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?
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.
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.
I mean that's fair. It may not even be ego, might be money. But the point stands either way.
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.
Only segment of his show I ever saw was Bill Burr calling him a Knuckle Scrapper when masks were brought up, lol.
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
I dont think anyone can be prepared enough to deal with someone like Alex Jones.
The guy is literally a Warhammer 40k space marine in real life. Well, not physically, but he thinks and talks like one.
You should check out Knowledge Fight. They are the experts. When the Times wants to cover him they call them.
The legal team for one of the Sandy Hook parent's had one of the hosts testify as an expert witness on Alex Jones.
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
America's not even ready for those people.
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.
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.
Consider joining a Joe Rogan community or similar. As a lurker, you can learn a lot about whats going on just by listening to how other people react.
The Joe Rogan subreddit has basically turned on him since Covid, and the comments are usually a good source of critique and counter arguments against him and his guests.
Use https://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.
Mmm but only his older stuff in on YT. He moved to Spotify before covid. Does Piped also scrap Spotify?
I had no idea that he moved—goes to show how much I like Joe Rogan, lol.
Here is a list of alternative front ends for Spotify, some of which block ads so you don’t have to give him ad revenue:
https://github.com/mendel5/alternative-front-ends#spotify
One good way to get an understanding is to watch the summary of Joe Rogan that Johnny Harris, a YouTube journalist did.
While it won't give you a summary of each episode that Joe Rogan does it will give you an unbiased look at what Joe Rogan's program is all about
Unbiased? Because a journalist is doing it, or how do you figure it's unbiased?
A fair question.
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.
As a man who works with a bunch of guys that listen to him, nothing worth listening to.
That being said, I'm not married to the guys and work and your going to have way more to deal with in his viewership than I do.
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.
When it comes to psychology, I think Peterson has a lot of valuable insights.
When it comes to anything else I just wish he would shut his mouth.
That combination of feelings really sums up a lot of Joe's guests.
Thankyou for those that gave constructive answers and didn't assume anything about my relationship
You can ask him to explain the episodes to you. It might help him reflect on the information and give you something to talk about.
If he's difficult to "debate" it might be that the format of your conversations are to blame. Sometimes arguing, especially by throwing "facts" and trying to prove someone that their views are wrong, just creates tension and pushback causing the opposite effect. There's something called Street Epistemology that can help open the door to actual conversations and reflection, instead of antagonistic debating.
https://streetepistemology.com/
If that fails, there's also the option for couples therapy if you feel like you're not communicating.
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.
Watch it with him and discuss the video afterwards. No matter how many people sit in front of a screen, it counts as one view.
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.
Johnny Harris has a good video: https://youtu.be/sLaXSvpfDZs?si=ckqeiEdfaknWnBeu
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.
JR lost touch with reality a few years ago. Hosts nonsense guests on his show who spread BS. To debate him, you simply require a brain and any simple reasoning skills.
Video transcripts? Not sure debating your husband is a good idea.
You can just watch a little bit of him, it wont hurt you that much to give him viewership and will help you understand what your husband is watching better. You can also find some video clips or compilations on YouTube.
Be careful of clips and compilations though, because those are easy to miss the context of a conversation with.
He's big enough that a lot of people tend to make videos explaining what he is wrong about and how. Searching YT for "Joe Rogan is wrong" or similar and picking some large looking channels from the list tends to give useful results.
That is the path I would take. All JR does, and all people like him do, is provide people with a encyclopedia of logical fallacies to use during arguments.
An "argument" with these kinds of people usually just drives you into a state of confusion trying to debunk lists of interconnected "facts" they are spewing out. Not only does it put that person in a place to "win an argument by default", they are generally masters at shifting the burden of proof on to you.
Two approaches I take are: Recognize what a person is about to spout off and counter each "fact" they come up with, immediately. Or, you ignore that person and walk off.
Hey, pure coincidence , Johnny Harris from youtube recently put out an informative video on Joe a month ago:
https://youtu.be/sLaXSvpfDZs?si=CPwiMtAEdhaWA3Jj
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!
Don’t kid yourself, you “giving” him a few views isn’t gonna make any difference, taking a principled stance on it is like peeing in the ocean.
Just watch a few of his videos or listen to some of his podcasts, instead of letting other people give your their viewpoint on him just get your own viewpoint, do it without any bias either.. pick an episode that you are interested in pick something you don’t agree with and pick something that could go either way. You might agree with some stuff and not other things but at least you determined that for yourself
I used to listen to his podcast but lost interest plus I’d only listen to the stuff I had any interest in, science and technology stuff. He had some odd views/stuff I didn’t agree with but that’s living in reality you aren’t always gonna agree with people.
Just watch Tim Heidecker's parody episode from his show Office Hours, it's quite accurate.
Excuse me, why is this an 12 hour video?
It's free real estate.
Lol, that's just one more Rogan jab. It's only 90 minutes I think, then looped over and over.
Johnny Harris did a pretty good video on him recently
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.
Edit: SHOULD not shouldn’t
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.
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?
A divorce would probably be less painful than acrually watching Joe Rogan videos.
Some of the videos on this channel may give you some insights.
Like this one about how he can dish it out but can't take it.
OP doesn't know what his arguments are yet, just that his videos are full of fallacies, and a lot of terrorists/traitors love his content
It would be, if I was using it as a premise that the show was bad. I was not making that argument.
I didn't conclude that the arguments are bad. Insisting it is still ad hominem is fallacious.
What about accusing someone of guilt by association when that person hasn't assumed someone is guilty? Do you not understand that that is the very thing you're doing?
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!
So many assumptions based on so little information.
I'm sorry, but you are going to let someone else interpret what Rogan is saying for you, so you don't have to watch his videos?
All you are doing is copying that person's opinion about Rogan if you do that.
Watch the videos. Be an adult. Think for yourself.
What's there to be concerned about?
I don't watch/listen to Joe Rogan, but it's not like your husband is watching some Nazi propaganda.
Bad take. There are literal nazis today who take their talking points from JR.
https://www.ajc.org/news/why-what-joe-rogan-said-on-his-podcast-about-jews-was-antisemitic
Is this not concerning?
At what point have I dictated his viewing? I'm guessing you're not in a relationship, because it's clear you are actually the one with a lot to learn.
The right to choose your entertainment is superseded by the obligation to eliminate fascism.