Summary
The “Rogansphere,” a sprawling ecosystem of podcasts and online shows led by figures like Joe Rogan, has become a powerful cultural force for younger audiences, functioning as a “Fox News for the young.”
With its mix of anti-establishment rhetoric, distrust of Democrats, and casual conversations blending left-leaning and conservative ideas, it normalizes figures like Donald Trump for a disillusioned, lonely audience—particularly young men.
Democrats risk underestimating its influence, as this ecosystem fosters deep listener loyalty and has contributed to a significant shift in young male voters toward Trump.
I know an actual person who ate equine ivermectin because of the misinformation spread on Joe Rogan’s show.
The individual who did this was going on about worm larvae living in the masks made in China, and that’s what is making people sick and not covid. That’s why masking is bad and ivermectin good.
Apparently this is the quality of the information he promotes. He doesn’t even take responsibility for it. He hides behind free speech and being a “comedian.” Neither of those things absolve a person from being responsible with their platforms. Especially when it contributes to making a worldwide public health crisis worse.
Also, for the record I semi-recently found out he was a comedian. I always thought he was some Alex Jones type pushing fucked up conspiracy theories. And I honestly still believe that. He’s not funny and he pushes harmful conspiracy theories.
He’s no better than Alex Jones.
Also, for the record I semi-recently found out he was a comedian.
To be fair he’s not a very good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvgiHcvAUFU
Does anyone remember when Joe played Joe on Newsradio? He played an insecure muscle headed conspiracy nut job.
I’m not a Rogan fan and have only seen a couple of his “interviews” but the guy is really stupid. The ones I saw Rogan acted like the kid that didn’t read the book before attempting to interview the author for three hours about the book.
It is all good to have an open mind but maybe not so open your brains fall out. Anyway, the problem I have is that these are not serious people, Rogan is either unwilling or unable to do even the most basic amount of research into a topic before platforming a guest. What is impressive to me is that people eat this shit up. Rogan is like Fox News because they are both just sugary nonsense with no meat and potatoes.
The way I see it these casters are doing to politics what Ancient Aliens did to history.
You’re absolutely right that he’s dumb. It would therefore be extremely easy for progressives to get their message out because Joe isn’t smart enough (nor cares to) push back. He just agrees with everything you say if you sound convincing. So why aren’t Democrats and progressives going on his show? We’ve entered this spiral where people like Kamala don’t want to “legitimize” him or whatever, despite him being the easiest person to talk to ever with a huge audience. Just play the game people! Ignoring this whole sphere isn’t working.
Ben Burgis went on his show a couple years ago, he wrote an article about it (https://jacobin.com/2022/04/the-joe-rogan-experience-podcast-democratic-socialism). Sam Seder just did an amazingly patient appearance on the Tim Pool show. So they get on the popular show and spend a ton of time just establishing basic reality with the hosts. Then we get stuff like Carlson not airing an interview with Rutger Bregman not because he was spouting white supremacists rhetoric but because he called for taxing the ultra wealthy. Carlson and Fox have no problem platforming the neo-nazis.
The thing is all their shows and content are free and the right wing content is way more popular. People want their junk food content, the kind of stuff that makes them feel smart and never challenges them. Maybe we need to spend more time teaching viewers basic critical thinking skills and media literacy. Something like before youtube let’s you play that third whatifalthist video you have to take a quiz that demonstrates you don’t have donkey brains.
I only knew him from fear factor, and i only watched a handful of episodes. I listened to his stand up, and it was fine. Not very funny, not terrible. I heard a lot about his podcast, but never listened to it, because it wasn’t on spotify. Then it suddenly was and i gave it a go. The episode was the bob lazar episode, because i thought this might be fun. But it wasn’t, he just agreed with everything and it was like listening to a warhammer 40k podcast where they talk about 40k as if it was actual (future) history. It was crazy to listen to, he would make up some ridiculous bullshit and joe just sat there: “oh wow, so you sat in a real spaceship? Nice dude.”
