
Jan 21, 2011
51,758
14,662
Very good interviewer with a foul mouth - which I think is unnecessary.

He`s not as smart as he thinks he is - but, then again, no one is.
In his defense, he calls himself a moron almost every podcast and directs people to others.
 

ORRFForever

Registered User
Oct 29, 2018
17,677
9,219
In his defense, he calls himself a moron almost every podcast and directs people to others.
I'm just not sure why people can't interview/make conversation without swearing. It's just so unnecessary. And they do it so often - an "F-Bomb" every 2 minutes. I find it off putting.

Here is the late Harold Bloom being interviewed - he speaks beautifully. Let's count how often he swears...

 
Last edited:

x Tame Impala

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 24, 2011
27,427
11,773
Doesn't matter. Giving a large platform to McInness goes beyond giving a voice to all sides of the political spectrum. This is not having a run-of-the-mill Republican stooge on the show. I don't care where Rogan leans politically. He should vet his guests to make sure they at least have some credibility. If he can't do that, he deserves to be criticized for it. 'All sides are valid' is not always an honorable position and posturing like it is (not saying that this is what you're currently doing) is often a sign of vapidness and stupidity.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Stylizer1

Blender

Registered User
Dec 2, 2009
51,305
45,253
I don't mind it when he has a good guest on, but overall he's willing to platform any crackpot that comes around and doesn't do a very good job of pushing back on the nonsense they spew, which legitimizes them.
 

x Tame Impala

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 24, 2011
27,427
11,773
Amerika also hits it on the head. If you have a massive platform, you do have a moral obligation to be thoughtful about your approach to it.

Which he does. It seems like he’s learned that and has gotten much better with it. Regardless, he’s done 1500 of these things so I don’t see how the very occasional bad guest tarnishes his reputation.

The overwhelming majority of people I’ve come across either in real life or on the Internet don’t like him simply because they’re more left-leaning on the political spectrum. They look at Rogan and see a guy who hunts, likes guns, used to be a fighter, commentates on UFC, and is a shaved-head white guy who has occasional conservative guests on his show or voices a few conservative opinions from time to time.

It is almost entirely political which is a shame because not only the quality and variety of guests this guy gets, but the format he offers them to speak and be heard is phenomenal. I learned more about the Democratic presidential candidates this past year from listening to his podcasts than I have in the decade plus I’ve been able to vote.

Seriously, if having a shitty guest on ruins your whole opinion of a podcast then you’ve made up your mind before you’ve even given it a chance and this is just the excuse you need to justify your close mindedness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stylizer1

ORRFForever

Registered User
Oct 29, 2018
17,677
9,219
I don't mind it when he has a good guest on, but overall he's willing to platform any crackpot that comes around and doesn't do a very good job of pushing back on the nonsense they spew, which legitimizes them.
The more popular he becomes, the better guests he will get. I've noticed an uptick in the quality of his guests.

He once said he approaches his interviews like he's having dinner with a friend - it works for him.

As for "crackpots" : I believe in letting a guest speak - even if the opinions are "off". Pushing back is always good but I believe the guest should be able to speak his/her mind.
 
Last edited:

member 51464

Guest
Which he does. It seems like he’s learned that and has gotten much better with it. Regardless, he’s done 1500 of these things so I don’t see how the very occasional bad guest tarnishes his reputation.

The overwhelming majority of people I’ve come across either in real life or on the Internet don’t like him simply because they’re more left-leaning on the political spectrum. They look at Rogan and see a guy who hunts, likes guns, used to be a fighter, commentates on UFC, and is a shaved-head white guy who has occasional conservative guests on his show or voices a few conservative opinions from time to time.

It is almost entirely political which is a shame because not only the quality and variety of guests this guy gets, but the format he offers them to speak and be heard is phenomenal. I learned more about the Democratic presidential candidates this past year from listening to his podcasts than I have in the decade plus I’ve been able to vote.

Seriously, if having a shitty guest on ruins your whole opinion of a podcast then you’ve made up your mind before you’ve even given it a chance and this is just the excuse you need to justify your close mindedness.
This is kind of a hilariously defensive reply to what I said. I have listened to dozens of Joe Rogan podcasts, and still do on occasion. However, I am sure Joe would agree he is not a news service. It is entertainment. Nobody has to justify choosing to give their free time to another entertainment outlet. That is not close mindedness.

You seem to build up a straw man to attack that is a bit silly. Okay, so of all the people you meet who don't like him, they have various reasons that may or may not have validity. So what? Nobody has to justify not listening to Joe Rogan. If someone decides they don't want to because of any of those reasons (guns, UFC commentating, whatever), no matter how silly, then who cares? Nobody has to justify not listening.

