What are the connotations of Joe Rogan?

Pat12@lemmy.world to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world – 124 points –

I know of someone who says they listen to Joe Rogan podcasts (political I assume) but I don't know what this means or what the connotations are. Both this person and I live in east asia.

168

Joe Rogan is a clueless buffoon, and admits such, and leans libertarian. He also thinks he’s a neutral philosopher and doesn’t recognize his subjectivity.

A lot of uneducated people think they’re enlightened by listening to him but most of the time the show’s material is not really based in reality.

He’s a “libertarian” in the sense that like most libertarians…

he’s a conservative that’s too afraid to commit to the bit.

Libertarian has become just a code word for pushing conservative views to people who dismiss conservatives.

Mostly agreed. It's also a label that conservatives who are not evangelical Christians and/or like drugs will apply to themselves. In that one sense, they can sometimes be easier to deal with on a day-to-day basis, but their entire political mindest is still a variation on "I got mine, fuck everybody else."

There's usually a healthy added spice of "and particularly fuck anybody who thinks studying a lot in college and putting in long hours at a finance-bro job where everybody looks like me means anything other than I'm a self-made man."

could you give a few examples? This person was listening to something about Joe Biden

His recent viral moment discussing Biden was about how he's no longer lucid, and shouldn't be let to run for a second term. His guest was trying to say how much worse trump was, but Rogan doesn't really think either ought to be president in 2024.

any chance you could give a time period for this? was this a few months ago? this might have been what they were listening to

The most recent viral moment I can remember is the Bill Maher episode from Sept 2

Here it is, jumping in talking about Biden https://youtu.be/4btqj2Ghk04?si=Ug6eNsPM67kcatDN

Wow... Maher on Rogan.

That's such a mass of overconfidence bias in one place that it seems like they should've collapsed into some sort of Dunning-Kruger singularity.

Yeah, that feedback loop is so intense it should be able to accelerate matter past the speed of light.

Wow… Maher on Rogan.

Can we pause and talk about how Maher is wearing a fucking Family Guy Star Wars shirt.

Indeed. It's like the world championship of cosplaying as a smart person.

thank you!

You'll see him try to criticize Biden but Maher doesn't let him, because he just keeps going back to how much worse trump is. While probably correct, Rogan just wanted to dump on the prez without talking about trump, and Maher can't seem to do that.

Because that’s always what Joe wants to do. Maher bringing up Trump was a breath of fresh air and a conversation Joe has tried to avoid.

but Rogan doesn't really think either ought to be president in 2024.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

He's pushed pseudoscience from ice baths to loonie egypt bullcrap to just about all of the facebook posts your grandpa shares around with no critical thinking at all, conspiracy theories, discouraged young people from getting the vaccine, given a blank check of a platform with no opposition or fact checking to climate skepticism, transgender hate in sports, made LOTS of racist comments that just keep popping up, liberal use of the n word, fearmongering some slippery slopes about "the wokes"

I don’t know but if someone told me they listened to Joe Rogan, I would assume, the best case scenario is they are Libertarian. Worst case is Qanon nut job.

i don't think he (the person I know) is a qanon, i don't really know what that is but i don't think we have those kind of people here in asia (our politics are focused on different things)

I don't think he's QAnon. I don't think he believes MOST of the nutjobs that he lets on his show, or even cares what they believe. But he lets a bunch of QAnon people on his show, so a bunch of QAnon people listen to him. And he keeps letting weirdos on his show because that's what his listeners want.

I would agree that the context is entirely different in Asia, his show is mostly harmful to Americans and wouldn't affect other countries much.

I don't think he's separable from qanon or the alt-right. Enabling them to the extent he does means he's one of them tacitly, if not officially.

i meant that the person i know is not qanon, i was responding to "I don’t know but if someone told me they listened to Joe Rogan, I would assume...Worst case is Qanon nut job."

i meant that the person i know is not qanon

Part of this is bad phrasing because you are unaware of the movement but no one knows who Qanon is.

What people are talking about in this thread are people who follow the movement, and not who Qanon is. Of course your friend isn't Qanon. That would be absurd.

But how do you know they aren't posting on 4chan and following the movement? Is that what you are trying to say, that they don't follow that sort of thing because you think its a movement that solely rooted in American politics?

What people are talking about in this thread are people who follow the movement, and not who Qanon is. Of course your friend isn’t Qanon. That would be absurd.

i didn't mean i thought they were qnon, i meant they are not part of the qanon movement

I feel like the latter conclusion isn’t entirely true. If this is other countries’ exposure to political discourse, you should be concerned about the generations to follow, if we even make it that long as a species.

