[throwaway829]

> never listened to a single episode Then maybe that’s why you don’t understand why people would listen. I only listen to Rogan occasionally but he’s a decent interviewer and does long (3-4 hour) interviews. Many guests are mainstream personalities like Neil deGrasse Tyson but he also invites people the mainstream shuns.

[mholm]

To me, who hasn't heard much of Rogan, it seems like the appeal _was_ largely in the same vein as Channel 5 currently operates: Going to all sorts of interesting subculture events/personalities and just letting them talk. Rogan seems to give individuals much more time, while Channel 5 will just give 20-30 minute skims of the wild parts, but I think they tickle the same part of the brain.

[selfportrait]

Your statement about not listening much to Rogan shows with this comparison. I don’t think the two are alike at all. Channel 5 lets the crazies talk while he stays silent for the most part, which says everything about his subjects. Rogan on the other hand lets his grifter repeat characters talk and then he himself talks and parrots all sorts of insane disinformation and obviously reactionary nonsense and neatly justifies it all away by saying “but don’t listen to me, I’m an idiot” all under the guise of rational dialogue and all the while elevating his guests who all conveniently have something to sell you.

[throwaway829]

> all conveniently have something to sell you He's interviewed: - Elon Musk - Tim Ferriss - Neil DeGrasse Tyson - Sam Harris - Matthew Walker - Mike Tyson - Many more

I guess they all conveniently have something to sell(?) but they also have interesting things to say.

> insane disinformation and obviously reactionary nonsense Put another way, he's a person you disagree with on many issues. So should we cancel him now? I guess the principle of free speech is only important when your ideas are repressed.

[selfportrait]

Joe Rogan has transformed slowly but surely from a liberal who smoked weed to a somebody who appeals to conservative fervor. For example, he will rail against the vaccine because “big pharma.” Then he “throws the kitchen sink” at COVID when he gets it, including flaunting the ridiculous ivermectin BS that us chimps will be laughing at ourselves over in 50 years, ironically a product of big pharma. So what is it, does he support or not support big pharma when he leverages ivermectin and monoclonal antibody treatment.

Now, you list off a few names like Elon Musk, Tim Ferris, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Sam Harris, all of whom have companies to market, images to sell, podcasts to peddle, speaking tours and appearance fees to offer, and ideologies to impart. Yes, they’re all selling something to you, and Rogan fans delude themselves if they think they’re simply consuming pure intellectual discourse. This isn’t Dialectic, and nobody is Plato here.

Do you think it’s any coincidence that after Jordan Peterson - a guy who sells himself as a clinically-minded intellectual and liberty defender with liberal aesthetics - went on Rogan the other day, conveniently after stepping away from his teaching post at the U of Toronto. He’s got a speaking tour lined up. Do you think it’s a coincidence that Jordan Peterson, after resigning immediately released an article in the National Post about how “appalling” diversity, inclusion and equity is?

I’ve got a bridge to sell all the Rogan fans. It was fun to listen to him back in 2016 when he smoked weed and talked to writers and doctors. But it’s no longer 2016. And this isn’t an approval to shut him down or even shut him up. It’s simply criticism of misbehavior.