Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

The Joe Rogan Experience Podcasts

1242527293040

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    "So and so is a dumb persons idead of a smart person" is a dumb persons idea of a smart dismissal



  • Registered Users Posts: 577 ✭✭✭iffandonlyif




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    So are you. I bet I listen to Rogan as little as you do.



  • Registered Users Posts: 757 ✭✭✭generic_throwaway


    Ooh burn!

    The point stands though. Some people lack the intelligence or education to be able to tell whether they are listening to an intelligent person or intelligent discussion. I'm often struck by this when watching a TV show where someone has tried to write a very intelligent character - unfortunately, it's more or less impossible for someone to write a character smarter than they are themselves. It's the same principle in reverse.



  • Registered Users Posts: 577 ✭✭✭iffandonlyif


    What - someone who defends Spotify’s decision and criticises a poster for petty rudeness?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,225 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    The trouble isn't people taking advice from Joe Rogan, it's taking advice from Joe Rogan's guests, because Rogan lately seems to have been going out of his way to interview people whose opinion go against the scientific consensus and tie in with Rogan's own beliefs and "research" on the subject, and then he doesn't challenge or question (and more importantly, can't question/challenge) their opinions, and those are the viewpoints that is put out to Rogan's listeners. And a lot of the time people will believe that which goes against the consensus more so because it goes against the consensus, as it makes them feel smarter. And I include Rogan himself in that. He seems to be purposefully looking for things which go against the grain and buying into it completely simply because it means he's "done his own research".

    He used to interview people who were experts in their field, fields he was interested in, and just have conversations with them about it. Now he seems to be trying to find "experts" who can explain what he already believes anyway and then doesn't challenge them on anything.



  • Registered Users Posts: 757 ✭✭✭generic_throwaway


    This is a great example of why putting your faith in an individual is dangerous. People change, or people turn out to be something other than you thought. Joe Rogan may be bringing millions of listeners with him on his journey away from science and facts, and into harmful fringe beliefs.

    If you are going to trust anything, trust the process of science - a process that generally treats findings as provisional until we have a better explanation, and keeps looking for that better explanation. It doesn't rely on individual people who can lead you astray. In fact, there's a known phenomenon called 'Nobel Disease' where individual scientists, Nobel Prize winners and hugely accomplished in their own field, go on to embrace fringe/lunatic positions in other areas. This hopefully demonstrates that it's the process of science that produces useful results, rather than the individuals working in the process.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Is it fair to say he goes out of his way to get guests that go against the current consensus? Or would it be fairer to say that - second hand - many people only hear about the guests that do so?

    For example how many of the articles moaning about the two Drs he had on - also go out of their way to mention the sanjay gupta interview? I haven't read more than 5 articles on this matter myself but only 1 of them mentioned sanjay gupta.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,317 ✭✭✭emo72


    I can't believe the crap he gets. It's an unreal pile on. He's never been anything but straight up. I'm probably one of his dopes that laps anything up. I'm a ratlicker 🤣



  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,580 Mod ✭✭✭✭humberklog


    Good response from Joe.

    I've rarely seen him talking and find it funny matching his voice to that head.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    ^ Hehe. The funny thing about that is - the person I have heard say you should never take anything Joe Rogan says seriously because he is a meat head and doesn't know much - more than any other person I have ever heard say it - is Rogan himself.

    He is successful and has a platform. That is enough to make people's responses to his minor misdemeanors turn disproportionate.



  • Registered Users Posts: 757 ✭✭✭generic_throwaway


    He's chasing an audience. A bigger audience means more money and influence (and success) for him. I guess he's going to get more of an audience from having controversial/wrong people on the show than having shall we say scientifically orthodox people come on and state the facts.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Does he not do both though? As I said he had Sanjay on who expressed mostly consensus views. Then he has someone on who does not express consensus views and suddenly he is being accused of going out of his way to do the latter. People ignore when he does the former.