Fair, I think what I'm trying to say is that I wouldn't expect Joe Rogan's show to be as immediately offensive to those outside of America, who are missing the context of all the internal conflicts we have here.

i don’t think we have those kind of people here in asia

qanon is a 4chan/8chan thing that is part of www - that includes people posting from Asian countries. There are definitely Asians on there. There were definitely Asians who went along with that movement.

I'm Asian too. Has nothing to do with the qanon movement.

I immediately assume that once someone brings up Joe Rogan they are easily susceptible to authoritarian propaganda and should be avoided.

Rogan brings on guests who argue in bad faith for topics which they are unqualified to comment upon. They provide no evidence and Joe immediately agrees with whatever random bullshit they spew out. Doing this creates the image of credibility (big podcast man agreed with psycho, maybe I should agree with psycho), and since perception is reality that image has value.

I immediately assume that once someone brings up Joe Rogan they are easily susceptible to authoritarian propaganda and should be avoided.

What if they're just talking about his previous acting career?

I immediately assume that once someone brings up Joe Rogan's previous acting career they are easily susceptible to bad acting and worse comedy and should be avoided.

Newsradio was a fantastic show. You think it was filled with bad acting? How much of it did you watch?

Phil Hartman, Dave Foley, pre conviction andy dick, kathy griffin, maura tirney, and a slew of others.

Did not suck, was very good.

Joe Rogan was not a huge part of why. He was just to show up, look hot, say his lines, dont try too hard, just be near the funny when it happens.

Exactly but I've been crucified in conversation for bringing the show up because he was on there.

Which is weird. You can not like him and enjoy the show, especially since his lines were written for him and he was a small part of it. You could enjoy Fear Factor too, it’s not anything like how he is now.

Right? Like the person who was insisting he was always bald due to some weird blind hatred. Like the guy use to just be a dumb stand up comedian/actor. As far as I remember he wasn't outspoken in the 90's like he is now.

That’s entertaining, and for frequent listeners it lowers the threshold of disbelief. Because obviously Joe has some areas or guests of true expertise. How to distinguish that from bullshit? He talks about all of these things in the exact same mannerisms.

The user you are responding meant "what if that someone that brings up Joe is just talking about his previous acting career?", not "what if that someone that Joe brings to his show is just talking about his previous acting career?"

I think you read it as the second sentence but it's quite clear since they quoted your first sentence, not the second one. And somehow they got downvoted for being confused with your response.

I'm not sure what you're talking about in regards to what I was saying?

Basically even if someone it talking about the previous acting career, which on the surface should seem credible. It's really hard to properly judge if the person actually is creditable because of how often Joe will interview uncredible people and spin them as creditable.

Basically Joe's creditability has be harmed so it's hard to trust anything or anyone he talks to at face value

You know, I once tried to explain to someone on reddit that Joe Rogan wasn't always bald and there is evidence of this when he was on Newsradio and he had a full head of hair back then.

Idiot on reddit just kept arguing that he was always bald and didn't even care that video evidence was being posted because it was more important to hate Rogan than to accept factual evidence of something so incredibly minimal on the scale of things.

Like why would it be important if he was bald or not? And why would hating him be more important than something being a fact?

Anyway, I asked cause I love Newsradio but often can't talk about it because people will either figure out that Joe Rogan was on there, or they already know and then think I'm a psychotic alt right idiot.

All because I watch a show that existed before that guy was ever doing a podcast.

He is a right wing extremism gateway. Also an antivaxxer, but I repeat myself.

He wasn't originally. He examined some pretty neat subjects. Such as aliens and effects of marijuana and other recreational drugs. Amongst many doctors and experts on niche subjects that were interesting.

But somewhere around episode 500 shit started getting wonky. I just stopped enjoying his podcast.

Yeah I don't remember exactly when he went completely off the rails, but early on it was just a chill podcast that talked about the kinda shit you'd bullshit with your buddies about

1 more...

Well first his show is one of the biggest podcasts in existence and spent a lot of time at the #1 spot - it’s not just a new thing.

Compared to other career interlocutors we might name from old media like Barbara Walters or Michael Krasny, Joe Rogan is a major step down on intellect. He doesn’t really prepare for interviews - reading the subjects book or whatever. He just wings it and spends a lot of time nodding and saying “wow.”