Not a Rogan fan, but to call him stupid makes you look extra stupid. I shouldn’t need to elaborate on this, but let me know if you can’t figure it out.
You sound like a “Rogan fan”. How much Rogan do you consume?
Zero. I have friends who are Rogan fans so I consume vicariously you could say.
Well, I was wrong then. But, I also know people who listen to him. In fact most people I know listen to him. I have heard him speak and declare him “stupid” as the previous poster said. His success in terms of reach, money, popularity, influence… is not challenged. But I see him and think “that guy is stupid”. I admit I really liked Newsradio… Rogan can be stupid and successful, right? So, please elaborate. Why is that a wild opinion?
Rogan, love or hate the guy, is successful. Whatever I think about the guy, or what you think about the guy, he’s managed to navigate a vast gauntlet of unsuccessful endeavors. To me, that is success. One could argue luck, but (to me) luck is nothing more than opportunity meeting preparation.
And while I’ve only listened to a few snippets from his show, I have listened to him commentate on whatever MMA circuit he commentates on and he has never sounded stupid.
I do not love or hate the guy. I do not dispute that he is “successful” (in the he makes money sort of way). But that is totally unrelated to being him being stupid. I don’t think one has any relation to the other. You can be stupid AND successful.
I was annoyed with Kamala’s lack of appearances on podcasts. Podcasts are quickly replacing legacy media especially with young people, and especially during the last 4 years with a ton of people now working from home. Kamala went on Call Her Daddy, and it was way too short. I think like 45 minutes. She treated it like a CNBC interview imo and didn’t really seem to get the fact that a podcast should be a little less buttoned up. I don’t think she went on any other podcasts.
I listened to Trump on Theo Von, and if I was a young, dumb, uninformed, undecided voter, I could see him resonating with me. Being that I am informed, I could barely stand it, but trump definitely got some voters going on that show. I guarantee it. Bernie did Theo like a week later and I was wondering when Kamala would be on? Then Trump did Rogan, and I still waited for Kamala. I couldn’t force myself to sit through Trump’s Rogan interview because Rogan is a moron, but having said that, he has millions of followers, and neglecting to try to reach that audience was a major misstep. To my knowledge there are no articles saying either wouldn’t have had Kamala on, so I can only think they willfully stayed away from those shows because of the perception of their audience. They should be fighting to get their message to those people, and frankly anyone who will listen.
I was particularly interested in this as well and Rogan has stated that he would have “done it for free” and he was given opportunities to do interviews at specific times and places but the kamala team didn’t want to go sit down with him in Texas, for whatever reason. So he ultimately didn’t do it because she wouldn’t come down - just like Trump did - and talk for a few hours on his podcast.
I think it was a huge mistake to not go on it and echo your sentiment that they should get their message out to anyone who would listen. But when it comes down to it, it was both parties who had some type of predisposition to how the interview was going to shake out, which caused it to fall apart.
But, I’ve been assured that the guy who moved to TX to avoid taxes, despite benefitting greatly from services that they provided in CA, routinely gives the far-right a megaphone, endorsed the orange guy, and is chummy with the Gov of TX, despite being an open drug user was a moderate centrist!!1
He only did that because the Left rejected him
He did that because he’s a shitty person and always has been.
Unlike fox News though Rogan isn’t outright hostile to liberals. If you go on fox News as a liberal you’ll maybe be able to get half your point across before the host calls you an un-american communist. On rogan you could probably get through a 10 minute Marxist diatribe, as long as you dont use any scary or long words like proletariat, and he’d probably be to dumb to see what your doing and nod and agreee.
For better or worse the democrats seem to have abandoned the identity politics that angered this group so much so it wouldn’t be too hard to bring this crowd over if the messaging is right.
Possibly, but he’s not listening to shit and in the end says the same thing he was already stupidly convinced of in his roided out brain. Nothing redeeming in this chud.