    Just like when he had someone on who made an anti meat documentary on Netflix. "Game Changers" wasn't it? After having the guy on supporting that Docu and the points in it - he then had on someone to debunk it (Chris Kresser if memory serves?).

    He will have someone on spouting all kinds of crap about UFOs. He will then have Neil DeGrasse Tyson on doing the opposite.

    So nah - not really buying the "picking guests just to build more audience" narrative to be honest. He claims to bring on guests that interest him personally - and I have watched enough of his stuff to take him at his word on this.

    Remember the recent controversy (if you can call a few loud mouths on twitter a controversey but it is these days I guess) is about two guests. Out of 1770 podcasts. Most of whom go under the raider - not noticed at all - and are from an array of backgrounds and topics.

    But 2 guests are contentious and suddenly there is a whole narrative about what his agendas and ideas must be.



  • Registered Users Posts: 757 ✭✭✭generic_throwaway


    Isn't that a bit like saying that US schools that teach Creationism alongside Evolution are doing a fine job? By giving a platform to cranks to make their case, a percentage of the audience is going to think this has equal weight and equal validity to scientific fact.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Not quite as useful an analogy as it might seem given that there is absolutely no evidence for creationism and that debate has essentially been settled decades ago for anyone but a few cranks who can not let go.

    That is not quite the same thing as open questions about emergent technologies and viruses and what is in many ways an entirely new experience for our species.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,110 ✭✭✭The Raging Bile Duct


    I must say Neil Young leaving, or rather being pushed off the platform has been a bit of an education to me in terms of what artists earn on the different streaming services - nearly all the major streamers give better rates than Spotify. It takes on average 350 listens on Spotify for an artist to earn one dollar - which is even more painful when contrasted against the rumoured $100 million Rogan got. It's something I should have looked at a bit more closely before tbh. I'm not interested in the podcast side of things and 3 or 4 hours of Joe and guests rambling holds no interest to me so I'm moving on to Tidal.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,225 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I mean if 95% of experts agree on something and 5% don't, and Joe interviews 3 of the 5% and 1 of the 95%(*), then there's an unbalance there.

    (*) - numbers just made up to illustrate a point, not actually representative of recent guests.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,110 ✭✭✭The Raging Bile Duct


    I've seen a couple of heads on facebook start posting Joe Rogan videos on facebook over the last year, generally with rants about masks and the lockdown or espousing the need for Ivermectin to be a treatment. I got berated for trusting WHO and the CDC when I posted an article in relation to Covid. Can't be dealing with that scutter at all. Ended up deactivating my facebook account.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,396 ✭✭✭AyeGer


    Joe is not a public service broadcaster. I’ve watched a good few Joe Rogan interviews on YouTube down the years some of them were excellent and others I’ve turned off after 5 mins, Why can’t people make up their own minds about these subjects. Without needing to have them censored. He has said now he will aim for more balance so I think that’s fair enough.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    That is a logistical issue really. I am content to hear two sides on any debate that is current (as opposed to the analogy to creationism for example which is to my mind settled). I think it a little bit much to expect a podcast to bring on representative proportions in that way. Not to mention insanely boring. In your example to be "fair" there would have to be 1 guy followed by 19 others? Who would bother sitting down listening to 19*3 hours worth of the same material over and over?

    I would be happy to hear one response. For example one of the Doctors in the "controversy" at the moment said that (quoting from memory here so sorry if I make a balls of it) the delivery lipids of the vaccine did not stay in the muscle where it was expected they will stay but actually travel around the body and accumulate specifically in the brain and the ovaries (for those who have the latter). And this might explain "brain fog" and "period alteration" respectively. So there we have a hypothesis and a mechanism. That's good science so far.

    That is interesting and I have not yet looked into that claim myself. I do not need to hear 19 guys rebut this claim. 1 would do.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,618 ✭✭✭archfi


    It's an orchestrated attempt to deplatform him from Spotify. It's hugely disingenuous and without doubt old media broadcasting , which is failing ion viwership miserably because they are simply NOT trusted, is very much a huge part of it. They being the largest purveyors of mis/disinformation on the planet without a shred of doubt.

