How do I get informed on Joe Rogan without watching his videos.
I’m a bit concerned about how much my husband has been watching his videos, but he’s a hard man to argue with. I want to understand what it is Joe Rogan is saying, but I don’t want to give the man my viewership. How/where do I get the info I can use to debate my husband?
But if you want to debate your husband on what he sees, you’re going to need to get a good idea of the guest. The problem with Joe Rogan is that Rogan does very little pushback as an interviewer.
There was one interview that I watched with Mel Gibson touting a stem cell cure-all treatment being given out in Panama and making claims about it helping to cure anything. That treatment was beginning to undergo Phase 2 FDA trials, which basically meant they were studying to see if it would kill people, not what benefits the drug had.
If you are going to debate, ask for a non-Rogan source to back him up. It will at least get your husband to start fact checking. And if your husband asks why you need a second source, you can tell him that Rogan describes himself as an idiot.
I view him as unbiased because he doesn’t promote Joe Rogan but also doesn’t dismiss the the good aspects of Joe Rogan. He views Joe Rogan as nuanced as he should.
Johnny Harris didn’t rush to label him Joe Rogan as horrible or great.
I’d just find the comedy special from many years ago where he told his audience that “I’m not an expert in anything except smoking weed. I’m a moron. I don’t know anything. Nobody should listen to me or take me seriously.”
That bit on stage is the first thing I ever think of whenever his name is mentioned these days, since he didn’t even take his own God damn advice.
I’m pretty sure I’ve seen several different clips where he repeats the same "I’m a moron" spiel.
While I have only watched what few clips came my way, I was under the impression that was the entire point of his podcast: Invite interesting* people, then validating them in discussion by agreeing to most of their takes regardless of how bizarre they are so that they freely speak of their topic.
*wherein "interesting" is usually something from the categories of fringe beliefs (often conspiracies), drugs, culturally influential people, or experts on whatever is a big topic for his viewership at the time.
Many of the experts are also those of the fringe belief kind.
Basically, if you take Rogan’s views significantly more seriously than the beliefs of your local meth head, you are doing it wrong.
You can also read into some of the very easily disprovable professional morons that appear on show. Jordan Peterson is a great example because he's obviously wrong in a very well researched area.
The clips posted on PowerfulJRE on YouTube are a pretty good summary of each episode.
The last four were…MMA contracts, Mexican Alien skeletons look fake, Bullet pushing out of his guests arm from bad urban doctors, kickbacks for non generic prescriptions to doctors/clinics.
This. Watching them yourself is really the only way to go. Anyone else you watch to get info on him is highly likely to be either biased towards or against him and will be giving you incorrect information.
Sorta the problem with the joe Rogan podcast is that Joe doesn’t have an agenda, but every guest he has on does. Some folks think that platforming scumbags and allowing them to say awful things isn’t cool, and therefore refuse to go on the show, which means fewer same people and more insane. This then repeats until only insane guests are in the show.
He does have an agenda now, though it’s not a political one. It’s the chasing of those strokes to his ego that his alt-right audience gives him every time he says something they like.
wouldnt be the first time hard right wingers were found out to be only in it for the money. tucker carlson’s leaked texts and emails come to mind. or all of ann culters college law papers that were pretty moderate. grift the rubes, never fails.
he definitely puts his own agenda into his show. like, with COVID, he only invited guests with one opinion. he picked the anecdotes and every part of the show that wasn’t pure interview. he very very clearly and strongly wanted to push that vaccines are bad and COVID is overblown. that was not a guest doing that.
I think you need to take a few steps back and really think about what you are asking. If your husband is a fan and regular listener to a source you are so adamant against, that even giving him a view is a concern, then do you and your husband have the same values?
I am so sorry to say this but your post is just littered with red flags. Sis, he isn't hard to argue with, the man just doesn't care what you think. If he did why isn't this a discussion and not an argument where he shuts you/your concerns down? I would say that making yourself informed about the specifics of Joe Rogan matters more than his view count going up by 1. But frankly, you probably aren't going to like anything you hear (Because Rogan is a pig who washes conspiracies/bigotry as "just debate lol"). But since your husband knows you won't approve, that is why he is brushing you off.
This sounds like a really rough position to be in. I've been there with some of my past relationships so I am sending you all the warmth and strength I can muster! Big hugs!
I don’t know your relationship but you might want to reflect on your desire to debate your husband. This seems like a recipe for disaster. If you’re concerned he might be sliding into a bad rabbit hole maybe you could try exposing him to some contrary view points, that way he doesn’t feel like his loved one is attacking his beliefs.
What? She’s trying to be more informed, to better understand the source material. She isn’t intending to debate him for fun, like a highschool club, but clearly takes issue with some of the topics and acknowledges she does t know enough to competently engage.
This is actually solid relationship advice overall, no one wants to be challenged on their views - oftentimes those who are challenged become incredibly defensive & double-down on their beliefs in irritation. Discussing it peacefully & respectfully will allow an opportunity for growth.
His video is nuanced and informative, but I cannot say it is unbiased and it leaves with a very centrist conclusion, but this might be the best for someone unfamiliar with Joe.
If I may add my own take on him, his show should be considered purely entertainment, and any semblance to actual discourse or debate is purely coincidental and done for entertainment. At best, it should encourage people to start forming their own ideas and opinions (without actually providing reliable resources where to start proper, sadly), and at worst it validates the unfounded opinions and hypotheses of those who believe their internet look-up and echo chamber chatter is equally reputable as peer-reviewed, documented, proper research.
And lastly to alleviate any concerns you have, people who watch Joe simply yearn to be more knowledgeable, even if his show isnt a good chanel for it. Your partner may be able to understand your concerns with a good discussion and communication, so I wish you the best in talking to them and a prosperous outcome. Cheers!
It’s impossible to say. What does he say regarding what? And what do you consider is worth debating over. It’s usually not Joe’s opinions per se but the guests.
His podcast literally covers everything you can think of. Indigenous people, hunting, technology, different diets, archeology, random chatting with comics, or otherwise interesting people (according to him).
Usually the guests are experts in some field and tell their opinions on whatever matter they have a degree in or they just talk random nonsense to make dialog that some might find interesting.
No they're not. Usually they're two-bit grifters spouting nonsense they obviously know nothing about, in order to sell some BS. Like how spam emails use bad grammar on purpose to select for the gullible.
Sure they are, depending on the subject of course. Someone with a phd in mathematical physics from Harvard talking about physics would be considered an expert in the subject no?
Add comment