Chat Forum
It is currently Sun Dec 16, 2018 12:04 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 170 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 13215
I don't follow Rogan but just heard Jimmy Dore was on. Very good.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-dqy6-1yfhg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:33 am
Posts: 7965
Location: Stockholm
I watch all of them. No idea who Dore is, but will watch regardless.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2018 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:33 am
Posts: 7965
Location: Stockholm
Elon Musk is finally on JRE. This will be very interesting...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycPr5-27vSI

... and apparently it's "controversial" that he was smoking joints live on air ...

Image

I'm only 10 minutes into it and Musk is coming across a predictable hyper intelligent weirdo. But judging by the comments, he loosens up a lot a bit into it (before the weed).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 7:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1126
Teddy Atlas was yesterdays guest and I think it was my favourite JRE ever. Joe barely said 10 words in 3 hours and gave Teddy the time and respect he deserves.
Listening to Teddy talking about his old man brought a tear to my eye. Just brutal honesty. Especially about Tyson. #peoplebad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:33 am
Posts: 7965
Location: Stockholm
mickie wrote:
Teddy Atlas was yesterdays guest and I think it was my favourite JRE ever. Joe barely said 10 words in 3 hours and gave Teddy the time and respect he deserves.
Listening to Teddy talking about his old man brought a tear to my eye. Just brutal honesty. Especially about Tyson. #peoplebad.

Was seriously just logged in to post the same when I realized the thread had been bumped.

Total class, genuine, no bullshit, not afraid to expose emotion, interesting, in short, lessons on how to be a man.

If that wasn't the best Rogan podcast yet then it was defo top 3 imo.

If you're a lurker in this thread, watch it. :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:28 am
Posts: 14624
Decent article on Rogan: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/arti ... -bad-ideas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6836
No it's really a bit shite.

He acknowledges Rogan is not a journalist and so not the person to probe the serious stuff. Then goes off the rails, That's the whole point. The whole point of people going on the podcast, the whole point of his viewership watching, the whole point of everything. I and pretty much everyone else would jump ship if he tried to penetrate these guys, he's completely ill-equipped.

Quote:
By ignoring the various issues hounding Musk, Rogan is implicitly saying that they don't matter. When Rogan lets Musk smoke a blunt and talk about electric planes, the universe as a simulation, and the singularity without probing him on any recent controversies, the undertone is that Musk’s critics are hysterical for caring about things like union busting, SEC rule-skirting, and how billionaires use their power.


And this is just unconscionable bollox all round.

This is the problem with people jumping in for a few episodes to bring some copy, as is continuing to happen now his star is rising. Joe has his failings, too many to mention, but this piece is spectacularly off the mark.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 9:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 12:28 am
Posts: 14624
TheBouncer wrote:
No it's really a bit shite.

He acknowledges Rogan is not a journalist and so not the person to probe the serious stuff. Then goes off the rails, That's the whole point. The whole point of people going on the podcast, the whole point of his viewership watching, the whole point of everything. I and pretty much everyone else would jump ship if he tried to penetrate these guys, he's completely ill-equipped.

Quote:
By ignoring the various issues hounding Musk, Rogan is implicitly saying that they don't matter. When Rogan lets Musk smoke a blunt and talk about electric planes, the universe as a simulation, and the singularity without probing him on any recent controversies, the undertone is that Musk’s critics are hysterical for caring about things like union busting, SEC rule-skirting, and how billionaires use their power.


And this is just unconscionable bollox all round.

This is the problem with people jumping in for a few episodes to bring some copy, as is continuing to happen now his star is rising. Joe has his failings, too many to mention, but this piece is spectacularly off the mark.

I mean anyone with a degree of critical capacity would at least try to confront Musk on the things mentioned there. It doesn't exactly take Bob Woodward.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6995
The Musk interview demonstrated how media is changing, no other media outlet would consider providing 2-3 hours to an interview unedited, which is why he can get them on. Traditional media would have spent the time trying to get that catch out sound bite for the 5 minute piece

Rogan may not interrogate, but he gets them to open up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:31 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 27468
unseenwork wrote:
TheBouncer wrote:
No it's really a bit shite.