Frankly, and I don't mean this in a rude way, your post just reads like a fanboy who can't accept the idea that other people don't share the same interests. He has one of the most popular podcasts on Earth and is in zero danger of being canceled or any other such thing. Nobody is obligated to be a fan or regular listener. You should not take it so personally for others to not hold him or his work in as high esteem as you do.

Finally, it is entirely valid for the quality of guests and his abilities, or lack thereof, to challenge dangerous ideas or be a quality interviewer to impact my view of the podcast. Otherwise your preferred setup would be something like, "Joe Rogan's podcast is great and deserves no criticism for anything because I enjoy it." If you think the good outweighs the bad, then carry on watching/listening regularly. But don't expect everyone else to do the same.
 

Spring in Fialta

A malign star kept him
Apr 1, 2007
25,085
14,267
Montreal, QC


I don't get this. At best, he's proving my point about him not vetting his guests well enough considering he referred to Gavin McInness' time at Vice which was uh...about 8-9 years before he had him on his show, then not appearing familiar with his other crap. That idiotic woman was even worse. 'Don't you want to hear the other side?!'

No, I don't. I'm not interested in validating the 'side' of a notorious racist and hate mongerer whose attempts at discussing his views through a scientific lens are comically painful. All things aren't equal and certainly not all views. It's dismissive towards people (including experts or academics) who actually put in the work. Look, I'm sure Joe Rogan is a nice enough guy and that he'd be enjoyable to have a beer with. I don't think he's a bigot or that he means badly. I think that, if I'm being generous, he can be lazy about his approach.
 
Last edited:

DaBadGuy316

Registered User
May 26, 2007
851
328
VanCity
Love the JRE. He doesn't pretend to be anything other than what he is. Been introduced to a lot of different people and subjects. Entertaining and informative. The fight companion shows are great also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stylizer1

Blender

Registered User
Dec 2, 2009
51,305
45,253
The more popular he becomes, the better guests he will get. I've noticed an uptick in the quality of his guests.

He once said he approaches his interviews like he's having dinner with a friend - it works for him.

As for "crackpots" : I believe in letting a guest speak - even if the opinions are "off". Pushing back is always good but I believe the guest should be able to speak his/her mind.
I don't believe in giving crackpots a platform, especially on irresponsible or dangerous topics that erode the value and trust of expertise in our society. For example, he's had Graham Hancock on the show multiple times and that guy is a pseudoarchaeologist with absolutely zero credibility in the fields he writes about, and is completely at odds with the actual experts in the field of study. Joe Rogan lets him drone on endlessly with little push back to the fantastical things he says, and even when he had him on with Michael Shermer to oppose him Joe Rogan spent more time arguing with Shermer while Hancock Gish Galloped all over the conversation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: member 51464

ORRFForever

Registered User
Oct 29, 2018
17,677
9,219
I don't believe in giving crackpots a platform, especially on irresponsible or dangerous topics that erode the value and trust of expertise in our society. For example, he's had Graham Hancock on the show multiple times and that guy is a pseudoarchaeologist with absolutely zero credibility in the fields he writes about, and is completely at odds with the actual experts in the field of study. Joe Rogan lets him drone on endlessly with little push back to the fantastical things he says, and even when he had him on with Michael Shermer to oppose him Joe Rogan spent more time arguing with Shermer while Hancock Gish Galloped all over the conversation.
If the person is a crackpot, don't have them on. If a person is worth having on, then let them speak.

When you have a bunch of guest who all think the same way, you end up with a very boring discussion.

That is one of the issues I have with shows like Real Time With Bill Maher. On the rare occasion Bill has a conservative guest, the "con" gets yelled at by Bill and the other left leaning guests - that is why so few conservatives will go on his show.
 
Last edited:

montreal

Go Habs Go
Mar 21, 2002
57,329
39,838
www.youtube.com
I do. Rogan STILL gets flak for being the host of Fear Factor and a UFC commentator so some people don’t take him seriously.

I think he’s a great interviewer and his format of giving someone 2-3 hours to talk about something (especially important issues) is way better than the 7 minute snippets people get on television.

I just listened to the one with the sleep expert, Matthew Walker, and it was great.



That was really interesting, I believe that was the first podcast of any kind I ever saw but I'm already looking at others that would be of interest. I see Neil Degrass Tyson has been on a few so looks like I will be watching a few of these at least as I'm a big fan of his.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->