Stylizer1
SENSimillanaire
He has had so many interviews that are great and some not so much. Most deserve to be discussed.
Does anybody listen?
Does anybody listen?
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 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.
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.
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.
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.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 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.
In his defense, he calls himself a moron almost every podcast and directs people to others.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.
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.In his defense, he calls himself a moron almost every podcast and directs people to others.
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.
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.
The more popular he becomes, the better guests he will get. I've noticed an uptick in the quality of his guests.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.
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.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.
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.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.
If the person is a crackpot, don't have them on. If a person is worth having on, then let them speak.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.
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.