Joe Rogan Gets New Spotify Deal Worth Up To $250 Million (wsj.com) 134
Spotify has reached a new deal with star podcaster Joe Rogan that will allow his hit show to be distributed broadly. From a report: Rogan's fresh deal, estimated to be worth as much as $250 million over its multiyear term, involves an upfront minimum guarantee, plus a revenue sharing agreement based on ad sales. Under the new licensing agreement, Spotify will sell ads for and distribute "The Joe Rogan Experience" across several podcast platforms, including in a video format on YouTube, the company said Friday. Under his previous deal, the show was exclusive to Spotify. The new deal is emblematic of shifting economics in podcasting, which has matured in both audience reach and advertising spending since Rogan's last deal. Spotify is working to revise the terms of its deals with top talent so that shows are distributed on several platforms to maximize their audience and ad sales, rather than requiring exclusivity.
Guess the boycotts didn't work (Score:4, Insightful)
Neil Young: "Spotify can have Neil Young, or Joe Rogan, but not both!"
Spotify: "K, bye. Oh, Joe, here's a new contract worth more than double your original contract"
Re: Guess the boycotts didn't work (Score:3)
Some people operate on principle.
Re: (Score:1)
I think when people say they respect Robert Byrd, they respected the part where he saw the error of his ways and changed to the point that the NAACP gave him an award. There's all that historic stuff from the Democratic party back when it was the one the racists joined, but things have changed and at least the openly racist people now prefer the Republican party.
So the question is now, Troll or moron?
Re: (Score:2)
Countless people have been canceled and destroyed for shit they said a long time ago or even as kids. No one gave any of them a chance to say, "But I've learned and grown!" and called them respectful. Can't have your cake and eat it.
Robert Byrd was a flat out KKK pos. The only change he made was following the political winds.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh? Who exactly are these supposed "countless people"? Joe Rogan? Dave Chapelle? Aaron Rogers? Novak Djokovic? Aaron Rogers? Elon Musk? Your own Dear Leader?
Looks to me like being "canceled and destroyed" is, at worst, a minor speed bump; and actually helped many of those "countless people".
Re: (Score:2)
Normal people like this:
https://www.nbcsandiego.com/ne... [nbcsandiego.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That's not a person that was racist in the past and admitted fault and changed his ways. That's someone that's either not racist or is racist and is making excuses about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. So much worse. Thanks for making my point.
A nobody gets canceled for no reason yet our hero, Robert KKK Byrd is a man of honor because... why? I can't remember, please remind me.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not even the same situation, just shows you're not even understanding the issue at hand.
Byrd did some despicable things in the past, but he should be respected for the things he did later in life. I wouldn't treat him as a role model, but hopefully members of the Republican party take his lead and try to change their views.
Believing the same thing forever even though it's wrong doesn't make you smart or pricinpled
Re: (Score:2)
Hard was treated as a respected role model. He was a KKK thug when it suited his political career and "had a change of heart" when it didn't. Big fuckin hero. Yay.
Whereas little people who didn't do anything or did the tiniest fraction of what Byrd perpetrated get destroyed.
They are the exact same issue, you just refuse to see it because it leads to a place you don't like.
Re: (Score:2)
Did those "little people who didn't do anything or did the tiniest fraction of what Byrd perpetrated get destroyed" accomplish anything afterwards that helped repair the damage they did? Because that's what Byrd was known for.
Honestly it's a little embarrassing that Republicans have to look back at historical figures and decades in the past to find anything to criticize about the Democrats these days.
Re: (Score:2)
People that show genuine change and work to repair the damage they've done are often respected. It's uncommon for it to be seen among your Republican friends because they usually just deny it or give an "I'm sorry you're offended apology"
Re: (Score:3)
Neil Young did exactly what he said and parted ways with Spotify. I can find no faults or complaints with his actions.
I want really supposed to work (Score:1)
But like a lot of larger than Life personalities people turn
Re: (Score:2)
Boycotts don't work?
Bud would like you to hold their beer.
