In the guise of “just asking questions” and “listening to all sides” he platforms people with extreme views including some far right weirdos, and normalizes them to his audience. He is also just a walking example of the Dunning-Kruger effect and somehow one of the most listened to voices among his demographic, which draws additional ire from many, myself included.
Alright, fair enough. One thing I don’t fully comprehend though is why can’t we listen to people with extremely opposing views to challenge our own views? Why do we have to only listen to people that fit a certain category? Isn’t that conformity bias?
I’m sorry. These are not meant to be loaded questions.
Perhaps a sound argument would be that general populous lack critical thinking and such distractive views can have undesired consequences.
Have you seen the world recently? We are literally at the point where states are policing interstate travel because people might have an abortion. Standing in opposition to actual fascism is an ethical imperative, and people who equivocate in the face of true evil should be condemned, at minimum.
Some people just want to enjoy some spare time listening to podcasts about plants, gardening and the migration patterns of African swallows.
Some people want to listen to things they can nod along to and agree with.
And I guess some people want to listen to things that challenge their opinions, views etc.
I don’t know why people listen to JRE. I think - back in the day - there was interesting and decent stuff.
Now there are interviews with anti-vax people. And they aren’t challenged or corrected. So they say their piece along side actual scientists talking about cool planet discoveries or whatever.
My biggest gripe is that Spotify bought the show, and tries to shove it down my throat all the time. I can hide artists, albums and songs… but not podcasts
I’m not opposed to listening to people I disagree with, but that’s not really the concern in this case. As others have pointed out, he doesn’t really present a balanced perspective on anything, he just invites guests with extreme views, skewing heavily to the right, and then allows them to present their views with zero critical analysis. He just gets high and nods along like “wow bro so true” while lunatics like Jordan Peterson calmly explain some bullshit that can be summarized as “I don’t like trans people existing, and I think we should put a stop to it.”
You will also not find him entertaining any extreme ideas from the left, which if he were truly the unbiased “just asking questions” guy he purports to be, he would do at least occasionally.
So really it’s a combination of the demonstrably false premise of him being an “unbiased centrist,” his overt ignorance of the subjects he discusses, and his outsized influence on the minds of his listeners.
He’s not just presenting ideas that I and others of the left disagree with, he is tacitly endorsing harmful and toxic ideas to his legions of fans, who then rabidly defend him in every venue online.
Edit: to clarify, I don’t think trans rights is an implicitly political subject, but rather one that has been politicized and turned into fuel for the culture war. It’s a minor thing but I felt I should make it clear since I used that as an example
This is just my opinion. I dont have any stats to really back it up.
I used to listen to his podcast fairly often, though now it’s quite rare.
he has progressively moved to the right over his time being a podcaster. He was originally much more towards the center of the political spectrum, which probably helped his original growth and popularity. He also rarely took sides on any argument, the exceptions usually in his professional careers of comedy and UFC. Now, he often seems to have strong opinions that tend to align to the right, even though he has little to no knowledge in the field.
I do think a large reason why this happened is due to the far left attacking him and attempting to cancel him. The most obvious example is the statements early on about trans people fighting in the UFC/combat sports.
He has had many guests that are quite worth listening to. Neil D Tyson, Lex Friedman, Sam Harris, etc. And even those on the right are still worth listening to. You dont have to agree with them, but its good to hear their arguments in order to make up your own mind.
Old Rogan was good because he focused on psychedelics and weed and had on fellow comedians like Duncan Trussell to talk shit about ‘what if 50 porcupines attacked you? You think you can fight 50 porcupines? What if they give them cocaine first?’
Then he got a little attention, got too much ego, and started thinking he was qualified to talk about politics and social issues with his one-too-many-hits-to-the-head style of cross-examination.
In the guise of “just asking questions” and “listening to all sides” he platforms people with extreme views including some far right weirdos, and normalizes them to his audience. He is also just a walking example of the Dunning-Kruger effect and somehow one of the most listened to voices among his demographic, which draws additional ire from many, myself included.
Alright, fair enough. One thing I don’t fully comprehend though is why can’t we listen to people with extremely opposing views to challenge our own views? Why do we have to only listen to people that fit a certain category? Isn’t that conformity bias?
I’m sorry. These are not meant to be loaded questions.
Perhaps a sound argument would be that general populous lack critical thinking and such distractive views can have undesired consequences.
Have you seen the world recently? We are literally at the point where states are policing interstate travel because people might have an abortion. Standing in opposition to actual fascism is an ethical imperative, and people who equivocate in the face of true evil should be condemned, at minimum.
Some people just want to enjoy some spare time listening to podcasts about plants, gardening and the migration patterns of African swallows.
Some people want to listen to things they can nod along to and agree with.
And I guess some people want to listen to things that challenge their opinions, views etc.
I don’t know why people listen to JRE. I think - back in the day - there was interesting and decent stuff.
Now there are interviews with anti-vax people. And they aren’t challenged or corrected. So they say their piece along side actual scientists talking about cool planet discoveries or whatever.
My biggest gripe is that Spotify bought the show, and tries to shove it down my throat all the time. I can hide artists, albums and songs… but not podcasts
I’m not opposed to listening to people I disagree with, but that’s not really the concern in this case. As others have pointed out, he doesn’t really present a balanced perspective on anything, he just invites guests with extreme views, skewing heavily to the right, and then allows them to present their views with zero critical analysis. He just gets high and nods along like “wow bro so true” while lunatics like Jordan Peterson calmly explain some bullshit that can be summarized as “I don’t like trans people existing, and I think we should put a stop to it.”
You will also not find him entertaining any extreme ideas from the left, which if he were truly the unbiased “just asking questions” guy he purports to be, he would do at least occasionally.
So really it’s a combination of the demonstrably false premise of him being an “unbiased centrist,” his overt ignorance of the subjects he discusses, and his outsized influence on the minds of his listeners.
He’s not just presenting ideas that I and others of the left disagree with, he is tacitly endorsing harmful and toxic ideas to his legions of fans, who then rabidly defend him in every venue online.
Edit: to clarify, I don’t think trans rights is an implicitly political subject, but rather one that has been politicized and turned into fuel for the culture war. It’s a minor thing but I felt I should make it clear since I used that as an example
Them: Let’s kill all jews!!
You: hmm, iiiiiinteresting. Guess I’ll challenge my views tonight!
This is just my opinion. I dont have any stats to really back it up.
I used to listen to his podcast fairly often, though now it’s quite rare.
he has progressively moved to the right over his time being a podcaster. He was originally much more towards the center of the political spectrum, which probably helped his original growth and popularity. He also rarely took sides on any argument, the exceptions usually in his professional careers of comedy and UFC. Now, he often seems to have strong opinions that tend to align to the right, even though he has little to no knowledge in the field.
I do think a large reason why this happened is due to the far left attacking him and attempting to cancel him. The most obvious example is the statements early on about trans people fighting in the UFC/combat sports.
He has had many guests that are quite worth listening to. Neil D Tyson, Lex Friedman, Sam Harris, etc. And even those on the right are still worth listening to. You dont have to agree with them, but its good to hear their arguments in order to make up your own mind.
He gives fascists a microphone. No need to listen to that
Old Rogan was good because he focused on psychedelics and weed and had on fellow comedians like Duncan Trussell to talk shit about ‘what if 50 porcupines attacked you? You think you can fight 50 porcupines? What if they give them cocaine first?’
Then he got a little attention, got too much ego, and started thinking he was qualified to talk about politics and social issues with his one-too-many-hits-to-the-head style of cross-examination.