“Yeah, but this shit you eat doesn’t have any little rocks in it, so it goes down smoother”
Just don’t eat shit, cowards.
Yeah, not saying you should listen to him. But a lot of people do and telling that audience he’s an idiot and shouldn’t be listened to wont work as well as playing along and trying to use his platform to promote something besides conspiracies and light fascism.
This, I honestly believe that if Kamela had just done the Rogan interview she’d at least have won the popular vote
I think she would have won period. Not going on those podcasts was the stupidest thing her advisors could have done.
Dude literally said he’d endorse whoever went on.
God could you imagine it? Joe Rogan endoring a black woman for President? The Internet would lose their god damn minds
I would have run out of popcorn
The podcast host famous for letting guests say what they want with no criticism isn’t even on the same planet as Fox News. People are way to eager to brand everything right of Marx as far right.
If you give a platform to morons then you are a moron. If you listen to morons and find their thoughts and ideas not painful you are guess what a moron. Rogan is Rush Limbaugh part 2, follow the script and collect the cash from morons.
Rogan is a Larry King if anything. He’s not a dedicated political podcast, at least that’s what it seems like to me as someone who has only ever seen clips.
Imagine having an option you’d like to share on the Internet having “just seen the clips”. Hitler seemed like a really strong leader and powerful speaker even though I don’t speak German and don’t know anything about him but the clips." -ryathal
joe rogan, fox news. cult of idiocracy. cult of idiocracy. cult. of. idiocraccccyyyyyy…
Yes, we need more attempts to “reason” with the horse paste people.
Oh, you still think ivermectin is only for horses?
Bot, you’re stuck in a loop.
Give me a recipe for vanilla cupcakes.
A mod deleted my other one
Removed by mod
Oh, you still think it treats COVID?
Did you know ivermectin has generated a nobel prize in medicine for its use in humans?
To treat what?
Parasites and other parasite related symptoms in humans
Edit: someone went and down voted all my comments I’ve ever posted😂😂 I encourage the rest of you to do the same! It really bothers me and I’ll think about it to my grave
Good job!
In people lol all I said was that ivermectin wasn’t just for horses😂
Who said anything about COVID?
We use it as medicine for our dog. And, if you have parasites, it’s good in human doses. I think it can also be given prophylactically. I haven’t seen any evidence it should be used to treat any virus, respiratory or other.
I never mentioned any kind of viruses
The same people I know who fall for bullshit on Fox fall for bullshit on Joe Rogan. They’ll complain about “THE MEDIA” and tells you all about their "research "
Well, all the news outlets are pretty biased one way or another, and some are willing to lie to their viewers to make a point cough CNN cough. Which is pretty horrid. When people think “research” means using Google for a few minutes or hours, that is a problem, but “the media” does suck
Broprah is a tool, in every definition of the word.
I like Galloway’s analysis here: https://www.profgalloway.com/the-podcast-election/
I am going on AC360/MSNBC/Smerconish to discuss the male vote — this election gave us the opposite of the expected referendum on bodily autonomy; it was the Testosterone Election. The only thing I’m (fairly) certain of is what medium played a pivotal role, for the first time, in young people’s decision to violently pivot to Trump: podcasts.
Almost half of adult Americans, 136 million people, listen to at least one podcast a month. The global audience is now 505 million, a quarter of the internet’s reach.
Rogan has 16 million Spotify subscribers and can reach many more people across a variety of other platforms: In just three days after the live podcast, his three-hour-long conversation with Trump was viewed 40 million times on YouTube.
By comparison, when Trump appeared on Fox News’ Gutfeld!, which averages about 3 million viewers, he reached 5 million people, and the full episode has been viewed 2.3 million times on YouTube.
Among Fox’s 3.5 million regular viewers, 70% are 50 and over and 45% are women. The No. 2 cable network, MSNBC, reaches 1.5 million viewers most days; its median viewer is a 70-year-old woman. So: a big audience of young men vs. a small audience of older women. People listen to pods to learn; they watch cable TV to sanctify what they already believe. The former is (much) more appealing to candidates and advertisers.