This is a problem when he invites on guests who spew misinformation. Joe doesn’t know it’s misinformation because he doesn’t research. And in fact he seems to think he’s a rebel journalist who hosts people that others want to silence. And he himself falls for many conspiracy tropes, frequently throwing out phrases like “they don’t want anyone to know this.”

So you’ve got a big dumb show full of misinformation that reaches a lot of young people. This is a problem for a lot of folks.

Others love Joe and find his lack of intellect relatable. He’s just a “regular Joe” to them. Maybe they don’t want a fancy interviewer who’s read all the books. Maybe they want someone just as uninformed as them so the information conveyed in the interview arrives at their level.

Sadly, Joe’s now hosted many of the top minds in the world. People like Neil DeGrasse Tyson just see him as a podcast host who’s popular with the youths. So why not go on his show. These people have boosted his numbers even more and legitimized him. Then he brings on a vaccine denier and it all goes to shit. He seems to thrive in the criticism, too, doubling down on the fact that he wants to investigate the things everyone else wants to bury (when his critics say he’s just giving the worst people in the world a platform).

I stop listening to anyone who uses the word "misinformation" unironically.

I can't believe you would tell on yourself like this

You know that’s a real word that applies to things right? If someone is saying the earth is actually flat and making up things to prove it, that’s misinformation.

It's just used as an excuse to shut down speech the government/tech companies don't like because it doesn't fit their narrative.

So what if someone believes the earth is flat, let the people hear and decide for themselves. That's a bedrock of democracy, people are capable of making decisions for themselves. Not you or anyone else has a right to tell them what to believe or filter down the information they get.

No one is shutting down anything, they’re using their speech to classify things as misinformation. You’re allowed to note things are lies or untrue just as much as the people spewing it. There’s a reason regulations and rules exist in the first place, you can’t just lie about ingredients in food for example to protect from harm.

Regardless, misinformation is a real word that applies to things. If you tell someone that says they heard “if I drink bleach it’ll cure my cancer” that is not true and is false information (which can cause harm), there’s nothing wrong with that.

lol this ain't the flex you think it is, chief.

8 more...

The connotation is that Rogan is an idiot who might be a decent guy, but he will say and do anything to prevent his guests from being pissed at him. This includes, but is not limited to, agreeing with some of the most toxic, misogynist, people you probably know.

He has never struck me as idiotic. Quite the opposite actually, he seems like he is probably pretty intelligent. But he's not a decent guy. Basically I think you got both of those backwards. He's a smart guy who has decided to sell whatever is most profitable, and what is most profitable for him is right-wing fascist bullshit.

I think you're giving him far too much credit. Hanlon's razor and all that

I really dont think hes as intelligent as youre giving him credit for. This clip where he rudely dismisses an expert showed me that he doesnt value anything more highly than his own overinflated ego.

Joe Rogan is a bigot. If your friend subscribes to bigot content, they probably harbor some bigoted beliefs. Any sane, non-bigoted person would recognize the fucked up shit that gets platformed on Joe Rogan content, and promptly unsubscribe.

well, i don't know fully. neither of us speaks english as a first language

For all Comments:

If this just keeps going down. We are forced to remove this comments here or lock/delete this post.

Directed especially to @Varyk@sh.itjust.works @AncientFutureNow@lemmy.world

Thanks

You mean our comment threads are crashing the post somehow?

It gets in the Rule 5 area. Already removed enough comments.

Users kept calling people bigots without evidence, but you've only removed the comments requesting evidence of bigotry rather than the unsupported original insults.

That reaction is not in accordance with the posted rules of NSQ.

Its against the rules that i didnt banned you both. The first one is personal opinion. The rest was just insulting. And not relevant to the post.

Thanks for responding, by the way

The first comments by the other party are unsubstantiated accusations, I agree, although my first reply is a direct contradiction providing evidence from within the podcast they mentioned.

After that, the person called me a bigot and gaslighting, words they are using incorrectly and have no evidence for, which I pointed out.

I understand if you are basing this decision on your personal opinion of rogan, but this person is just name-calling without evidence, baiting comments(against NSQ posted rules) and I'm providing contradicting evidence to their incorrect and unsupported name-calling.

Bigot is a strong word for him. I guess if you are pro-trans athletes in sports you would find him that way, but I can't really think of other issues where he expresses close minded views? Fucking guy learns and changes his mind when presented with evidence, which is a huge reason I can listen to him. Even if some of the subjects and guests are kinda fucked up or dull or misinformed.