He acknowledges Rogan is not a journalist and so not the person to probe the serious stuff. Then goes off the rails, That's the whole point. The whole point of people going on the podcast, the whole point of his viewership watching, the whole point of everything. I and pretty much everyone else would jump ship if he tried to penetrate these guys, he's completely ill-equipped.

Quote:
By ignoring the various issues hounding Musk, Rogan is implicitly saying that they don't matter. When Rogan lets Musk smoke a blunt and talk about electric planes, the universe as a simulation, and the singularity without probing him on any recent controversies, the undertone is that Musk’s critics are hysterical for caring about things like union busting, SEC rule-skirting, and how billionaires use their power.


And this is just unconscionable bollox all round.

This is the problem with people jumping in for a few episodes to bring some copy, as is continuing to happen now his star is rising. Joe has his failings, too many to mention, but this piece is spectacularly off the mark.

I mean anyone with a degree of critical capacity would at least try to confront Musk on the things mentioned there. It doesn't exactly take Bob Woodward.


But that's surely not what he's there for. Or more accurately, not what people tune in to see. He has (generally) interesting people on and lets them run their mind. That is literally the appeal. Is there lots of shit ideas exposed, yes? But I would counter that no truly great idea ever came into the world fully formed, and you invariably have to go through a shit-tonne of crap ones before you find the golden nugget.

It's up to someone else to do the penetrating interviews, if they can get them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12205
mickie wrote:
Teddy Atlas was yesterdays guest and I think it was my favourite JRE ever. Joe barely said 10 words in 3 hours and gave Teddy the time and respect he deserves.
Listening to Teddy talking about his old man brought a tear to my eye. Just brutal honesty. Especially about Tyson. #peoplebad.


Watched it earlier. The bit about his father is incredibly moving.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22415
Rogan didn't make the 50 best podcast of 2018 in the Guardian. But looking at the list I don't believe the writer of the piece actually listens to their own list of best Podcasts either.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... ts-of-2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2698
_fatprop wrote:
The Musk interview demonstrated how media is changing, no other media outlet would consider providing 2-3 hours to an interview unedited, which is why he can get them on. Traditional media would have spent the time trying to get that catch out sound bite for the 5 minute piece

Rogan may not interrogate, but he gets them to open up.


There's an Irish podcast which is similar. It's an hour long and by a comedian who just chats to people. He's not pushing anything so the guest opens up themselves and would say stuff you wouldn't get if you were to push them.

It's called an Irishman Abroad so it's, obviously, Irish interest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22415
Jeff the Bear wrote:
unseenwork wrote:
TheBouncer wrote:
No it's really a bit shite.

He acknowledges Rogan is not a journalist and so not the person to probe the serious stuff. Then goes off the rails, That's the whole point. The whole point of people going on the podcast, the whole point of his viewership watching, the whole point of everything. I and pretty much everyone else would jump ship if he tried to penetrate these guys, he's completely ill-equipped.

Quote:
By ignoring the various issues hounding Musk, Rogan is implicitly saying that they don't matter. When Rogan lets Musk smoke a blunt and talk about electric planes, the universe as a simulation, and the singularity without probing him on any recent controversies, the undertone is that Musk’s critics are hysterical for caring about things like union busting, SEC rule-skirting, and how billionaires use their power.


And this is just unconscionable bollox all round.

This is the problem with people jumping in for a few episodes to bring some copy, as is continuing to happen now his star is rising. Joe has his failings, too many to mention, but this piece is spectacularly off the mark.

I mean anyone with a degree of critical capacity would at least try to confront Musk on the things mentioned there. It doesn't exactly take Bob Woodward.


But that's surely not what he's there for. Or more accurately, not what people tune in to see. He has (generally) interesting people on and lets them run their mind. That is literally the appeal. Is there lots of shit ideas exposed, yes? But I would counter that no truly great idea ever came into the world fully formed, and you invariably have to go through a shit-tonne of crap ones before you find the golden nugget.

It's up to someone else to do the penetrating interviews, if they can get them.


