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?
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.
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 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.
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?
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.
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.
I get the sense that your concerns aren’t who your husband watches but what your husband’s opinions are.
Instead of debating over what Rogan says, maybe just have a conversation with your husband about your concerns. Express your thoughts on issues important to you and see how that goes. Maybe your husband just likes the drama and doesn’t put much weight into Rogan’s hot takes.
This is good advice! I listened to his podcast for a little while because I was interested in a particular guest and I wanted to hear what the guest had to say, not what Rogan thought. I found a few other guests I liked but I quickly stopped listening because Rogan always makes interviews about his interests and it grew old.
The real answer. Everyone is different, can’t really judge a person’s views by who they watch. I know people that watch a lot of Fox because they want to know what kind of crap they’re spreading.
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.
Behind the Bastards and Some More News have covered him albeit tangentially. Knowledge Fight has covered when Alex Jones has been on Rogan and it really illustrates how dangerously unprepared he is to deal with people like Alex
Not true. Dan acted as a probono advisor to plaintiff’s council in one of the Texas cases. He never testified. He did sit in on a deposition and suggest a few questions and lines of questioning
I agree with many of the other commenters that OP debating their husband might not be the best idea.
But if that’s what they want, “Decoding the gurus” did at least one Rogan specific episode, and I think they do a better job covering and dismantling Rogan’s rhetorical approach than the podcasts above.
I’m listened to Jones on the Joe Rogan show when he was on with Eddie Bravo. It ended up with them getting wasted and spouting some really off the wall shit. Bravo was deep into chem trails. Jones confidently proclaimed that “interdimensional child molesters” were the biggest threat to humanity. If they were trying to get people to believe in that stuff they were doing a terrible job of it. Unless you’re already primed to think that way, it was obvious they weren’t thinking rationally.
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.
Of all the right wing assclowns, rogan is the one that people least need to “keep up with”. He doesn’t create conspiracies or thought. He just regurgitates what others say.
But, more importantly: What do you expect to come out of this? if you aren’t comfortable speaking to your husband about what he is watching, what will you do once you find out?
I think we should refrain from over-extrapolating about their relationship based on one - admittedly concerning - short paragraph.
I can understand wanting to discuss it with him from an informed stance. It makes it easier to be heard when you can demonstrate a little working knowledge.
I agree, and if I may add to your comment, it is very unlikely their conversation will go anywhere if the OP were to approach their spouse with the same tone and attitude as the person you replied to. That comment is neither informative or welcomes communication. The OP wants to be informed, even if their opinion is the same as the comment they will get nowhere talking to an avid Rogan listener with that, just two loudmouths yelling at each other.
Exactly. This is her husband, after all. A good marriage is all about communication. All she’s trying to do is achieve communication and, hopefully, understanding/compromise.
Use piped.video to watch his content. It is a privacy respecting alternative front end for YouTube that will strip out ads and such so you don’t give your support to the content creator if you don’t want to. I use it to keep up with Trump stuff without fully supporting those who choose to host him.
neat. i’m always vaguely curious about some of that stuff, but if you watch even 5 minutes of a video about Jordan Peterson you get spammed with OWN THE LIBS videos and nonsense for weeks. it’s to the point where i don’t even bother.
Piped is the service for you then. I have noticed 0 change in the holy algorithm from the things I have watched on Piped, so that must mean that the privacy measures are working.
Add comment