Like, tulsi gabbard last week reading a thing from the UN and totally either misunderstanding it, or worse, twisting it into saying something it 100% wasn't. And Rogan was just kinda like "I dunno maybe" as he's not very confrontational, very often.

I mean off the top of my head, he laughed at a friend who "joked" about coercing women in to giving blowjobs by threatening to withhold gigs from them, he's hosted Jordan Peterson and Matt Walsh, the first "merely" transphobic, the second, a self confessed fascist and transphobe. He's also suggested that supporting trans folk is a sign of society collapsing

As the person you're replying to said, if someone subscribes to Rogan, they likely hold some bigoted beliefs, because the guy is absolutely a bigot, and actively chooses to spotlight and empower other bigots

7 more...

Joe Rogan is in the business of making reactionary content for people who respond (regardless of whether that response is good or bad) to reactionary content. A bit more advanced that YouTube videos of prank fake bank robberies or filling a car with cement. But still in the same vein. He says things about hot button issues that I don't necessarily think he believes just to be controversial. He also tries to legitimise those opinions (even ones he doesn't believe in), and his fans believe him and therefore hold him in high esteem.

There is the potential for the person you know to like him or his show because it's absurdist in content. However it's more likely that they like it because it feeds certain biases of theirs. A world view that they embrace that doesn't necessarily match reality. The politics in your country may not be the same. But the politics in the US definitely have an effect on just about every other country in the world. Not all of Rogan's takes are political. He spreads a lot of general misinformation. I wouldn't be surprised if your acquaintance was just looking for validation in his content.

The connotations are that they aren't too bright. Joe Rogan is a comedian turned political influencer of sorts, and this same dude once said, on set, "I am an idiot. I don't know shit. Nobody should take anything I say seriously."

In the way that white middle class housewives watched Oprah, white fitness bros tend to like Joe Rogan for all the same reasons:

Its where they get their news, their political misinformation, their performance enhancement drug info, and their pseudoscience wellness products.

Used to be Art Bell, then a breif flash of a Johnny Carson ... that got turned into an Oprah.

And now it seems, from afar, to be filling the vaccum formerly occupued by Alex Jones.

Why would you do art bell like this lol. I get the conspiracies but he wasnt only boosting the right wing like the rest.

Most of the first thousand were either comics, bjjbros, or guests from CoastToCoast.

The McKenna brothers, Ghram Handcock before the fame, etc.

It was kinda neat then.( Except for a few of the regulars.)

Im just a sucker for coast to coast tbh though most of my life its been George Noory

Politics aside I would say the connotation here is that this person isn't very intelligent. I don't mean that as a statement on their intelligence but instead that Joe Rogan falls into the category of anti-intellectual, low bar entertainment. I'd consider Joe Rogan to be the equivalent of a tabloid paper but for people who listen to podcasts.

Rogan has 2-3 hour interviews with people from every walk of life but got obsessed with COVID misinformation.

Rogan has explicitly supported gay rights/marriage, drug legalization, prison reform, and other leftist positions, but recently appears to have become swayed by right-wing talking points to the point that he is unnecessarily confrontational.

He has some amazing podcasts in the bank with amazing people, and has some newer podcasts that are garbage. He has like 1500 3-hour podcasts.

So look up some of the athletes, the biologists, the astronomers, geologists, a lot of interesting non-political podcasts before covid happened and you'll probably learn a bunch of interesting things.

But anything remotely political in the past few years is pretty rough to the point that I haven't listened to any of his podcasts since.

Lot of unhelpful answers here. I'll try my best.

In a nutshell, Joe was a UFC commentator who also avidly practices various martial arts. He's also a successful stand-up comedian. Being personable and well connected, he started his podcast interviewing friends, comedians, and celebrities.

It should be fairly obvious how he appeals to people interested in masculine personalities. In particular teenagers, young men, and people who aren't very secure in their masculinity tend to like him.

He had/has a rule of letting nearly anyone on the show so long as he felt he could have an interesting conversation with them. To massively simplify, this ultimately led to him having some questionable political provocateurs on the show, many right wingers. Combine this with Joe's non-combative interview style, and his show ended up being a platform for some pretty out-there political theory. The way he talked about COVID struck many people as pretty irresponsible, for example.

Eventually, many who are left-of-center were scared of even associating with him. That's a problem for your public image if you claim to be a centrist, as Joe does. Or at least he did, I haven't kept up with him in a while.

TL;DR: if you listen to Joe Rogan's podcast people might think you're overly concerned with your masculinity or that you're being indoctrinated into extreme right-wing politics.