Indeed. Joe Rogan is basically not trying to do journalism. He's basically saying lets have a fun and interesting chat and learn about what you think or discuss how crazy the world is. Rogan doesn't have an agenda, you can occasional tell when he's humouring a guests BS ideas (Maybe more noticable when you know some of Rogan's thoughts previously) but he's there to mostly let the guest be themselves and try to have a cool chat with them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 12:28 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15156
Location: By the mighty beard of Adam Jones
Quote:
That means guests like Shapiro and Leno get the same kind of non-confrontational treatment. There's a basic rule of improvisational comedy that says that the performers on stage should respond to one another with "Yes, and…" This allows the conversation to continue to flow, sometimes in increasingly absurd directions. This is often how Rogan treats his guests, which works great when he has another comedian on, and not so great when Alex Jones is on the show talking about interdimensional pedophiles, or when Jordan Peterson describes the plight of men besieged by social justice warriors on college campuses. Both are ideas that don't stand up well to scrutiny, which Rogan doesn't provide.


And neither does the author of this article. He just asserts that the ideas don't stand up well to scrutiny, but doesn't bother his arse to explain why not.

I mean, some ideas require less scrutiny than others to make them fall down (interdimensional paedoism seems a bit far-fetched after all), but the actual scrutiny should still be required, not just this glib dismissal.

A minor and not very original point and making it probably means I'm falling into some kind of rabbit hole, but hey ho. As for Rogan, the guy just seems like a douchebag to me, but I'll admit that's a snap impression that probably wouldn't stand up to much in the way of scrutiny.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:15 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 27468
Womack wrote:
Quote:
That means guests like Shapiro and Leno get the same kind of non-confrontational treatment. There's a basic rule of improvisational comedy that says that the performers on stage should respond to one another with "Yes, and…" This allows the conversation to continue to flow, sometimes in increasingly absurd directions. This is often how Rogan treats his guests, which works great when he has another comedian on, and not so great when Alex Jones is on the show talking about interdimensional pedophiles, or when Jordan Peterson describes the plight of men besieged by social justice warriors on college campuses. Both are ideas that don't stand up well to scrutiny, which Rogan doesn't provide.


And neither does the author of this article. He just asserts that the ideas don't stand up well to scrutiny, but doesn't bother his arse to explain why not.

I mean, some ideas require less scrutiny than others to make them fall down (interdimensional paedoism seems a bit far-fetched after all), but the actual scrutiny should still be required, not just this glib dismissal.

A minor and not very original point and making it probably means I'm falling into some kind of rabbit hole, but hey ho. As for Rogan, the guy just seems like a douchebag to me, but I'll admit that's a snap impression that probably wouldn't stand up to much in the way of scrutiny.


Funnily enough, I felt the same way. Maybe it was the UFC stuff (I still can't help but feel people into UFC are thickos), or maybe it's the way the format is set up and the way it was like nothing I'd ever seen before...but if you watch a few of them, you begin to see he's actually very good at what he does, and even interviews tipping in at 3 hours odd long can be extremely fascinating and hold your attention for the whole time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6995
MrBunhead wrote:
_fatprop wrote:
The Musk interview demonstrated how media is changing, no other media outlet would consider providing 2-3 hours to an interview unedited, which is why he can get them on. Traditional media would have spent the time trying to get that catch out sound bite for the 5 minute piece

Rogan may not interrogate, but he gets them to open up.


There's an Irish podcast which is similar. It's an hour long and by a comedian who just chats to people. He's not pushing anything so the guest opens up themselves and would say stuff you wouldn't get if you were to push them.

It's called an Irishman Abroad so it's, obviously, Irish interest.


Add Triggernometry to your list as well, and of course Dave Rubin, both have their moments - and when they don't you delete


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 4:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5188
Location: The void
Jeff the Bear wrote:
Womack wrote:
As for Rogan, the guy just seems like a douchebag to me.

Funnily enough, I felt the same way. Maybe it was the UFC stuff (I still can't help but feel people into UFC are thickos)

Rubbish

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:45 am
Posts: 1864
unseenwork wrote:


Perhaps if Rogan was a journalist interviewing people.