Rogan’s demographic is 80% male, 93% under 54, and 56% under 34. Men under 34 are the Great White Rhinos of advertising, the most valuable beast in the consumer jungle, and they’re increasingly difficult to find.
He also mentioned in a CNN interview: “Look at the top 10 podcasts. 8 of them lean right, and Trump went on 6 of them.”
Don’t a lot of people who listen to podcasts do so while driving? If so, this is eerily similar to how conservative AM radio brainwashed people who drove a lot, especially in remote areas where FM radio with music wasn’t available.
Also similar: Spotify puts podcasts and music side-by-side the same way the radio dial used to. Sick of that top 10 hit? Check out what the worst people in the world are thinking today!
Makes me glad I never subscribed to Spotify
I did it when I saw all my money was going to Rogan and none to the musicians I listen to
It’s really annoying, plus the algorithm seems really locked down. Between cutting the screen space in half for podcasts and audiobooks, and the narrower algorithm, I never see anything new to listen to anymore until I take extra steps to search for it.
Goddammit I don’t want another round of right-radicalization like the 90s. Fuck’s sake. Wasn’t living through one round enough?
Goddammit.
And the people bankrolling these podcasts, or at least sponsoring them to push a slant to the right, are fully aware of the similarities. It’s why they do it, they already did the math.
Podcasters are self employed.
No, if they run ads, they are sponsored. A handyman is self employed. I don’t stop working to thank DeWalt or Snap-on for providing my tools, I bought them myself.
The ads a handyman chooses to run on the side of their truck are their responsibility. Noone is forced to sell out.
You are missing the point of my original comment, there are podcasts that do get sponsored by conservative or hard right/religious right money that are filling the same niche that AM radio used to, and they are being sponsored because the right knows that it works because they already did the same thing with AM radio.
As an aside, I have never seen a handyman with an ad for a sponsor on their vehicle, ever. Maybe an ad for their own business, but that’s how a service industry works, you need to advertise yourself. Podcasters are entertainers or influencers, and in our economic system, if your income isn’t directly generated by the work you do (service), then it is given to you to perform or advertise (entertainment). An entertainer doesn’t work for their audience. They put in work to gain and keep an audience, but no one person in the audience has the ability to tell an entertainer what to do or say, that power solely covers from the group that pays that entertainer to entertain. The owner of a venue pays a comedian or band, you pay the venue to be allowed to be entertained at that venue. The venue decides what content they put on stage because it can become associated with their brand. Patreon does allow people to directly support podcasters, yes, but if you run ads at all, you are beholden to their terms in order to continue receiving payment. It is statistically improbable that the vast majority of conservative leaning podcasters are either self funded or entirely crowd funded, just like most influencers. Those cross country Van-Lifers are largely either independently wealthy or sponsored by the brands they showcase, serving as an advertisement to their viewers, many of whom are also wealthier. Podcast hosting has a similar barrier to entry as being a SoundCloud hip-hop artist or maybe a country singer, a computer and maybe a camera, so anybody can do for extra income if there are brands or causes willing to actually make it worth the effort to do
Thats an awfully long winded way of saying its not the podcasters responsibility or fault for what is included in their content.
Sorry I disagree.
Plugging Behind the Bastards from coolzone media.
There’s a lot of good work being done at Coolzone. But especially BtB.
Maybe that’s why the reds kept wanting companies to force a return to the office.
And commercial real estate.
Also worth mentioning that Harris declined to be on Rogan
Other way around
Harris will not appear on Joe Rogan podcast, her campaign says - https://www.reuters.com/world/us/harris-will-not-appear-joe-rogan-podcast-her-campaign-says-2024-10-25/
Rogan says he rejected Harris campaign interview conditions https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/10/29/2024-elections-live-coverage-updates-analysis/joe-rogan-kamala-harris-interview-conditions-00186008
Okay… that doesn’t mean I’m wrong lol. The point is she had an opportunity to come on to the show. Her schedule was busy and they couldn’t make it work. I don’t see why he should have to fly to her and only do an hour instead of the usual three. It’s not like Rogan flew out to Trump.