    Now, Rogan could easily take the 100 million if that happens (I believe he has some clause in his Spotify contract) and establish his own platform. But with the recent example of the cartel power of big tech in lockstep with big govt, he could probably find it very difficult to host. This is the state of what has been accepted by quite a lot of people (no idea if it's the majority or not) which is incredibly bad for everyone.

    I've enjoyed a lot of Rogan's conversations and turned off quite a lot more that I would have had no interest in. Nothing he has broadcast is a 'perilous calamity for the public' - I reject the weak, simplistic cry of 'safe spaces' from speech and everything else which doesn't incite actual violence.

    When did grown adults become such absolute weak ars*holes?

    The issue is never the issue; the issue is always the revolution.

    The Entryism process: 1) Demand access; 2) Demand accommodation; 3) Demand a seat at the table; 4) Demand to run the table; 5) Demand to run the institution; 6) Run the institution to produce more activists and policy until they run it into the ground.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,391 ✭✭✭olestoepoke




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,195 ✭✭✭Sudden Valley


    I've heard Old media bandied about alot but what is new media- a single person running a website? The media new or old was of course going to report about Neil Youngs ultimatum against the most popular podcaster in the world. That is news! Joe did say that young people don't need the vaccine, but should get it. I think he was right when he said that, that it wasn't a threat to their overall health but should have said this would have a knock on effect that more unvaccinated young people would end up in hospital and if they became overwhelmed there would be unnecessary deaths.

    Joe will continue to have guests with fringe views on his podcast, I'm sure of this. That is what makes him so popular and makes Spotify a lot of money.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Megan and Harry are "concerned" over Covid misinformation on Spotify but are committed to continuing their $25 million content deal 🤣😃😂

    Such heros, thank you...😁




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Should this thread not be closed? Or is boards.ie now supporting covid misinformation?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,024 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken




  • Registered Users Posts: 13,147 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,147 ✭✭✭✭JRant


    What is covid misinformation exactly?

    This site has changed its position on what is misinformation many times over the past 2 years as more and more data becomes available. In fact, science is still doing its thing with respect to covid and anyone you says the science is settled is talking through their hat. This virus has only been around 2 years and there is still so much we don't know about it, what medicines we should use to treat, what the next round of variants will bring, what tweaks will be made to vaccines etc etc.

    "Well, yeah, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man"



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Pussyhands


    Rogan really nailed it on the head when he said there's common opinions and possibilities said now that would have been called conspiracy theory or dangerous nonsense months ago. For example, the covid came from a lab theory. It is a possibility and has been said so by WHO etc. Same thing about getting covid despite being vaccinated. When the vaccine first came out, anyone saying you can still get covid was called a nutjob.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,225 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I agree to a point, however it leads to the exact type of situation that Rogan is in right now. By having so many guests whose views go against the general consensus, it comes across that he's making these things seem more equal than they actually are.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    But how many is "so many"? After all out of his nearly 1800 podcasts the number of guests that are causing this controversy is -> 2.

    Contrast this to how certain news networks in his country will have multiple guests on - hammering one talking point over and over and over.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,110 ✭✭✭The Raging Bile Duct


    Alex Jones is a regular enough contributor to the podcast and that guy is the biggest sack of horseshít out there. Anyone that guys that dickhead a platform after what he put the families of the Sandy Hook victims through goes down an awful lot in my opinion.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    That's certainly a different conversation worth having. Unfortunately I know so little about Alex Jones - like literally nothing pretty much - I am in no position to have it with you :)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,735 ✭✭✭✭Bobeagleburger




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Far more than that. And Rogan himself. Hes talked about Covid and vaccinations et al a lot. Ill listen to his opinions on MMA and maybe comedy at a push.

    Mad that this letter signed by 270 medical professionals was published 3 weeks ago.

    But it took Neil Young to get Spotify to act.

    The disclaimer is a good idea.

