I’ve always felt that in a strong episode of the Joe Rogan Experience, you don’t actually experience too much of Joe Rogan. If you’re going to do a long form interview show, part of being a gracious host is to be open to what the guest has to say. And frankly, I’d much rather that people adopt Joe Rogan’s humble attitude of “I don’t know” than cop an overconfident attitude because they think they know everything. If you want to listen to some opinionated loudmouth like that, you’re in luck because they all have their own podcasts.
Also, watching his interviews doesn't mean you're a fan of Joe Rogan. Most of the time, I am interested in what the guest has to say and Joe rightfully shuts the fuck up and lets the interviewee talk - exactly what a host should do.
I disagree. I've watched most of them and have learned a lot over the years, both from the high-profile experts sharing their knowledge on topics I would never otherwise think about to the BS conversations with friends.
Rogan is also not an interviewer and explicitly does not approach the podcast as an interview (outside of special guests). The free uninterrupted conversation is what gets the best out of people.
Do you instantly know the truth in every conversation? Do you argue every point or do you let the topics flow naturally? Joe Rogan is no different. He's not an interviewer but just a guy who has long conversations. That's why many guests are his close friends, and also why people are eager to be guests in the first place and talk for hours.
The long-form uncritical nature is what made the show popular and gives you a chance to really see how someone thinks and speaks. It's a rare thing in the world of quick soundbites and prepared presentations. What you do with the information is up to you. Judge it, ignore it, research it, refute it - but that's for you to do.
Also for all the claims of anti-intellectualism, the show has introduced me to more interesting guests of all kinds than anything else.
Podcasts such as his aren't really about his opinion, rather the opinions of his guests and the conversation that follows. I'm not the biggest Joe Rogan fan but have enjoyed a few of his shows.
The best part about the interviewing style of Joe Rogan is that the guests are feeling welcome and free to say what they think. Joe has his own opinion and both are free to be wrong, and stupid. This combined with the long format is a great way to discover guests and how they really are.
Traditional media is all about opinions and to tell you what you think. Quick! Put this idea in this box! If you think this then you must be that. There is not enough room for people to be wrong or explore alternative ideas. There is such angst, as if the society was so fragile that one badly categorized idea would make all the society crumble. Quick, it has to be correct on the spot before it spreads further!
The irony is that the article recognized that but then couldn't help himself to condescend to the public and Joe Rogan at the end. It gave a pretty good description of the Joe Rogan experience and then failed at replicating it.
To be fair I would agree with you that some of his guests are great (e.g. Quentin Tarantino) and I do enjoy the long-form interviewing. But Rogan himself, to me, gives off bad vibes. Not really sincere or actually interested in his guests more than he is interested in himself. I find he'll say he's interested and come back with some show of how cultured and learned he is by bringing some obscure minutiae. I think he should be truly interested in his guest and put them in the spotlight.
Sorry to point out the truth but Joe himself is an unaccomplished stoner and promotes lifestyle choices that are repugnant to me. I would never trust him with my kids. So why would I trust him with my time?
Others do a much better job of the long form interview and have themselves provided some value to society on their own merits. Tim Ferriss and Jordan Harbinger to name a couple.
Exactly. I have zero issues with that, and the fact that Joe Rogan is aware of it helps a ton.
I like listening to all the various guests he invites, like doctors or even professional archers. I like hearing them talk about their stuff deep enough where I, as a person who knows not much at all about their specialty topics, can learn something. But it would become not that interesting to me if every single guest of his would dive so deep, I would not be able to understand anything without reading a tons of pre-req material.
It is a really difficult thing to balance, between going too in-depth and being too surface-level. And, I feel like, that's why Joe is so popular, as he nails it very well.
For the topics that I want to dive very deep into, I can just listen to specialized podcasts on those topics. But as a general "seeing tons of cool stuff and learning about basics of really diverse topics I would never see otherwise", Joe's podcast is great. Plus, Joe manages to open up people, to the point where they get really candid and, for the lack of a better word in my mind, human. Even the people who hold very opposing views to those of Joe's.
I think you’re right. But... Joe Rogan often claims he’s not a genius, and not an expert in many topics. I also feel his fan community strongly understands this. There are a lot of YouTube videos making fun of his mannerisms and when he might be too high on an interview.
To me this is as good as it gets for a talk show that has a wide ranging set of topics like the JRE. Joe Rogan isn’t an expert and doesn’t pretend to be unbiased on all issues. His community, I think, understands his limitations. He just runs a good conversation, and that’s all I want to hear.
