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.
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.
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...