But he is a comedian who gets people on to chat. That's it.

The author of that article is clearly triggered, dumb, out of their depth, or all of the above.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6693
He's the best interviewer of our time in terms of how he can relate to a wide variety of guests.

I don't care that he isn't hard hitting - that isn't his role. The Cathy Newman style interview is unwatchable in comparison. People are sick of 30 second out of context "gotcha" moments originally cut from a 90 minute interview.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:03 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15221
J Man wrote:
He's the best interviewer of our time in terms of how he can relate to a wide variety of guests.

I don't care that he isn't hard hitting - that isn't his role. The Cathy Newman style interview is unwatchable in comparison. People are sick of 30 second out of context "gotcha" moments originally cut from a 90 minute interview.

I'm a fan of his podcasts but I think that sometimes he needs to pull guests up on some of the shit they say. I think he can do it in the context of his style and not have it turn unto a wholly confrontational interview that stops guest wanting to come on his show.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12205
If anything I don't think he has a wide enough range of guests. They tend to be:

MMA fighters
Comedians
Scientists/doctors (usually in fields related to his pet topics)
Hunters
Strength and fitness trainers/experts
Fringe political commentators

Understandable given his interests, bit he doesn't stray too far beyond that. I'm fine with him being a relatively safe gig for guests. He's not a journalist and not his job to assume the Paxman role.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:45 am
Posts: 1864
UncleFB wrote:
J Man wrote:
He's the best interviewer of our time in terms of how he can relate to a wide variety of guests.

I don't care that he isn't hard hitting - that isn't his role. The Cathy Newman style interview is unwatchable in comparison. People are sick of 30 second out of context "gotcha" moments originally cut from a 90 minute interview.

I'm a fan of his podcasts but I think that sometimes he needs to pull guests up on some of the shit they say. I think he can do it in the context of his style and not have it turn unto a wholly confrontational interview that stops guest wanting to come on his show.


He does sometimes. He challenged that conservative chick as to why she doesn't believe in climate change - its just you towing the conservative line, you don't know anything about it etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:48 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15221
Sensible Stephen wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
J Man wrote:
He's the best interviewer of our time in terms of how he can relate to a wide variety of guests.

I don't care that he isn't hard hitting - that isn't his role. The Cathy Newman style interview is unwatchable in comparison. People are sick of 30 second out of context "gotcha" moments originally cut from a 90 minute interview.

I'm a fan of his podcasts but I think that sometimes he needs to pull guests up on some of the shit they say. I think he can do it in the context of his style and not have it turn unto a wholly confrontational interview that stops guest wanting to come on his show.


He does sometimes. He challenged that conservative chick as to why she doesn't believe in climate change - its just you towing the conservative line, you don't know anything about it etc.

Oh yeah, I can't say I've seen all of his vids, probably not even most, so my comment only relates to the ones I've seen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 7:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:45 am
Posts: 1864
Here's the clip. Her opinions are pretty generic conservative opinions, but shes hot, so its good to watch. :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lD29jqH078&t=685s


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:10 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 25108
Location: Middle East
Sensible Stephen wrote:
unseenwork wrote:


Perhaps if Rogan was a journalist interviewing people.

But he is a comedian who gets people on to chat. That's it.

The author of that article is clearly triggered, dumb, out of their depth, or all of the above.


The long form conversation/ interview that he does, where he allows the people to speak is pretty refreshing after being inundated with all the TV news panel type things that descend into shouting matches as people fight to speak over each other, get out their crafted soundbites in their allotted 30 seconds before they cut to a commercial.

He could take many of his guests to task, and be a lot more confrontational, especially when they start to go moonbat crazy, but he actually does a valuable service letting them get their ideas exposed to sunlight, letting them dig a hole for themselves and relying on the listeners to see and judge for themselves how insane Alex Jones is, etc...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22415
Jeff the Bear wrote:
Womack wrote:
Quote:
That means guests like Shapiro and Leno get the same kind of non-confrontational treatment. There's a basic rule of improvisational comedy that says that the performers on stage should respond to one another with "Yes, and…" This allows the conversation to continue to flow, sometimes in increasingly absurd directions. This is often how Rogan treats his guests, which works great when he has another comedian on, and not so great when Alex Jones is on the show talking about interdimensional pedophiles, or when Jordan Peterson describes the plight of men besieged by social justice warriors on college campuses. Both are ideas that don't stand up well to scrutiny, which Rogan doesn't provide.