Oprah Winfrey, but for guys (Score:5, Informative)
Both of them are geared towards the drooling dipshit demographic, it's just different genitals.
Oprah even pushed the same amount of oughties-flavored wackadoo flimflam, but never drew much heat for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Oprah has brought us such gems as Dr. Phil, Dr. Oz, and gave Jenny McCarthy a platform to spout off anti vaccine nonsense.
Goop for men (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
Slashdot is full of idiots who defend them. Can't tell the Trumpies from the conspiratards from the libertarians from the musclehead-wannabes, Joe appeals to all of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Pointing out Rogan is an amoral, greedy tool tends to trigger a collection of what I would call "low-thinkers". They'll mindlessly defend him however they can.
But every downvote here is one the mouth-breathers can't use elsewhere, so more than worth it.
Great news for Alex Jones! (Score:2)
He'd be worth at least as much
Re: (Score:2)
He'll be able to pay back his victims in no time!
Wrong direction (Score:5, Insightful)
Spotify should be 100% music and pay musicians better
The transition from mainstream media (Score:3)
The transition from the corporate, mainstream media empires of the Television Age to the corporate, mainstream empires of the Internet Age is nearly complete. I'm surprised it took this long, actually. I think consumers are the winners here. The content from podcasts, social media (X in particular), and independent news organizations is markedly more diverse and interesting. That comes from embracing free speech as a consumer value. Freedom is simply more attractive to a broader spectrum of people than the walled garden of speech policing.
It's important to note, however, that the new Internet version of media is just as corporatized as the old, in particular with regards to the necessity of making bank. If you like the content, you really do need to support it with your subscriptions and your attention (to ads, that is.) In the end, if we want "free" as in speech, we can't have "free" as in beer. Everyone has bills to pay.
Re: (Score:2)
The transfer from blogs to podcasts has not impressed or assisted me in any way whatsoever. 99% of podcasts are a thorough waste of time. Sometimes you need to waste time -- like on a public transportation commute. Otherwise, who needs it?
Re: (Score:2)
In context "freedom" means a broad selection of information sources that validate my preconceived beliefs and shelter me from unwelcome contradiction by experts.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, now people have no problem drooling over podcasts telling them only what they already believe.
Let me break it down (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Worth it to him, obviously. Worth it to Spotify, maybe. Worth it to the world? Doubtful.
Re:Let me break it down (Score:4, Informative)
> Worth it to the world? Doubtful.
Contrary to the Soy Brigade protestations, there's no universal objective valuation for anything.
Individuals value one thing or another and then through iteration and collaboration methods these values are revised to reflect requirements, preferences, and changing conditions.
The Soviets eventually used French newspaper commodity prices after their central planning failed. Such ideas led Sanders to get cheers for saying we don't need more than one brand of deodorant. Then again, he honeymooned in Moscow.
Re: (Score:2)
The French didn't need ANY brands of deodorant. Though I've heard some of them use it now . . .
Re: (Score:2)
Joe Rogan represents classic masculinity.
If you define classic masculinity by 1980s action movies, then sure. But despite millions of people who watch his show, billions don't give a shit about him or his image.
That's worth every penny of the contract.
Sure if you're a podcast platform. I'm all for it, I just wish Spotify would stop pretending to be about music and stop bitching that they can't afford to pay artists. Incidentally we're talking about a company that lost $800million last year and has never made a yearly profit in its operating history despite having Rogan on their platform
Re: (Score:2)
If you define classic masculinity as mis remembered 80s action movies.
Rambo was anti authoritarian, anti war and about PTSD. It would probably be decried as woke now, but gets remembered as yeah guns America fuck yeah.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, I've watched a few videos now.
That's not "classic masculinity", that's what you thought would be masculinity when you were a 13 year old boy. That's a mix of trashy 80s action movies. Yes, that was what I'd have considered a "real man" back when I was 13, but since I've grown up.
Re: (Score:2)
Classic masculinity?
Where are the tools and shop skills?
Does his even have a super hairy back?
Re: (Score:2)
I think OP misspelled 'toxic'. Or maybe meant, 'frat bro'.
