[discopicante]

This is the first critical yet reasonable piece I've read on Rogan. The author correctly points out that there is no left-leaning equivalent to Rogan's format. The author also correctly points out that the left is (too) often delusional in thinking that many of their values have (or could have) broad appeal across the electorate, not mention society at large.

This makes me think of past attempts like Air America to counter right-wing talk radio only to end in bankruptcy. Or MSNBC to counter Fox News only to consistently come in third behind CNN with 25-54 year olds (the demographic that matters for TV advertising).

Perhaps the conclusion is, in the marketplace of ideas with every opportunity of distribution, some ideas just aren't selling. Maybe that's due to bad packaging and marketing but it might also be that the idea itself is bad.

I rarely if ever see this kind of reflection on the left. Hat tip to the author for writing and sharing.

[Levitz]

>The author correctly points out that there is no left-leaning equivalent to Rogan's format.

Well I don't think there is a right-leaning equivalent either, in the sense that there really isn't any other "Joe Rogan" kind of guy out there, it's a singular, unique show. Besides the format itself, if one wants to find counterpoints or different stances to the ones presented in his show I'd like to learn how not to find those, it seems to me they are everywhere.

[discopicante]

The author points out that Rogan (who I agree is not partisan) frequently has guests that the left loathe but rarely has guests that the left like and/or love.

[anonyxyz]

Rogan often has very left leaning guests including scientists, authors, and politiciana. They just get less coverage. For example, Rogan had Bernie Sanders as a guest and openly endorsed him.

[lazyeye]

Is Joe Rogan really right-wing? Or does he just have his own opinions that dont line up exactly with the narrow railroad tracks of leftist thought. And because he's so popular that makes him a threat and a target.

[quantified]

Would you say that Bill Maher occupied the same spot on the left? He was fairly prominent until he pointed out something that seemed true but was radioactive at the time, then was cancelled.

[Zelphyr]

What did he get cancelled for? Not having had HBO for awhile, I haven't watched his show for some time.

[quantified]

After 9/11, not too long after, the socially acceptable position was that the hijackers were cowards. He pointed out that taking the controls of a jumbo jet yourself and directing it into a building was not exactly cowardly. You had to take real action for a period of time and you were going to die in flames. Cowardly was paying other people to do this on your behalf. No one ever accused Japanese kamikaze pilots of being cowards, quite the opposite.

So he got cancelled. Literally, he had a network show that was cancelled, as well as socially cancelled. Social media “cancellation” didn’t exist since Facebook and Twitter didn’t yet exist. He’s the real deal.

[kcplate]

Say huh? Bill Maher is pretty far from “cancelled” at least in the 2021 understanding of the term. Politically Incorrect ran for 9 years until 2002, Real Time w/Bill Maher has been running since 2003 nonstop!

“Cancelled” in 2021 implies that you have been sent out to pasture permanently for whatever it is that offended the cancelling powers that be… Bill Maher is a man who has been providing political commentary with the exception of a brief hiatus for 27 years. His “new rule” segments are all over social media and YouTube nowadays. Almost every single week those segments get massive social media reach and often gets mainstream news organization coverage.

He is an equal opportunity offender though. Right hates him for his opinions on religion, left hates him for his opinion on a “certain” religion. Right hates him for making fun of Sarah Palin’s sone with Down syndrome, left hates him for his recent tirades against wokism and the Biden administration.

The fact that he is so successful at pissing off EVERYONE and still has a weekly show on a major network that has run for the last 18 years is pretty much testament to the fact that not only is he not cancelled, but is pretty much apparently un-cancelable.

[dragonwriter]

> “Cancelled” in 2021 implies that you have been sent out to pasture permanently for whatever it is that offended the cancelling powers that be…

Not really. I mean, it is used as if it means that, but almost invariably about someone who has lost no social prominence, or in fact gained it, from the thing for which they notionally have been “cancelled”.

[quantified]

What’s “permanent”? Give it a couple years and see. “Cancelled” means some people “cancel” you, very likely to be a passionate froth that gets forgotten. We’ll see how durable current cancellation is.

Politically Incorrect remains cancelled.

[kcplate]

Yes, politically correct was cancelled, still is. That cancellation was more to do with advertiser pressure and likely advertisers not advertising on his show but other Comedy Central show. It has in no way hurt or diminished Bill Mahers audience and social reach. It was also so temporary most folks didn’t even notice…unless perhaps you were a fan without an HBO subscription.

Does he occupy the same spot on the left? Who knows? He is unashamedly liberal, and doesn’t do a wide variety of topics in a long conversation format. So it’s apples to oranges. His show is intentionally more monologuely, political panel oriented, with short conversations with newsmakers. However like Rogan his guests come from both political leanings.

Edit: submitted accidentally before fixing an unclear sentence

[cafard]

Curious that this could have come directly from G.K. Chesterton.

[Zelphyr]

Thanks. I had forgotten all about that.

[yellowcake0]

Is Joe Rogan really right-leaning though? He voted for Bernie Sanders after all.

He doesn't strike me as particularly ideological, and I've never gotten the impression that he had a partisan axe to grind. Granted that he is sometimes susceptible to conspiratorial thinking, however that's not a personality trait exclusive to conservatives.

[kcplate]

> Granted that he is sometimes susceptible to conspiratorial thinking, however that's not a personality trait exclusive to conservatives.

Pretty prevalent personality trait in humans though.

[rolha-capoeira]

It seems to me that there is something about American culture that is inherently right-leaning. The "left" struggles to gain any traction because they ultimately fail at marketing their ideas to the average American, to your point. There is also an aspect of playing dirty that gives the modern Republican a leg up.

[dogleash]

>It seems to me that there is something about American culture that is inherently right-leaning.

The American left's branding is being "other" to the status quo. Nothing can simultaneously be both status quo and belong to the left. Once something moves from the "left" to "status quo" the success doesn't count, because it's no longer the "left's," it's everybodies. And the left has to find a new way to be against it (or stay silent on the topic).

Without saying anything about where the force vectors that create this common view comes from, the sum result is a narrative with bounds. Bounds that are reinforced and entrenched because they can be useful to leverage for political gain by them and/or their opponents.

So no matter how many times the left have succeed or will succeeded at marketing many ideas to the average American, some people feel they're much more ineffectual than they are.

[yellowcake0]

The left struggles to gain any traction because they fail at marketing their ideas to a set of key demographics in a small number of swing and low-population states. The average American is a liberal American.

[Levitz]

In my experience, they fail to market their ideas to the average European too.

From feminism, to antifa, to anything touching economics, the American left tends to get itself deep enough into identity politics and neoliberalism to disgust about anyone here (I'm Spanish).

There definitely is something regarding American politics that sets it apart from the European understanding of how politics works, I personally think that the system encouraging a two party system establishes too strong of a "us vs them" mentality and that it damages political discourse altogether.

[kcplate]

This is a great observation. Our two party politics absolutely and intentionally generate binary thinking. Definitely harms the discourse because the party politicians feel like they have to embrace the extremes to create that black and white choice for the voters.