For me, it kind of depends. If Rogan is interviewing an actor, comedian, or MMA/UFC fighter, he’s more in his element, and the interview can be alright. The problem is he’s kind of an “all sides” show and he doesn’t really understand all the stuff some of his guests pedal. This is problematic when he has folks on pedaling stuff where he doesn’t recognize and call out the potential toxicity. A good example is someone like Jordan Petersen. A guy whose credentials would seem to indicate he knows what he’s talking about. In reality, a lot of the MRA-adjacent BS he spews sounds somewhat reasonable, if a bit “edgy,” on its surface. Petersen knows it isn’t actually backed up by any research (which is where his credentials are), it’s just his musings that he’s found an audience, and quite a bit of money, espousing. This is a problem because Rogan doesn’t usually call this stuff out for the dog whistle that it is, and he has a massive audience.

FWIW, I haven’t listened to him in years, and didn’t listen to him very long to begin with.

Guys a tool and gives an audience to losers who don't deserve one, but in all honesty his interview with Brian Cox is magnificent. Though, that has got more to do with Brian than joe whose role was to be the subject of the ELI5's.

It's the guests that do it. I have no interest in seeing him pal around with his mate Alex Jones but a long chat with someone interesting like Cox is fun. I even enjoyed Elon's first appearance on the show while I was still blissfully oblivious to the rest of his bio.

Which is the obvious problem: you know not to like when guests like Alex are on, but Joe doesn't do enough to push back against other more palatable bullshit artists like Musk, so you end up thinking better of someone who's just gotten one over you and Joe.

I don't know why I have to come to a judgment over anyone for a random JRE appearance. It's not like I treat the podcast as a good primary reference source on any topic. Musk has been quite capable of demonstrating his character flaws in a very public ways since his appearances on the show.

I'll try to give an unbiased answer. Joe Rogan podcasts aren't just political, but they do discuss political topics frequently in conversation. The connotation for a regular listener is that they are very likely to be misinformed, plain and simple as that. As many have already said, it's likely that they are libertarian at best or into conspiracy theories and alt-right at worst. I'll explain why:

He brings in a lot of different guests to his podcasts. These guests could be celebrities, athletes, book authors, researchers, actors, etc. Sometimes he would have politicians, from left and right. He would also bring in people who spread conspiracy theories, aka "qanon" types.

He never confronts any of his guests. Some people hate him for it, others listen to him precisely because of that.

Rogan gives a platform equally to all of his guests and presents and treats them all as if on the same level of legitimacy. This means, today he interviews a scientist who is an eminence in their field, with 30 years experience in research... and next week he brings in some influencer on the same topic, who doesn't understand the science behind what they say. Both guests sound equally knowledgeable to the average listener.

The problem with this is that this spreads misinformation, and if you as a listener are not already well informed on the topic then you are likely to fall for it. Most people don't question everything they hear, let alone understand in depth anything discussed superficially over a podcast. This is evident with science, but it gets really hairy when you add politics and personal values/morals to the mix.

I hope this helps you understand better.

"He never confronts any of his guests. "

This is false as of the past year or two (post-Covid). Now whenever he has a scientist on, he'll argue and disagree with them, especially if the topic is Covid, vaccines, or climate change. He really likes the gish-gallop argument method where he spews a bunch of long since discredited claims on the topic.

Yeah he does confront his guests (though not any of the alt-right or qanon ones). It's pretty clear he has an agenda, despite everyone claiming he's just some kind of enlightened centrist.

I'll take your word for it, I haven't listened to any of his for several years now.

I mean before COVID there was also that time he furiously berated a primatologist for telling him he was mistaken for thinking Bondo Apes were a unique species.

He’s always been an angry meathead when facts make him feel stupid. He’s just doing it in more mainstream ways now so he gets more exposure.

Ask them their stance on apes. If they stay an ape could mess a dude up theyre probably just into martial arts. If they say something racial they are probably racist. And maybe you shouldn't be friends with them.

To my knowledge the Rogan community is strong advocates of the idea that most other great apes can beat us up.

More right wing than left wing. An anti vaxxer to a degree.

He told people repeatedly to take ivermectin, was critical of masks, downplayed the severity and impact of Covid and has guests like Alex Jones, Jordan Peterson and Matt Walsh.

A lot of the comments above are super creepy in how neutral they are on Rogan, who is well known to be a far right conspiracy crank who mostly platforms other cranks and super bigoted people and credulously spreads their claims as accurate.

He very rarely has actual decent people on and, frequently when he does so, tries to argue with them that they're wrong. Especially if they're scientists.