His constant anti-vax bullshit (Score:2)
And fuck dude I'm a nerd of course I got picked on growing up. So did you this
Re: (Score:2)
Says the person switching to AC to troll someone. You lack any form of credibility here.
Re: (Score:2)
Free speech is absolutely necessary (Score:2)
Mill's Trident: You're either wrong, partially wrong, or 100% right [substack.com]. In any case, free speech is absolutely necessary as Adam Goldstein & I explain in today's installment of the Eternally Radical Idea.
Yay, another whiny millionaire spouting off. (Score:2)
Who? (Score:3)
Seriously, who?
Damn Joe Garelli really made it from (Score:2)
FreakZilla website.
Re:Take this with a grain of salt (Score:5, Insightful)
Then again maybe there's an audience for that sort of thing too.
Ya think? There's a huge audience for any show that tells people all their problems are the fault of somebody else.
Re: (Score:1)
https://static.tvtropes.org/pm... [tvtropes.org]
Rogan didn't used to do that (Score:4, Informative)
There's a rather famous video of him talking about these apes that don't actually exist and they renowned primatologist calls in to correct him and he just brays at her like a donkey until she gives up and hangs up. I think that was kind of the point of no return.
Once you give up on science and facts is really only one group of people in this world who will accept you and shower you with praise and once you get in with that group it's a downward spiral
Re: (Score:2)
Stern was a shock jock, and Rogan never came across that way.
Stern made Chyna cry because of her adult film.
Stern routinely had a midget wrestler on his set.
Stern had John K. and Billy West. Oh I found it!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't quit your day job then.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Here's a list of the last 50 or so podcasts. You can look up the rest yourself: https://jrelibrary.com/episode... [jrelibrary.com]
Which episodes are the ones about Anti-Vaccine Nazi Big Foot's in UFOs again?
Can anyone on the left point to where the bad man touched them? lol
Episode Guest(s) Date Notes
#2096 Josh Dubin, Sheldon Johnson Feb 1, 2024
#2095 Moshe Kasher Jan 31, 2024
#2094 Colion Noir Jan 30, 2024
#2093 Bert Kreischer, Tom Segura, Ari Shaffir Jan 26, 2024 Sober October Crew
#2092
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Take this with a grain of damien lee (rsilverg (Score:2)
He really doesn't do conspiracy theories that I've seen. I don't watch his show all the time, but what I've seen of him is he'll entertain "what if" scenarios a lot and talk about how bizarre they'd be, and he frequently has guests on that he is at odds with but he doesn't get confrontational with them, rather he probes why they think what they do and sometimes entertains the idea without taking it seriously.
I don't get why progressives think simply entertaining an idea means you intend to follow it. It jus
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's money to be made in stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
There's money to be made from stupidity, which is to say, from the stupid.
Re: (Score:3)
It's very clear that money can be made from publicly being stupid, as well. Example: Mike Lindell.
Re: (Score:2)
I think peak stupidity is having zero oversight of how $2 trillion in taxpayer money [go.com] was spent. Is anyone able to account for how much of that money went to political grifters? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
Re: (Score:1)
Is that how much Biden has sent to Ukraine?
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, what Biden sent to Ukraine was mostly obsolete junk that we avoided the cost for scrapping that way.
Re: Take this with a grain of salt (Score:2)
the only way Russia doesn't invade the Ukraine is if they paid off Putin & trump.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'm talking about explosive ordinance that has an operational storage lifetime, and we have to pay for disposal if we don't use it.
And you're absolutely correct - it was an avoidable war. All it would have taken to avoid it is for Russia to stay on their side of the border 2 years ago.
Wait, are you suggesting that a sovereign nation should just roll over and accept genocide because their shithead neighbor decided they wanted more land? Please tell me they don't pay you in rubles for this half-assed pr
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that or a Flamebait mod, same reason, same effect.
Re: (Score:2)
"They", eh?
But I'm not paranoid!
Because if you are, "they" notice it!
Re: (Score:2)
Rogan was always into conspiracy theories, even on Newsradio in the 90s they were already making fun of it. Was also the case on the show, if anything it has gotten less. Covid vaccine stuff is over, nobody cares about this anymore, also it seems not Rogan.
