Is it though? Before spotify deal it was definitely true, but recently I tried some of his new episodes and he's much more conservative leaning nowadays. So much so I couldn't really watch it, stark contrast to earlier episodes with Duncan Trussel, Bill Burr and others. I heavily doubt he has much liberal audience nowadays.
Besides his vaccine skepticism, and willingness to talk to anyone, what about him do you think is conservative?
[0] https://nypost.com/2021/03/16/joe-rogan-sells-longtime-la-ho...
I remember the pre-Spot days where he was with Alex Jones, and talking about Trump and he really seemed a conservative or "new right" type of talking head at that time. Nowadays to me he seems waaaay more liberal, balanced and middle-of-the-road.
The effect could be that sort of thing that dang always talks about on HN where people have the impression that HN is really "anti-China", but in fact that's an artefact of their exposure to the articles that they engage with (being more likely to be those they disagree with)--or something like that, dang explains it way better. Reality is HN is really a thing with multiple facets...but people feel there is "astro-turfing" and stuff like that, when in fact it only seems that way. Better explanations: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
I guess it would also make sense to me if that was the case because, if not for any other reason, it would be a reality of his platform having increased so much. His wider audience demands and benefits from a wider range of guests with a wider range of views. It also makes sense to me that his own view of his purpose has grown from, "somehow orbiting the Trump, new right sphere" to "someone who talks to people from all backgrounds" about the issues of the day.
How do you know that? I'm legitimately interested what kind of audience he has now and how it changed after he signed w/ spotify, but I don't think this info is available publicly, at least I can't find it.
There is something in the region of 100s of millions of downloads. Joe mentioned it and talked about it briefly on one of his shows.
I've personally spoken to people about Joe Rogan about interviews he has done to people in Belgium, UAE, the US, the UK, Germany. My boss listens to Joe Rogan and he is a Muslim that lives in Sheffield (UK) and I am pretty sure he probably votes Labour or Liberal Democrat.
Some people really need to talk to people outside of their bubble. Joe Rogan has mass appeal because he has long format conversations with interesting/noteworthy or notorious people. It the same reason Loius Theroux was popular back in the 90s and 00s.
Exactly good point. Just like HN. It's an international community. It's funny (but I used to do it) to say that "HN is so conservative", "HN is so anti-free speech" or, "HN is so West coast liberal" when none of those things are true in reality.
He has a large inter-national audience and the number of people that have watched his podcast is in the 10s if not 100s of millions. That is more people than a lot of countries in Europe. Yet you find it hard to believe that the audience can have diverse (in the truest sense of the word)? That is quite frankly moronic.
As for the people I've talked to about it. These are people in aren't in my "bubble". I simply had a passing conversation with them in a break-room or on a Slack call (I work remote now) while waiting for people to filter in or some random people I've spoken to on Discord. These are not close friends, or people I even regularly speak to.
I find it hard to believe because up to this point you've made zero effort to offer any proof of that apart from 'trust me bro'. I'm skeptical that Joe has a diverse audience because to have that you need to make an effort, and from what podcasts I've listened of his he became noticeably less accepting of other viewpoints over time, on some topics like covid especially. This could easily lead towards radicalization of his audience, but you just dismiss this possibility. He should really follow his old advice and go to woods and do some ayahuasca, his third eye is fully closed at this point.
But for a more meta and enlightening take, check out dang's comments on why any sufficiently large community/audience can often incorrectly seem to one person as biased toward a certain stance, when in reality it's that person's bias, rather than the community, that skews their interpretation. Dang explains it way better than I could: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... and https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
It's up to you to provide evidence to the contrary or you will have proven yourself to be arguing in bad faith which wastes people's time and harms discourse.
[0] https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/poll-finding/kff-co...
His questioning of the official wisdom is just the latest thing they have attacked him on.
You and I both have no accurate metrics on his audience demographic. We are not privvy to it. However I can infer from the size and the fact it is inter-nation that the idea that only people that fit inline with the "US Conservative" viewpoint cannot be correct. Which was the original claim I was responding to. I am not asking you to "trust me bro". I am asking you to use some good judgement.