Well, if her people asked for her to be on his show but they had to fly him out and it had to be an hour, and he said no, that she had to go there, like trump, then they declined. That isn’t, in any way the same as her declining to be on his show. Or are you saying you think rogan is lying? If that’s the case I have no argument but I’d question your reasons.
You’re saying Joe Rogan refused to have Kamala Harris on, remember?
https://x.com/joerogan/status/1851118464447971595
I don’t know what to tell you, but Kamala didn’t want to go to Austin and also didn’t want to do the normal three hour show. You can argue with me all you want but all the information is available so you’re just wasting your time.
I’ve been a comedy fan my entire life, by and large nobody respected comedians outside of whether or not they make you laugh. I don’t understand how or know when the culture changed so much. These podcasters are comedians. Why is everyone comparing them to News broadcasting companies or any other industry that is supposed to have merit and accountability? At most/best, these podcasts are a long form version of Regis and Kelly or Ellen. You people taking these CLOWNS seriously, is the reason stupid kids and dumb men my age think they should be taken seriously. Joe Rogan is talked about on the news like he’s a fucking politician, why is anyone surprised his show effected politics after YEARS of the news talking about him and politics in the same breath?
why is anyone surprised his show effected politics after YEARS of the news talking about him and politics in the same breath?
Ignoring him won’t make him go away. The reason he affects politics is because culture affects politics. Everything is politics.
If someone gets on an elevator with 6 people all facing the back wall, even if they don’t understand, they will awkwardly turn to face the back wall like everyone else. If someone sees a bunch of people they respect (read: “he seems like a down to Earth guy”) show their support for Trump, guess what that person is likely to do.
This is the reason celebrity endorsements—oh yay, Swift endorses Kamala—make the news. It’s not because people think Swift is a politician, it’s because they think she’s likeable and not stupid or cruel enough to actually hurt them.
And also, bystander effect, it’s much easier to take a stand when you have a leader. To some, Swift is the jumper-cable spark they need to get involved.
The bottom line is Rogan, podcasts, Tik Tok, Youtube—this is the new media. Democrats can’t keep pretending the only thing people respect is high-brow interviews on 60 minutes.
I’m young enough. You know what I’ve never seen? A single CNN interview. At best, I watch people on Twitch cover them.
News outlets are the reason Rogan is taken seriously. Everything you said isn’t wrong, but it’s ignoring the differences between how “the media” treats Joe Rogan and how it treated other “comedic” figures before him. CNN and just about everyone else, except (maybe) PBS, talked about that bald clown like he was a force to be reconned with.
It doesn’t matter if people actually watched those news segments. People heard about it because, even though they don’t get views, the major news networks still hold more weight than independent media.
Would you know who Joe Rogan is if you weren’t already listening to his podcast and he never came up in the news? 5 years before COVID, he was just “the guy from fear factor” for me.
I’m not suggesting anyone ignore him, I’m suggesting people stop talking about him the way they are. There should be articles about fact checking him without attacking, so his viewers can go to it without feeling bad about watching/listening, not about how important his podcast is. If they weren’t attacking him and instead just fact corrected him in a sort of “by the way” kind of way, this election and COVID would have been a lot different. It’s still possible to do that now.
Edit: fixed an autocorrect I noticed
Great job, keep talking shit about the most popular podcast and alienating people. Sure worked out great for us during the election.
Did you even read the article or are you reddit-jerking over the headline?
Replying to the asinine comments like yours, soy boy
Rogan ain’t gonna stool fuck you bro.