I think since moving away from California his guests have become less interesting, I think that's largely a geographical issue.
It's three hour talks with people that go pretty in depth. I think anyone saying it's just Rogan going on rants isn't watching/l
Re:Take this with a grain of salt (Score:4, Interesting)
Yeah it's beyond obvious now that Rogan is a entertaining interviewer and he does have quite a few interesting people on and is able to engage them in discussions.
What I hear most often as the criticism is that he is a very passive interviewer, as in he could have Neil DeGrasse Tyson on one day explaining the mysteries of the universe and engage faithfully in that but 2 shows later have on a flat earth believer and give them the same amount of deference and end up really agreeing with both of them.
Now there is a valid discussion to be had that's it's not his style or even responsibility to engage against these things or push back at all but it definitely cuts against the idea that he is engaged in serious discussion about anything, it's pop-radio.
Patton Oswalt who has known Rogan a long time had a bit in one of his last specials to the effect of "Joe is a very sweet guy who is very smart but someone gave him $400,000,000 and that's enough to drive anyone off the deep end"
Re: (Score:1)
It's three hour talks with people that go pretty in depth. I think anyone saying it's just Rogan going on rants isn't watching/listening the show.
Having checked a decent sampling of the recordings, I can say you're lying here. 90% or better of the show is either Rogan ranting skinhead conspiracy theory crap, or having skinhead conspiracy theorists on and nodding "uh huh, oh that's so interesting" while they spew white-supremacist conspiracy theory bullshit.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not like these are secret recordings. Let's hear them. Send the episode # and time stamps. Let's listen to these things.
I want to see if these are really recorded or these are just voices in your head you're hearing at the same time.
Moryath ( 553296 )
Re: (Score:2)
And by recordings you mean that someone went through the thousands of hours of recordings and collected some out of context 5 second clips and put them after eachother? If I collect 1000 hours of you talking I can cut them up to make you say whatever you want. Hell I can cut up your above comment to make you say you are a white supremacists. I am pretty confident that if you watch a recent episode with a guest that interests you, you will come out of this not hating the guy.
Re: (Score:2)
And anyone who isn't listening to the show deserves credit for avoiding such horrible nonsense.
I don't agree with Joe, but I find him sincere! (Score:5, Insightful)
But several forms are full of people complaining about how the show is going downhill because instead of being fun and entertaining it's just Rogan going on about various conspiracy theories and anti-vax nonsense. I've never understood the appeal of the show but I do know people find it entertaining, and that a lot of people are saying it's becoming less and less entertaining because Rogan won't shut up about vaccines and furry litter boxes.
We have a peculiar modern problem. So few people can derive value from someone they don't fully agree with. I enjoy Bill Maher and Joe Rogan, even though more than one time I have wanted to yell at them for being idiots. Joe had guests that have changed my life for the better, like Petter Attia and Andrew Huberman, and Pavel Tsatsouline. Because of their advice, I am fitter and literally 40lbs lighter. Joe introduced me to Peter Zeihan and I watch his videos daily now and have learned a lot about economics and the world as well as discovered other content producers I like and have learned a lot from. But I would hate to sit next to either on a flight and listen to them go off about their stupid shit.
I hate Bill Maher's generational rants and made-up wokeness strawmen. I hate Joe Rogan's desire to shoehorn his stupid anti-vaxxer rants into unrelated conversations. I hate how Joe Rogan can have TOTAL political hacks on his show who lie to his face about obvious stuff and he lacks the intelligence to ask follow-up questions.
Jordan Peterson is a great example. I didn't "like" him before and disagreed with his stupid rants about trans people, but assumed he was sincere and just had a different view and thought this life advice to young people about cleaning their room as the start to a journey of self-improvement was pretty brilliant. He used to be an example of someone I didn't "trust" but respected to some degree and could listen when he wasn't ranting about things I viewed as made-up problems.