Joe Rogan doesn't interview people. He might have stuff that he wants to bring up, but most of the conversation is organic which is part of the appeal I think.
- No gotcha questions. On TV, the interviewee might be on for 5 minutes and the interviewer asks a bunch of preloaded questions, especially "gotcha" questions if there's a political divide. Rogan never tries to undermine his guests.
- The conversations usually last as long as they need to. His show sometimes go over 3 hours if it's necessary. I don't ever listen for 3 hours and feel like I've wasted my time.
- Joe is clearly good at making his guests feel comfortable, which brings out a different side of people that you might not see in a traditional setting. How is anyone supposed to be uptight around a pot smoking, MMA fighting comedian who asks you if you've used DMT?
I have never listened to a single episode of Joe Rogan. I still don’t understand why would someone waste their time listening to someone who is not an authority on anything and doesn’t add any value to the audience. There are literally thousands of better podcasts and audiobooks that enhances your knowledge 10x on many subjects.
I like Joe Rogan for the very reason most here seem to criticize him - that he just has conversations with people without pushing an agenda. I learned so much about candidates this year just from listening to a few conversations. He doesn't try to 'gotcha', bring up something they did 5 years ago, etc. There are no shortage of people who do that, and to be honest, he probably wouldn't land the guests he does if he was one of them. In some ways, it feels like uneducated ol me(in the topics being discussed) just having a conversation with someone about something they are interested in.
While I don’t agree with all of his ideas, Joe Rogan himself doesn’t either. He’s changed his mind openly on many topics. I admire that. He’ll invite a guest he knows he’ll disagree with (e.g. Andrew Yang on Basic Income) and genuinely try to understand how they got there, without hammering on his own convictions. After three hours he walks away with a more nuanced take on the topic, and will openly admit to that. Where else do you see this these days.
Again, I don’t like all of his opinions, but from his podcast I also learn that I don’t have to, and actually, that that’s the way forward. People being able to talk to eachother even if there are profound disagreements.
He’s also not afraid to ask “stupid questions”, so that all questions get asked. Which is great because presumably not all listeners are expert in all things, either, and hearing it from a-z makes all the podcasts accessible.
I think that's frankly a condescending world view. Who made you the arbiter of what's true and what's not? Listening to Joe Rogan doesn't mean you agree, it just means he brings on interesting guests and trusts his viewers to make up their own mind.
Who do you think people are more inclined to listen to, someone that treats their audience with respect, or someone that calls a broad swath of the population idiots?
Joe Rogan is a great interviewer; he doesn't have an agenda, he doesn’t interrupt, allows their guests to speak their mind, asks interesting questions, doesn't steer the conversation. He's a pretty open minded guy and simply enjoys talking to people.
I listen to Joe Rogan not because of Joe Rogan but because of what his guests have to say without feeling pressured.
I am not too sure what to make of Joe Rogan’s podcasts. Note that I do not listen regularly, and mostly only listen to some of the ‘big name’ guests. On one hand, it is cool that he is able to attract big names from diverse fields to come onto his podcast.
On the other hand, it feels like most of the podcasts have a shallow content level if you are already familiar with the subject, and sometimes the conversation/questions tend to go into the stoner mysticism realm.
I don't really get the 'truth from the garage' vibe from Rogan's podcast. To me the space he creates by not strongly challenging his guests and by keeping the guests list so varied is that of a sort of neutral ground that people can sample other viewpoints from. Almost all other podcasts are easily filtered into the left/right buckets, end up with their respective entrenched audience and help build that audiences bubble. If someone listens to Rogan's podcast they might hear some quackery along the way but they certainly won't end up in a bubble. I prefer sifting through the sludge to find what resonates with me rather than having hosts do it for me.
I listen to some of Rogan's podcasts (usually not comedians or MMA commentary) because of the long conversation format. For me, it's more about who Rogan is talking to rather than being interested in listening to Rogan talk.
Whether it's POTUS candidates (Bernie, Yang, Gabbard), intellectuals (Dr. Cornell West, Eric Weinstein), interesting individuals (musicians, nutritionists, etc.), or the more 'controversial' guests you get to hear a 'real' conversation and understand more about the person he's talking to.
You can't get away with canned soundbites in this format, so I think it leads to less propaganda and BS and more considerate dialogue and thinking.
Whether Joe Rogan is the best person to host these conversations is negated by the fact that he's one of the only people doing this. To that end, I support him 100%.
reply