Your stool hole is filled with Rogan’s jizzum
Yes because insulting the voter base is the way to win their votes. This is why we keep fucking losing. Instead of adjusting we call the voters lonely and stupid. Sounds like a sure fire way to win on the fence voters.
This article is essentially saying anyone that listens to these shows is the problem.
Tbf, anyone listening to Joe Rogan is stupid.
I listen to Joe Rogan
This article is essentially saying anyone that listens to these shows is the problem.
Fascists are usually the problem, yea
Now you seem to be implying that anyone who listens to podcasts is a fascist.
Do you ever just take a breath and hold off on what you’re about to say?
Now you seem to be implying that anyone who listens to podcasts is a fascist.
No, I’m not, learn to read
Be less ambiguous.
I wasn’t ambiguous at all, learn to read
You got me.
They killed their chance with Sanders who had a better approval rate than Hillary and could have won that election. Thats when i realized the democratic party is GARBAGE.
For me it was when they skipped their primary election, then adopted the slogan “Democracy is on the ballot”.
Like damn that is insulting. I’ve voted Democrat in every election in my life until this one, but I will not put up with gaslighting from anyone no matter how long our history.
This, many people who voted for Trump weren’t going to vote at all until Hillary called them deplorable.
She didn’t. If they weren’t voting for trump she didn’t call them deplorable. Also, she was referring to only a subset of trump voters. She said you could separate trump supporters into two groups, one was a basket of deplorables. They seem fine with "murderers rapist and thieves and some I assume are good people ", but “there are neo nazis supporting this man, we need to reach the non nei nazis on his side” is too far.
Regardless, the rhetoric is aggressive and alienating, the opposite of what a candidate who wants votes should be.
I would agree that it was aggressive and alienating. Another issue is that it was extremely easy to take out of context, which it widely has been. It’s so it of context that people who didn’t know the context proudly labeled themselves as “deplorable” showing solidarity with David Duke. Never realizing that’s who the original context was about. But it’s hard to speak in a way that will never be taken out of context. “You didn’t build that” for another example.
Did Hilary ever actually clear up the ambiguity though or did we have to give her the benefit of the doubt to a degree?
I dont quite understand what she had to gain from making the statement even if it was said different. She had a strange way of carrying herself thats for sure.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basket_of_deplorables
There wasn’t ambiguity to clear up in context, but she did regret saying “half” of his supporters. She was clearly never saying all of them. Unless you remove the context.
Okay well how about I say I want to murder someone and later take it back and say I only want to murder their bad half. It still sounds sorta like I feel the same either way right?
You can’t say words like clearly unless you know her intent. She was happy to say it at the time, she liked the reaction in the room. Saying later she regretted it could just be an acknowledgement that it caused more trouble than it was worth.
Conversely, she could say, “It was wrong for me to call any group of americans deplorables.” If she wanted to be a leader, take responsibility for your mistakes. Using clever words to make it sound like you might have maybe made a mistake but not really, and then acting like the victim of the story isnt a good look.
Edit: after reading the quote, it was delivered as a joke, very similar to the Puerto Rico joke that got bipartisan condemnation in this election.
Lol you aren’t ever going to win that voter base, the fact that you keep trying is why you keep losing.
Quit your bullshit. Dems have never gone after this segment and you know it. What the fuck is wrong with you?
Yeah this thinking right here is what won you that election.
You need to go to bed. You’re not making sense.
Riddle me this what is making sense to you in the country currently
You’re a bad faith actor. I would never give you the sincerity of real engagement. You would take it as an opportunity to spread your poison. You’re not a Riddler.
YoUr tHe pOisoNer. Better to drink what’s bitter and accept the truth then dance like a fool for clowns.
I find this frustrating. Yes, many of those podcasters are conservative and have participated in spreading misinformation, but there is a huge difference between a private cable news company that is designed to manipulate the electorate, and a bunch of loosely connected yahoos on YouTube who share similar opinions.