Then in a recent appearance on Bill Maher, he claims Joe Biden caused the Hamas attacks....gave the flimsiest, most desperate justification and revealed he degenerated into just a talking head for dumb Right Wing propaganda. Bill Maher at least asked follow-up questions like "how the hell can you say Joe Biden caused Hamas to attack Israel"...although didn't grill him enough to my liking...Joe, when presented with obvious bullshit, just goes with it and half the time repeats it in later episodes. As much as I find Joe gullible and sometimes quite dumb, I do believe he is sincere.
In a world where half of commentators are clearly full of shit and pushing propaganda, it is nice to have someone who has a platform where you believe he is sincere and not saying what Fox News or MSNBC wants him to say. You believe that when he says it, he believes it. He's not part of the grift, like most conservative commentators. That's his main appeal, IMHO. He's also genuinely a good podcaster and conversationalist. I honestly listen to him and try to learn from him just on how to talk to people because he's much better at it than any person I've personally met and I feel I could learn a lot from emulating his ways.
However, maybe I'm just old, but I have the ability to hear someone I don't agree with and still derive value from listening, if they are sincere. I want to hear alternative views. I prefer being right...and not just listening to folks who tell me I am right. That's what separates people like me from Fox News viewers. I want my perspective based on learning things and questioning beliefs I hold to be true. If they're true, they'll survive scrunity just fine. People who watch propaganda channels like Fox can't handle their views or perspectives being challenged. They don't want to be informed. They just want to be reassured that they're fine as they are and there's no room for growth and whatever they view is correct...even if the facts don't support their ideals. That's why I appreciate people like Joe Rogan and Bill Maher. They're there to provide their perspective (at least from what I can tell)...not just reaffirm yours.
Re: (Score:2)
And I appreciate your comments too. Yes, be able to listen to a variety of views. Thank you.
Re: (Score:1)
My problem with spending time on Maher or Peterson is I feel their opinions are so lack in substance and often fail an even cursory criticism that I would be better served spending a few minutes listening to a random stranger's thoughts on the same topics.
There is a whole industry of journalism that spends time reporting on what these talking heads said. And rather than picking it apart and showing the flaws in Maher or Peterson's arguments, the media just stirs the pot. I mean I guess if everyone is entert
I listen for the guests, personally (Score:3)
My problem with spending time on Maher or Peterson is I feel their opinions are so lack in substance and often fail an even cursory criticism that I would be better served spending a few minutes listening to a random stranger's thoughts on the same topics.
There is a whole industry of journalism that spends time reporting on what these talking heads said. And rather than picking it apart and showing the flaws in Maher or Peterson's arguments, the media just stirs the pot. I mean I guess if everyone is entertained, that's something. But it seems like a collective waste of effort to me.
For me, the appeal is the guests more than the host. When Bil talks, I listen...but don't always agree. However, there are often interesting debates on his show if you can stomach Bill's smugness.
Joe has GREAT guests....some horrible ones too....but the guy puts out a lot of shows. If you have 5 shows that literally change me as a person in a year, you're doing amazing...even if 100 shows that year were pure trash...and honestly, most of his guest are boring to me. The last person I want to hear ta
Re: (Score:2)
To this day, I am still really sad Gina Carano not only acted like a total piece of shit online, but doubled down on it. I really liked her and wished she'd just swallow some pride, apologize, and earn a fuck-ton of money...
Its Hollywood. Its possible that some of Carano's positions stem from her off stage interactions with Disney execs, and she may feel that she cannot share them with the public. (For openers, they definitely have enough money that they can sue her, if she cannot validate her unrecorded
She embarassed her boss (Score:2)
To this day, I am still really sad Gina Carano not only acted like a total piece of shit online, but doubled down on it. I really liked her and wished she'd just swallow some pride, apologize, and earn a fuck-ton of money...
Its Hollywood. Its possible that some of Carano's positions stem from her off stage interactions with Disney execs, and she may feel that she cannot share them with the public. (For openers, they definitely have enough money that they can sue her, if she cannot validate her unrecorded public statements in court.)