As for Joe Rogan being conservative leaning is that is a nonsense. He is in support of socialised of healthcare, legalisation of cannabis and other viewpoints that many conservatives in the US are deeply opposed to. If you need any evidence of this watch his interview with Steven Crowder. They were at compete loggerheads about it. I was quite shocked at the time as the interview become extremely combative.
> I'm skeptic that Joe has a diverse audience because to have that you need to make an effort, and from what podcasts I've listened of his he became much less accepting of other viewpoints over time, on some topics like covid especially.
What Joe believe and his audience believes maybe different things. You are making the mistake that many people make of assuming that because somebody watches or supports somebody that they fall inline with the views of the host. Nothing could be further from the truth.
What Joe Rogan brings to the table is long form discussions with a guests that are generally aren't combative. The listeners can make up their own minds. This idea that people are too stupid to make up their own minds has is the bigotry of low expectations.
> This could easily lead towards radicalization of his audience, but you just dismiss this possibility. He should really follow his old advice and go to woods and do some ayahuasca, his third eye is fully closed at this point.
The radicalisation accusations comes from older news media which he is in direct competition to. I can dismiss it on those grounds alone. Joe Rogan is only guilty of having conversations that are deemed to be verboten in the current political climate. What is deemed to be verboten and what isn't is subject to political expediency.
My opinion of him attracting more conservative (not just US by the way) audience is based on his antivax stance, which is very popular among them, and he seems to shoehorn this topic quite frequently in his recent episodes.
> As for Joe Rogan being conservative leaning is that is a nonsense. He is in support of socialised of healthcare, legalisation of cannabis and other viewpoints that many conservatives in the US are deeply opposed to. If you need any evidence of this watch his interview with Steven Crowder. They were at compete loggerheads about it. I was quite shocked at the time as the interview become extremely combative.
I didn't watch it before because it's Crowder but you piqued my interest here, I'll have to watch it later.
> The radicalisation accusations comes from older news media which he is in direct competition to.
I'm not taking this argument from older media, I don't read it. I have visited /r/JoeRogan a lot over the years, and the discussions there changed quite a bit. The difference between new and old listeners and the discussions/opinions they have is quite palpable, although not scientifically admissible sadly.
I listen to another newscast frequently and I completely disagree with the host on vaccines (he is anti-vax, I am pro). You are assuming that people won't just skip that part of the podcast. People are willing to listen to people they deeply disagree with if they believe that person isn't being disingenuous.
Just because someone has some view point held by another group holds it doesn't mean that his existing audience is going to abandon them.
> I'm not taking this argument from older media, I don't read it. I have visited /r/JoeRogan a lot over the years, and the discussions there changed quite a bit. The difference between new and old listeners and the discussions/opinions they have is quite palpable, although not scientifically admissible sadly.
This is a complaint of many people that as the fanbase grows that the fanbase is of lower quality. It is a common complaint and you are not the first to complain about it.
That doesn't mean that his audience has become more conservative. It just means you have noticed that there are more conservatives present. Which ironically might indicate that his fanbase is more diverse, not less.
Also we don't need hard metrics to accept that podcast has broad appeal. Demanding data for what are obvious things is asinine. If it didn't have broad appeal it simply wouldn't be as popular as it is. I listen to things with much less broad appeal and those things will never become as large because of the very nature of the subjects they are talking about.
He has been continuing to do that. Before and after the move to spotify.
I looked up exactly when he moved to Spotify. According to Wikipedia it was May 2020. So I spent time (which you could have done before making your erronous claim, because I won't like being wrong) going through the spotify podcast listing.
Just scrolling through the listing since May 2020. I see Mike Tyson, Glenn Greenwald, Oliver Stone, Jon Stewart, Bret Weinstein (who politics is firmly on the left btw despite the claims to the contrary), Bill Burr, Dr Debra Soh. Generally there are a lot of musicians, comedians, body builders, MMA fighters. So there is a fair mix of Right, Left and non-political people on there.
So I don't see how you have a basis for your claim.
> After that I've seen him almost going for a streak, inviting right-wing guests one after another, but judging from responses I got here this might not be the case anymore, I'll have to listen to his recent podcasts to get a better picture.
Right so you are arguing from ignorance? You don't know who he has had on (as I've shown above). I actually looked them up just now just to see if you claim is valid and it clearly isn't.