Trump gained ground with nearly every demographic out there. They weren’t all watching Kill Tony. Working class people, comedians who rely on unrestricted speech, and a whole lot of other demographics have legitimate grievances that the Democrats have either ignored or shamed them for. They either need to lean how to address these people’s needs, or they will continue to suffer the consequences.
And when you aren’t trying to form a political opinion about it, Kill Tony is actually a pretty funny show. That is why it is the number one comedy podcast, not because of Tony’s political opinions.
loosely connected yahoos
This particular yahoo has a $100 million deal with Spotify.
He may not have the multi-billion dollar revenue of Fox News Media. But he does only have a fraction of their staff and operating expenses. That is certainly no pittance.
The rest of the yahoos are emulating him. Together they have a huge impact.
But they are not a coordinated cabal like Fox, which is the point I was trying to make.
We are being downvoted for this but it’s funny to me that they are calling him Fox News for young people. The show really isn’t all that political. Instead of whining about Rogan, democrats need someone who occupies a similar space as Rogan that young people want to watch.
When I was younger we had Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert. Times have changed and right leaning comedians are edging out left leaning comedy, for whatever reason. Maybe the left is too PC? I don’t know.
The problem is that Rogan is the beginning of algorithmic rabbit holes that relatively quickly draw people into further right-wing political commentary, pundits like Ben Shapiro or Matt Walsh or Tim Pool start popping up more and more on recommended pages, for whatever criteria the almighty algorithm had decided Joe Rogan and right-wing pundits have in common.
He might not seem very political, but he has politically engaged figures on his show quite often.
Even on my own YouTube, I actively curate the recommendations and channels that get suggested to me and tend to cut out the extreme right wing and I still get suggestions for anti-woke conservative videos.
Rogan is an inflection point that leads many people to right wingers.
People often think propaganda is done by hiding something or lying. More often they don’t need to do either of those things. Once you have a pulpit it’s more about who you choose to elevate and amplify.
Even on my own YouTube, I actively curate the recommendations and channels that get suggested to me and tend to cut out the extreme right wing and I still get suggestions for anti-woke conservative videos.
For reasons I cannot explain sufficiently, YouTube seem to be in full we-have-no-ideas panic mode and spitting out lots of right wing crap regardless of what your algorithms used to be.
The best thing one can do on YouTube (alas, I’m a Premium subscriber I must admit), is TURNING OFF VIEWING HISTORY.
I cannot emphasise this enough, please show your parents, your children or cousins how to turn it off. It makes your viewing experience so much better.
I keep getting youtube videos from folks with a thousand subscribers max, I think youtube just kinda imploded somewhat.
Those other guys you mentioned are certified douchebags. Joe Rogan is way more moderate than those clowns.
If Tim pool appeals to young people, then we have to ask ourselves why. It’s not because they may like Joe Rogan. I have a maga buddy who is a huge pool fan but doesn’t like Rogan
Congratulations you’ve pointed out the obvious they’re douchebags who lean further right than rogan, it doesn’t change the fact that algorithms have linked Rogan with these douchebags.
No need to act like you’re better than me for whatever reason. It sounds like you’re blaming Rogan instead of the algorithms. If that’s not good enough then shout at the sky because hacks like Tim Pool exist. You all are going out of your way to blame something else that isn’t even the problem to begin with.
You need to work on your reading comprehension. I am primarily pinning it on the algorithm but I’m also pointing out that Rogan’s podcast is leading people to right-wing commentators, partly because of the guests he has on and partly because the algorithms push people in that direction.
He has plenty of left wing guests on. I have no idea what the situation is with algorithms because I don’t get any right wing nonsense in my feed despite watching Rogan from time to time.
I will say that I checked my ChatGPT and it thinks I’m a right winger because I’m always fact checking my maga friend. What I’m saying is that if people are like me and have right wing friends they argue with, they may get flagged as right wing just from checking their links.
I’m sure I trust someone with the username “ThirdWorldOrder” telling me Joe Rogan isn’t al that political. It’s just a joke, bro!