His whole thing has been that of being a skeptic for many years, whether it's in legitimacy of certain combat sports, whether pumping your body with TRT will have any negative effects, or in what medical professionals push. This seemed all fine and dandy when the political landscape was sane, and when society didn't need people to follow medical advice.

Like many, he's realised that his fans will follow anything he says, and he's become more vocal towards his own views. For lack of a better term, he's an influencer, and his views influence people. From a MMA perspective, many would say that this has had an effect on his ability to call the sport he's an expert in, because his analysis is often pretty poor - even compared to commentators with minimal knowledge of the professional sport.

The connotations for Rogan is that fame corrupts. The connotations for your friend are that he might be exposed to utter bullshit and assume it's correct because "Rogan brings experts on the show".

I feel like this is the type of question that needs to be asked on different platforms to get a proper feel for what people think about the guy. You won't get an objective answer from any one place.

The dude is a bit of a meathead who will listen to anyone he has interest in for better or worse. I enjoyed his show for a while because I generally enjoy hearing people share their thoughts on things, even if sometimes they end up seeming a little off. As it so happens, I was just as willing to hear out criticisms against his show as well when I started noticing those. Then I just kind of lost interest. It can be a fun show to listen to, but it’s kind of like a dude-bro celebrity magazine-turned-podcast for people who fantasize about being rich and smarter than everyone else. I like to call him “Joe Brogan” now because I think it fits.

The basic issue with Joe is that he can't or won't really challenge his guests to justify what they're saying. Sometimes he gets great guests , and sometimes gets nutjobs. In either case he just lets them talk unchallenged regardless of how crazy or obvious wrong the the person is. And people will argue that by putting nutjobs on the same platform as his better guests he's elevating them and granting a degree of legitimacy. I sort of agree to some extent.

I used to watch his show on YouTube, not for Joe, but for the guests. I was pretty selective in who's episodes I'd watch so I feel like I avoided a lot of the bullshit by default. But I did watch some of the real crazies just to see how crazy... very... the answer is very.

I haven't watched or listened to any of his stuff in a long time, probably since the start of Covid where he would push really hard that it's fake and that freedoms were being impinged. We had some pretty tough lock downs in Australia but the vast majority of us could see why. What Joe was saying was being echoed by "the cookers" so he lost me.

"The cookers" (as in Meth, as I understand it) is the nickname of the conspiracy theorists.

Oh, he got way more unhinged during and since Covid. That's when his conspiracy craziness took off for the stratosphere.

Chad interviewer, he's clueless about everything so he gets the interviewee to explain everything and asks grade 1 questions the audience can follow along

You wouldn't rely on him for advice (unless it was related to ufc/training perhaps)

Depends on the context, but generally it indicates a lack of critical thinking and a capacity to be easily swayed by sensational claims. Joe Rogan has no legitimacy as a journalist, and a checkered record when it comes to the veracity of what and who he presents on his show, which has shifted significantly rightward over the years, going from pot smoking and ancient aliens to diet supplements and anti-vaccine narratives. Generally, in the US, Joe Rogan fans are predominantly white, male, and right-wing with a libertarian bias.

The deal with Rogan is that he has become increasingly politically activated in the past years since COVID started. People consider him right wing because he holds certain economic beliefs about the pandemic and is hostile towards Biden and Senator Fetterman. He is constantly complaining about how much he personally was affected by the pandemic lockdown and is completely upset about how people with large amounts of wealth were not able to freely move about because of the pandemic. He’s a comedian that really enjoys performing, and was extremely personally and financially “hurt” by the COVID measures put in place by California, where he lived most of his life until the pandemic. His views strongly represent an upper/far upper class perspective that the pandemic measures were stifling to his career and ability to vacation. He’s otherwise pretty open minded about topics of conversation outside of COVID, and can be a good source of fitness information (by that I mean, fact check anything he says before you really take anything to heart). He really honestly comes off as an idiot to people who are an expert in any field outside of athletics where he spews an “opinion” that often gets misconstrued as an educated position on whatever complex topic.

Maybe this is my chance to bring a nuanced answer to this.

First of all, these are all speculations, because you can never diminish a person down to what content they consume.

That said, let's have a look at Joe Rogan: he is a podcaster who started out with a solid baseline viewership and with a positive perception. His views were very moderate. Because of a lot of circumstances he became very popular fairly quickly (one of them is probably that people found his laugh funny). He then changed his topics a bit, got more prestigious guests on the show and also changed his views from what he let shine through in the podcast. He got very much more libertarian / conservative and his topics got a bit more bizarre sometimes. Nowadays a lot of people don't identify with him anymore and he has had some very controversial situations and takes.