And neither does the author of this article. He just asserts that the ideas don't stand up well to scrutiny, but doesn't bother his arse to explain why not.

I mean, some ideas require less scrutiny than others to make them fall down (interdimensional paedoism seems a bit far-fetched after all), but the actual scrutiny should still be required, not just this glib dismissal.

A minor and not very original point and making it probably means I'm falling into some kind of rabbit hole, but hey ho. As for Rogan, the guy just seems like a douchebag to me, but I'll admit that's a snap impression that probably wouldn't stand up to much in the way of scrutiny.


Funnily enough, I felt the same way. Maybe it was the UFC stuff (I still can't help but feel people into UFC are thickos), or maybe it's the way the format is set up and the way it was like nothing I'd ever seen before...but if you watch a few of them, you begin to see he's actually very good at what he does, and even interviews tipping in at 3 hours odd long can be extremely fascinating and hold your attention for the whole time.



Agreed. It took me a little while to warm to Rogen but he's good. He's not the smartest dude and he knows it, but he's well read and widely read about a variety of things, but doesn't act like he's an expert. He's also fairly down to earth so he can approach most topics with an expert and let them talk about it and have fun with it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22415
UncleFB wrote:
J Man wrote:
He's the best interviewer of our time in terms of how he can relate to a wide variety of guests.

I don't care that he isn't hard hitting - that isn't his role. The Cathy Newman style interview is unwatchable in comparison. People are sick of 30 second out of context "gotcha" moments originally cut from a 90 minute interview.

I'm a fan of his podcasts but I think that sometimes he needs to pull guests up on some of the shit they say. I think he can do it in the context of his style and not have it turn unto a wholly confrontational interview that stops guest wanting to come on his show.


But that's not what he does at all. This sounds like what you want him to do when you disagree with something rather than appreciate the nature of his show. But he will disagree with guests, but it's a conversation not a debate or an interview he's having.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22415
Turbogoat wrote:
Sensible Stephen wrote:
unseenwork wrote:


Perhaps if Rogan was a journalist interviewing people.

But he is a comedian who gets people on to chat. That's it.

The author of that article is clearly triggered, dumb, out of their depth, or all of the above.


The long form conversation/ interview that he does, where he allows the people to speak is pretty refreshing after being inundated with all the TV news panel type things that descend into shouting matches as people fight to speak over each other, get out their crafted soundbites in their allotted 30 seconds before they cut to a commercial.

He could take many of his guests to task, and be a lot more confrontational, especially when they start to go moonbat crazy, but he actually does a valuable service letting them get their ideas exposed to sunlight, letting them dig a hole for themselves and relying on the listeners to see and judge for themselves how insane Alex Jones is, etc...


:thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6693
Turbogoat wrote:
He could take many of his guests to task, and be a lot more confrontational, especially when they start to go moonbat crazy, but he actually does a valuable service letting them get their ideas exposed to sunlight, letting them dig a hole for themselves and relying on the listeners to see and judge for themselves how insane Alex Jones is, etc...


Exactly. I like hearing the unfiltered version of the guests own thoughts.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:45 am
Posts: 1864
Turbogoat wrote:
Sensible Stephen wrote:
unseenwork wrote:


Perhaps if Rogan was a journalist interviewing people.

But he is a comedian who gets people on to chat. That's it.

The author of that article is clearly triggered, dumb, out of their depth, or all of the above.


The long form conversation/ interview that he does, where he allows the people to speak is pretty refreshing after being inundated with all the TV news panel type things that descend into shouting matches as people fight to speak over each other, get out their crafted soundbites in their allotted 30 seconds before they cut to a commercial.