I’ve had this username since StarCraft 1… so a long time ago. What does ThirdWorldOrder mean to you? lol
democrats need someone who occupies a similar space as Rogan that young people want to watch.
I’ve said it before and I’ll probably say it another hundred times but that.cannot.happen. It’s not possible. It’s like saying “democrats should fight an armed conflict with water balloons and paste” - it is not a possible thing to do.
There are some really interesting reasons why that is, but the TL;DR of it is right-wing conservative bullshit does not translate. So what we’d get is a left-wing liberal papier-mâché version that wore thin quickly.
All I’m saying is don’t bother going down this road. It’ll eat up lots of time and have no results that will help. The answer to Fox News Limbaugh Rogan Chudville Station is not the opposite sameness. It’s entirely different media.
Don’t fight against them, expose the sources of funding they get and go after the money. Almost immediately after Tenet was found out to be a Russian front paying for and delivering talking points to Podcaster like Tim Pool, Lauren Southern, etc and was shut down. All these shows suddenly started dropping what they could do because they lost a significant source of funding and content.
Well, good luck finding something that appeals to young men then.
I mean, that’s easy. It just doesn’t have any politics in it.
Edit: overt politics
In my opinion, the heavy policing of language during the 2010’s made the Democratic Party a hostile environment for improvisational artists. The whole style of their art is to make an omelette on the fly while definitely breaking a few eggs along the way. It is fundamentally necessary for them to be able to make a mistake and move on, and that is something that the “cancel culture” was progressively trying to deny.
It has gotten a little better, but this latest round of blaming comedians and podcasters for Trump isn’t going to help. The Democratic Party needs to realize that when they point the finger at others, there are three fingers pointing back at them.
The whole style of their art is to make an omelette on the fly while definitely breaking a few eggs along the way. It is fundamentally necessary for them to be able to make a mistake and move on, and that is something that the “cancel culture” was progressively trying to deny.
Is this cancel culture in the room with us now?
No, but it sure was in the room when a lot of people got fired.
A lot of Democrat spaces have been in purity spirals for closing in on a decade. It’s not enough to just be pro choice anymore, you have to support free home delivery of abortion meds via text message, elective abortion into the third trimester…
you have to support free home delivery of abortion meds via text message, elective abortion into the third trimester…
Where in any Democrat aligned policy us this the case? The only people getting late term abortions are people who’ve had something catastrophic happen during their pregnancy. No person is going through 6+ months of all the challenges and difficulties associated with pregnancy just to decide they don’t want a baby at the very end.
Don’t just parrot what you hear off of Fox News or Breitbart or Daily Wire, look shit up and verify what they’re saying is true.
Top line policy and allowed opinions in various groups are different. I don’t think you understand a purity spiral, it’s not realistic or logical, it’s about signalling increasingly extreme adherence to a belief. Whether that is third trimester abortion, or anyone not worshiping X god in exactly the right way or you burn in hell, it’s the same root problem.
Got a source on those policy positions to back that up? Any politicians that explicitly are running on encouraging 3rd trimester abortions?
I agree with everything you said, except Kill Tony being funny. I have not heard anything from him that made me laugh.
I am genuinely still waiting.
Kill Tony is the name of a show that has featured hundreds of comedians—that is what I was endorsing as funny, and that is what most viewers come to see. Tony Hinchcliffe is a person, and he serves primarily as a judge on the show, not a featured entertainer.
This exact misunderstanding—that enjoying the product is an endorsement of the political opinions of the creator—is a good example of what I’m talking about. If Democrats want that audience to watch a Democratic comedian’s show, then all they have to do is make a better comedy podcast than he did.
I saw him on tour earlier this year (or maybe last year, I can’t keep up with time anymore). Had never heard of him but we had free tickets. There were 3 or 4 openers, all people part of the Kill Tony family or whatever. His openers were hilarious, he was…very not funny.