So if someone watches such a person there's different reasons: maybe they do it for entertainment and don't take it seriously, maybe they take it very seriously and agree with him a lot. Either way, It's like watching trash TV: it's not inherently wrong, but it looks kind of weird to support it, if even just by watching.

Ok this is my little summary. Hope it helps. Also everything else old correct me if I got things wrong.

I don't know what the connotations of him are in East Asia. I think the question might be geographically biased against a good answer from most English speakers.

We can tell you what he means over here (and many people are in these replies), but that might be very different from his meaning over there, so keep that in mind.

I don’t know what the connotations of him are in East Asia.

I don't think there are any, I agree the audience for my questions are people who speak English (at a level they would understand what he's saying fluently), i don't think he's super well known or very popular here

he was in the local news a few years ago because he talked about the protest in hongkong but he was referred to as "ufc's joe rogan", not sure if he had the podcast back then

He used to be interesting, for about 6 months. Now he’s just grifting the idiots at $10 a month on Spotify. The reason I joined Apple Music lol

You are not going to get a normal or accurate response to your question here, just so you know.

And where would one go for a "normal or accurate response" then? Because it's common public knowledge that Rogan is a right wing misinformation and pseudoscience pusher. Especially since the beginning of the pandemic.

What this response signals to me is that if you’re critical or point out the negatives of what Rogan does, your opinion doesn’t matter. I’ve seen plenty of accurate responses here.

I used to like joe Rogan as a comedian. His entire set was basically the first thing my brain thinks of - an easy crack joke with some wit. But one cannot live one’s life according to the fastest, easiest joke you can conceive of. Deeper thought reveals most of these impulse thoughts as stupid, over simplified and with surface interpretation only. But he seems to just run with it, and has made that his public and political personality. My smart ass should not be making any meaningful decisions.

It's an incredibly popular podcast. There's every possibility the connotations are wrong about this specific individual. I wouldn't try to dig too deep into it.

Well, Joe Rogan is stupid.

So, it doesn't take much to presume that people who find what he has to say interesting are also stupid.

I saw this video recently and honestly Hasan puts it best.

I'd love to know what he said but I'm not going to sit through an hour long reaction video.

My friend, you’ve asked this question in a very left-leaning forum. As you can see, most or all of these answers are gonna be from people who generally disagree with Rogan. If you want to get an idea of what his podcast is about there’s lots of short clips from his podcast on YouTube. I think we need more context as to why your acquaintance is saying this to answer questions you might have about connotations or meaning.

Reality is left wing. The posts aren't wrong. Joe Rogan is a gate way to the far right and extremism.

Long way to avoid saying all of the important things

He's pushed pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, discouraged young people from getting the vaccine, given a blank check of a platform with no opposition or fact checking to climate skepticism, transgender hate in sports, made LOTS of racist comments that just keep popping up, liberal use of the n word, fearmongering some slippery slopes about "the wokes"

Doesn't matter which side of politics you're on, Joe Rogan is batshit insane these days. Well maybe that is the side you're on, in which case I retract the former statement.

He's a wrestler that became a podcaster. At the time his podcasts gained popularity because he was able to get very high echelon guests and he would have a very simple conversation with them. It was new at the time.

As time goes on things got muddy. He's a bit of a doofis who likes to say things without thinking, and some people claim that he is irresponsible with what he says because he has a large platform . Two people having a poorly thought out natural conversation becomes something different when it's being broadcast to millions of people.

In the US he has become associated with the "right wing". He has a bit of a cult of personality following him. People lable his fans as "dude-bros" who think they're smart, but aren't.

Personally I think that just like Howard Stern's interviews, they shouldn't be taken as informational, but can be entertaining. He does have a lot of interesting guests. I treat podcasts like these like I'm going to the zoo. The animals are interesting, but that's about it.

wrestler that became a podcaster

That's too much. He was an entertainer, always has been, always will be.

Whether that was wrestling, interviewing, hosting X Factor or saying n**** with his pals while goofing around microphones in 2009.

The best thing would be to listen to some of what he has to say and make up your own mind.

Don't let the mob tell you how to think because the mob doesn't think.

The trouble with that plan is that he's pretty good at layering in the crazy. He has been doing this a while, and knows when to press the "it's just a joke" button, so a first time listener might not catch the subtext or the dogwhistles.