    Sad its come to this. I dont blame Joe Rogan, or Spotify, or Neil Young. The podcast got really big really quickly and got out of hand. You really have to blame the complete thickos out there listening who can't think for themselves.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I will have to take your word for it. Which other guests do you refer to?

    The press releases I read - Rogans short video today - and most of the discussion I have seen are only complaining about these 2 guests in particular.

    So what is "too many" exactly? And "too many" of what specifically? Too many guests against the mainstream narrative on a certain issue in particular? Or too many guests overall in total who were against any mainstream narrative at all?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,735 ✭✭✭✭Bobeagleburger


    You're better off. He's a crackpot. Example - he's been spouting for years that the Sandy Hook shootings, where 20 small kids were killed, was a hoax. He's lost a good few lawsuits regarding these lies actually. Expensive lies.



  • Registered Users Posts: 673 ✭✭✭dog_pig


    This is a page about the 1992 JFK movie (it's well known that Stone took liberties, he talks about it himself), it has nothing to do with his recent appearance on Joe Rogan nor his new documentary. It also doesn't look to have been updated in the past decade.

    Can you please just answer the actual question? What were the dozens of blatant lies and ludicrous claims made by Stone in the podcast?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Its a 2 hour podcast. You want me to list everything? Have you see the documentary? Its an absolute shambles.

    That list absolutely is relevant to the new documentary. Same stuff. Different decade.

    I like Stone and certainly dont think he should not have been on the show. Thats fine. But Rogan really should have someone else on to call out Stones BS.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,315 ✭✭✭Did you smash it


    So you can’t list a single lie in the new documentary?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,203 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    Hes been on twice? Maybe a third time I can't remember actually, I feel like 3 times though. Not exactly regular enough tbf, Joe did push back on him and tried to keep him on point but make no mistake Alex Jones was only on for entertainment and views purposes.

    Gonna use that as a segue into a wider opinion on the situation.

    I disagree with a lot of the stuff I feel Joe accepts if not exactly pushes, but he does not edit the content, he does not slant the content. He asks people questions and allows them the space to answer - what people make of those questions (the listeners) is up to them really. I have found some of his episodes very interesting (Alex Honold for example), and entertaining (like seeing Candace Owens get torn apart) including the insanity of Alex Jones in fact on one of them but I have also not bothered tuning in to the vast majority of his episodes cause I simply don't care about the guest. There have also been episodes where the person was spouting such absolute horseshit, and not entertaining me (like Joey Diaz who is absolute gold - ridiculous, horseshit, gold), that I had to turn it off.

    But then I went about my day, it didn't exactly stick with me. Look everyone is entitled to do what they want here, listeners are entitled to tune in or out, Spotify is entitled to host a show, Neil Young is entitled to remove his music, James Blunt is entitled to release new music!

    I don't see the problem, I do see a huge problem with everything you don't like has to go away because it has to go away somewhere and its better out in the open in my eyes. Joe has apologised for any offence caused, which is a shame, and committed to doing better in future so really that should be that surely?

    TL;DR - if you are taking your medical advice (or any advice to be perfectly honest) from a random guy on a podcast your problems are bigger than you think.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    It would be easier to list the true things.

    1. He got the date right.

    Couldnt be arsed writing it all out but most of it is in here.

    Stone didn't do the research for the documentary in fairness so hes at the mercy of Jim DiEugenio. Whos a bit mental.



    Again, no issue with Stone or him being on it. Hes a great film maker. But I would've liked to see an alternative viewpoint aswell. Not as sensational I suppose.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,203 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    Do people expect Rogan to be an actual journalist? Or ask hard hitting questions, is that what the misunderstanding is?

    Its barely an interview - its a conversation, that's all it is. A conversation between 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 people which tends to wander aimlessly a lot of the time.

    The most confrontational I remember lately was with the doctor from CNN, Rogan was visibly hurt by the mocking of him CNN had done and he put a bit of that onto the doctor, who dealt with it very well I thought and by the end they managed to have a very good conversation, was the most irritated I'd been listening to Rogans voice for a while though.