He could take many of his guests to task, and be a lot more confrontational, especially when they start to go moonbat crazy, but he actually does a valuable service letting them get their ideas exposed to sunlight, letting them dig a hole for themselves and relying on the listeners to see and judge for themselves how insane Alex Jones is, etc...


:thumbup: Exactly.

Though I sort of agree with whoever commented on the range of guests. I am not really interested in listening to Peterson, Shapiro, Weinstein, Ruben etc for the millionth time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17855
Margin_Walker wrote:
If anything I don't think he has a wide enough range of guests. They tend to be:

MMA fighters
Comedians
Scientists/doctors (usually in fields related to his pet topics)
Hunters
Strength and fitness trainers/experts
Fringe political commentators

Understandable given his interests, bit he doesn't stray too far beyond that. I'm fine with him being a relatively safe gig for guests. He's not a journalist and not his job to assume the Paxman role.


Yeah agree. I went off it really. I'd listened since 2013 and just got pretty bored of him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:33 am
Posts: 7965
Location: Stockholm
unseenwork wrote:

I think it's a pretty dumb article to be honest.

It's not Rogan's job to interrogate his guests. It's a safe space that people can air their thoughts and opinions on almost anything from any "side" of politics. I think that is absolutely invaluable on a global scale. That may sound like hyperbole, but it's not. Rogan's show isn't just another journalistic outlet pushing an agenda, it's a space for free thought and free and open discussion.



eldanielfire wrote:
Rogan didn't make the 50 best podcast of 2018 in the Guardian. But looking at the list I don't believe the writer of the piece actually listens to their own list of best Podcasts either.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... ts-of-2018

That's just moronic. I think from memory that JRE is the #1 podcast in the world in terms of listeners/viewership. JRE is probably a bit too genuinely open and politically unaffiliated for The Guardian's tastes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 9:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 22415
Mog The Almighty wrote:
unseenwork wrote:

I think it's a pretty dumb article to be honest.

It's not Rogan's job to interrogate his guests. It's a safe space that people can air their thoughts and opinions on almost anything from any "side" of politics. I think that is absolutely invaluable on a global scale. That may sound like hyperbole, but it's not. Rogan's show isn't just another journalistic outlet pushing an agenda, it's a space for free thought and free and open discussion.



eldanielfire wrote:
Rogan didn't make the 50 best podcast of 2018 in the Guardian. But looking at the list I don't believe the writer of the piece actually listens to their own list of best Podcasts either.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... ts-of-2018

That's just moronic. I think from memory that JRE is the #1 podcast in the world in terms of listeners/viewership. JRE is probably a bit too genuinely open and politically unaffiliated for The Guardian's tastes.


Well I think that list is actually to 'woke' for even the Guardians tastes. It's more agenda in place of genuine journalism stuff. It's obvious bollocks that anyone would actually be listening to most of that list outside of extreme virtual signalers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 2:01 pm
Posts: 11326
Location: Donegal
Mog The Almighty wrote:
mickie wrote:
Teddy Atlas was yesterdays guest and I think it was my favourite JRE ever. Joe barely said 10 words in 3 hours and gave Teddy the time and respect he deserves.
Listening to Teddy talking about his old man brought a tear to my eye. Just brutal honesty. Especially about Tyson. #peoplebad.

Was seriously just logged in to post the same when I realized the thread had been bumped.

Total class, genuine, no bullshit, not afraid to expose emotion, interesting, in short, lessons on how to be a man.

If that wasn't the best Rogan podcast yet then it was defo top 3 imo.

If you're a lurker in this thread, watch it. :thumbup:


Listening to it now, it's brilliant.
The bit about Teddy's little brother was heartbreaking.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 5:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1107
Location: Next to the Ocean.
Love his podcast. Simply the best.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2018 1:09 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15221
eldanielfire wrote:
UncleFB wrote:
J Man wrote:
He's the best interviewer of our time in terms of how he can relate to a wide variety of guests.

I don't care that he isn't hard hitting - that isn't his role. The Cathy Newman style interview is unwatchable in comparison. People are sick of 30 second out of context "gotcha" moments originally cut from a 90 minute interview.