Joe Rogan is a sociopath and a danger to the community at large. He normalizes ignorance and gives a platform to bigots. He might have been a reasonable guy at some point, and he's probably not wrong about everything. But that doesn't make up for the negatives.

This. Alex Jones has been a not-infrequent guest. Jones, and others that Rogan has platformed in the guise of "just asking questions" are akin in my eyes to the ol' "What do you call four nazis drinking with a fifth person? Five nazis."

Aside from that, he's got a massive amount of absolutely horrifically bad scientific and medical opinions. I've heard him described and Gwyneth Paltrow but for tech bros, and even that's a little generous. Shove a lemon up your hooha or whatever Gwyneth is up to is probably not quite as problematic as "take this horse tranq to cure your covid" esp. during the alpha wave.

Joe does long form interviews with lots of different types of people. All you could really assume is that they like listening to people with different perspectives.

Joe mostly talks to Western people, so maybe this person likes to hear about western society through Joe's podcast.

I enjoy Rogan. I hear shit I should know without the msm slant.

Some of his guests are batshit crazy, but I think he just gives a platform to everybody. You know, free speech is also freedom to disagree. But censorship isn't good, and he's not about that.

From time to time his guests say some ridiculous shit though. I'd say I agree with maybe 40% of the content, disagree with 40%, and am neutral or uneducated on the 20% in the middle. It'll spur me in to read / listen to other topics and expand my knowledge base so I can form an opinion.

There's a load of shit brought up on Rogan you might otherwise have not known, because the media is a stilted propaganda machine.

"Censorship?" Does everyone deserve to get on his talk show? Are those that aren't "censored?"

No. He has to draw the line somewhere, and he has. Where he's drawn it -- who he invites to speak to his enormous audience -- is very instructive indeed.

By looking at all the alt-right, conservative, and qanon guests he invites on his show, we can tell who Joe Rogan is: a useful idiot for the alt-right, if not an enthusiastic enabler of them. And he is as bad at interviewing guests as he is at selecting them. He lobs dangerous, loaded questions at the worst people in the world, fails to challenge even the most basic errors they make with their answers, and idiots lap it up because they want to imagine they're smart.

If he was alive a hundred years ago, he'd have been enthusiastically debating the Jewish question and "free speech" people around the globe would be nodding sagely and being happy someone is finally willing to stand up against "censorship" and "international Jewry." Because he's alive now, he's just doing that about vaccines, racism, trans people, police violence... basically anything where it's possible to have a bad take, he's interviewing someone about it.

Counterpoint - you're cherry picking. He also invites left wing guests and gives them the same opportunity to speak.

He has a vast audience because a more centrist view of things appeals to a huge # of people. Your description of his audience is reductive and close minded. Yep, there are people who fit that description. And there are going to be others who fit every other description you can write down, too. Why? Because hundreds of millions of people listen.

That's not true. You want to imagine he's centrist because it gratifies your ego, but he is simply right-wing.

As are the people who he appeals to.

Now do fox and MSNBC!

In what sense would their numbers make Rogan’s any better?

You didn’t really think about this whataboutism moment too hard, did you.

He doesn't just "give a platform to everybody" for the sake of free speech, that's not how free speech works when you're a host and/ or owner of a media company. He hosts a certain crowd because he wants to. It's his show.

Literally all media is biased. If someone tells you that they are unbiased or if some other show is, they are lying. Rogan is friendly to capitalism and drug legalization, and there's nothing wrong in disclosing it (even if I don't personally agree with the former).

Holy shit you guys are terminally online if you think that Joe is far-right. People watch him because he lets the guests talk, but still follows along good enough to ask good questions. It's really not that deep. And of course he brings controversial people on the show, why would you not in his place? It shows he has no bias and he's ready to listen to opinions and ideas that are new/opposed to his.

If you think joe is far right, it would also mean you think the average >40 is far right. He's the perfect depiction of a centrist/neoliberal

So centrist that he supports DeSantis, has dinner with Greg Abbot, thinks Jan 6 was a false flag, and still claims Trump facing prosecution is evidence that the US is a banana republic despite the episode immediately before having the guest lay out in irrefutable detail the real crimes DJT is standing trial for.

If he isn’t right wing then the only other viable explanation is that he’s an empty bobble head that invites on as many conservatives voices to nod along with as they can.

the only other viable explanation is that he’s an empty bobble head that invites on as many conservatives voices to nod along with as they can.

You might be onto something there.

7 more...
7 more...