    I liked his one with Bill Maher actually a good while back, not confrontational - but was just long enough for a gym session. Bill Burr one was good value too and Andrew Lang, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Bob Lazar, Anthony Bourdain, Bernie Sanders and plenty others I found to be good listening.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,157 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    The 270 medical professionals line though has been debated quite a bit about how valid plenty of them are.

    Rogan I have mixed feelings on.

    A lot of his most vocal haters are wretched people. Mainstream media who know they are becoming more and more irrelevant every day , people who live for cancelling people and very simple folk who live in an echo chamber.

    Rogan for me is someone I can easily ignore and cherry pick his better podcasts, his covid opinions are abysmal, but nobody is taking covid advise from him, everyone has made up their mind on this a long time ago, anyone who suggests otherwise is talking bullshit.

    Ideally I would like him to give it a rest on covid and take a step back, nothing wrong with having conservative people on, but he is in danger of slipping into that world as that seems to be where he is getting a lot of love these days. Hanging out with grifters like Tim Pool etc.

    This cancellation effort seems really sophisticated, initially thought it was the usual suspects, establishment media bores etc, but as others have said this seems like a deliberate attempt to hurt spotify from rivals who have the financial muscle to do this.

    I don't know how it ends, if they smell blood in the water it could get messy indeed. Hopefully for everyone's sake Rogan cops himself on, yep creatively he is at his worst right now,,,but the people are coming for him with the power are pretty wretched themselves.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,484 ✭✭✭✭MEGA BRO WOLF 5000




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,157 ✭✭✭✭Rjd2


    I thought that was a great interview. It was very sad that the CNN doctor who seemed like a great bloke who went on the show with the right intentions and had a good time when he went back on CNN seemed to get dragged in an interview with Lemon. He had to somewhat walk the interview back.

    Its mad really, a lot of people who loath him think everyone hangs on to every word he says, I am like most people, some of the podcasts I seek out, some I give up on early and some especially the more recent covid doctor loons I have ignored.

    I thought Snowden made some good points here, look at his logo ,he has never branded himself as a hard hitting journo ffs.

    https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1487175300115054593



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 45,735 ✭✭✭✭Bobeagleburger


    Most people with half a brain don't take medical advice from Joe Rogans guests. Or from Facebook, or CNN or Fox. But a lot of people are pretty stupid and believe what they read and hear. That's the point.

    He's been censored now, something that'll kill him as he's always harping on about free speech etc. That's probably the start of it too.

    Joe should stick to non medical related guests, as he's had some great ones.



  • Registered Users Posts: 673 ✭✭✭dog_pig


    No I just want you to follow up on the claims you yourself made, this is the fourth time of asking. Blatant lies and ludicrous claims are the words you used.

    Do you really think linking blog posts from a website created to sell a book is going to convince anyone?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    You were asked this already and didnt reply but just ignored and carried on banging that drum: Are you disputing the professional credentials of Malone and McCullough?


    Rogan shuts the whiners up in the first five minutes of this video: Claiming the virus started in a lab in wuhan, would have got you banned for peddling misinformation not too long ago, claiming the vaccines would not prevent you from catching covid would do the same, now that so called misinformation is fact.


    https://www.instagram.com/tv/CZYQ_nDJi6G/?utm_medium=share_sheet



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,580 Mod ✭✭✭✭humberklog


    I liked the Sanjay Gupta interview. Sanjay came across well.

    Before that interview, on line and here included, some people had JR down as "anti vax". I thought differently because I heard what he had to say. But it's good to get a 2nd contrarian opinion on that and Sanjay provided it.

    Twice in that interview Sanjay said "I know you're not anti vax Joe" to which Joe agreed.


    What I get that's odd is people trying to change the narrative that's there to be heard. Some anti-jRE think "symantics" are at play when the difference between Disinformation and Misinformation is pointed out. Even when they're quoting the **** post that says "misinformation" and saying it's Disinformation.

    It's not tomayto-tomahto.



Advertisement