4 ms·

> 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'. You and I both have no accura

> 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'. 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.

iaml 5y ago
> 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. 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.
- YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
  > 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. 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.
  - iaml 5y ago
    I agree, his fanbase has grown and some of the issues I've mentioned could be attributed to that. I also think that a good chunk of the diverse core audience he used to have left over this issue, but as you mentioned we don't have the data on the scope and implications of both processes.
    - YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
      What do you mean by "diverse core audience"? I literally mean a plurality of people. 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.

iaml 5y ago

> 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. 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.

YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
> 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. 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.
- iaml 5y ago
  I agree, his fanbase has grown and some of the issues I've mentioned could be attributed to that. I also think that a good chunk of the diverse core audience he used to have left over this issue, but as you mentioned we don't have the data on the scope and implications of both processes.
  - YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
    What do you mean by "diverse core audience"? I literally mean a plurality of people. 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.