I'm a fan of his podcasts but I think that sometimes he needs to pull guests up on some of the shit they say. I think he can do it in the context of his style and not have it turn unto a wholly confrontational interview that stops guest wanting to come on his show.


But that's not what he does at all. This sounds like what you want him to do when you disagree with something rather than appreciate the nature of his show. But he will disagree with guests, but it's a conversation not a debate or an interview he's having.

Of course (I'd prefer every podcast to be targeted specifically to me ;) ), there's time when you can see him looking on incredulously yet he lets it go - I'd prefer it if he didn't let it go, however as I said, I still like the podcast.

Sensible Stephen wrote:
Here's the clip. Her opinions are pretty generic conservative opinions, but shes hot, so its good to watch. :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lD29jqH078&t=685s

Cheers, although I don't find her hot (I don't find Southern hot either - that blonde type isn't really my type).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2018 1:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6995
There is a good one coming up, a debate between Chris Kressor and some Vegan Doctor


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 27, 2018 12:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:33 am
Posts: 7965
Location: Stockholm
_fatprop wrote:
There is a good one coming up, a debate between Chris Kressor and some Vegan Doctor


I'd regard neither as true "experts" in anything much. Chris Kressor is a paleo-head acupuncturist, which has my woo-woo alarm bells ringing straight away. I don't know who, "some vegan doctor" is, but it's quite possible it will be similarly woo-woo ideologically based psuedo-science.

That disclaimer out of the way, I suspect they will both have some solid points to make and hopefully it will be interesting enough. If it turns into a shit-fight, then I'm going to assume whichever one descends first and/or furthest into tehcno-babble woo-woo talk to make their point is the loser of the debate. The one who can explain their POV using the simplest and most obvious logic, and the one who concedes they know the least about the intricate complexities, will be the winner in my books.

The reason for that being is that the human body and biology and how we process nutrients is just so complicated, that it's stupidly easy to either consciously or unconsciously misinterpret it all and find <insert what you want to be true> hidden in convincing-sounding "science talk". If they can't make their case in a simple, easy-to-understand manner, it's likely they're relying on the vagaries and complexity, and flat-out unknowns of very complex biological systems to just sound convincing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 01, 2018 10:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:33 am
Posts: 7965
Location: Stockholm
I found the Chris Kresser vs Dr. Joel Kahn "debate" to be extremely irritating and ended up turning it off a bit over half way through. It sounded like Joe Rogan, a comedian, and Kresser, an acupuncturist, ganging up and talking woo-woo about about heart-health with a cardiologist and heart surgeon. And even then they would barely let him talk. One third of the time Kresser just asked questions directed at Dr. Kahn and talked over him.

I'm not a vegan, and I'm not about to become a vegan, but that podcast left me in little doubt over who has the most medical expertise between those two guests. I just wish Joe Rogan had let Dr. Kahn speak a bit more. If anything it just made me rethink my newer beliefs that saturated fats are harmless. I'm not going to become a vegan, but it definitely made me stop for pause.

There's another one on now between allegedly "natural" bodybuilder Layne Norton and keto-diet guru Dom D'Agostino. After hearing all the BS on original one I almost didn't watch it, but this one is muuuch better. I thought I wouldn't like Layne Norton - mostly because I'm very sceptical of his "natural" claims - and I had assumed he'd just be a bro-science woo-woo merchant, but he's really not. In fact he's got a very genuine, not bullshit approach to all it that I am enjoying.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 170 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Benthos, Bokkom, Brumby_in_Vic, danthefan, Dark, Diego, DragsterDriver, Google Adsense [Bot], HurricaneWasp, Jeff the Bear, Kahu, Lazy Couch potato, Lemoentjie, Lobby, mr bungle, MungoMan, MunsterMan!!!!!, Nolanator, openclashXX, P in VG, Plato'sCave, Raggs, redderneck, rett, ruckinhell, SamShark, sockwithaticket, Taranaki Snapper, The Native, Turbogoat, UncleFB, Vicar of Dibley, Womack, Yourmother, Zico and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group