You can phrase things as complex as you like and get into the merits of her opinions, but regardless...when you earn the kind of money she does and are a public face of a new franchise, which she was about to be, you keep your mouth shut. Your job is to pretend to be a space bounty hunter, not opine on the world...even if you bring light to some great injustice...which I don't think mocking trans people and comparing conservatives in Hollywood to Jews in the Holocaust are particularly correct or insightful
Re: I don't agree with Joe, but I find him sincere (Score:2)
You make a very valid point, he is sincere and authentic. He generally tries to understand new things and make up his mind about it and it is not just an act because it makes him money.
I have no issue with him getting things wrong, everyone can verify and look things up these days and it teaches you about how and why you get things wrong, who has what agenda.
And he is pleasant enough to listen to and keeps his guests talking.
When he cares about something or thinks he knows the right answer, he will call peo
Re: (Score:2)
This.
You can find faults in Rogan's endeavor, but it's tough to accuse him of either being insincere, malignant, or worse, hateful. Among the other people you mentioned (such as Maher or Peterson), I'm not fond of their rants, but I appreciate their commentary (even though they're very different, Maher is an entertainer and Peterson a psychologist).
As far as I'm concerned, I learn from some of Rogan's guests (although I must listen to 1 episode per 100 he produces), I learn from some of Peterson's guests (o
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you include jews and muslims in that view, or just evangelicals?
Just asking.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
silly prog neologisms aside, I'd say the poster i was posing that question to is more of a bigot than myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who needs a con-man to tell them what to do qualifies. Whether you call that con-man priest, rabbi or imam, a rose by a different name...
Re: (Score:2)
Well it's not for me either; but hey.. to each their own.
But it IS interesting how progressives are more than willing to use white evangelicals as punching bags, but oh lawdy will they ever recoil in horror at the implication that jews or muslims are 'fools to be milked'
it's the double standard that makes it magical.
Re: (Score:2)
Just mention how women are treated in Muslim countries and enjoy the mental gymnastics exhibition.
Re: (Score:2)
An MMA guy!
I'm losing faith in this country's long term viability
Re: (Score:2)
Half of people are below average intelligence. Combine that with most people overestimating their understanding of topics (Dunning–Kruger effect). And some of popular culture starts to make more sense.
That people are dumb and believe dumb things is a very old problem. It's one of the justifications made in support of the class system (Western) or in a social strata (China), And a big barrier to social equality and egalitarian ideologies (both Democracy and Communism).
The US's long-term viability hinge
Re: (Score:2)
Reagan was an actor.
Re: (Score:3)
The Joe Rogan Experience is an informal talk show. Its topics are as ranging and deep as what dudes talk about at the local bar and it is presented in a similar way. There's nothing wrong with that, in my opinion. But most of the viewers aren't aware that Rogan's show is just a male version of The View. And more importantly, people forget that the primary purpose is entertainment. It's not there to inform, educate, or even to convert people to a political ideology. It's just Joe talking about whatever he fe
Re: (Score:1)
> I've never understood the appeal of the show
I’d watched a few of his early episodes and it would basically ask all the right questions to lead his guest into whatever interesting things they had to talk about. Then he’d freely admit not knowing about X and Y and prompt the guest into explaining. From time to time he’d deviate into Joe Rogan subjects like smoking DMT.
But right wing talking head blew up as a grift and the format lends itself well to people who wanna spout bullshit uno
Re: (Score:2)
I just love seeing anti-free-speech "progressives" get triggered by the existence of Joe Rogan.
Re: (Score:2)
You, sir, are a liar.
Rogan has said multiple times on air that he has advised (or would advise, if they weren't so enclined) his parents to get vaccinated (I assume you meant for Covid). Is that what an anti vaxxer would do? As for the right wing nut accusations, Rogan has expressed quite a few view points on the podcast that make him a classic liberal (or 90s era liberal if you will). So these also fall flat.
I think the appeal of his podcast for most people is that he's genuine and the long form format all
Re: (Score:1)
Oh you tremendous . By labeling anything to the right of chairman mao "nazi" or "racist" you dilute the terms so that when actual thoughtcrime or badthink-adjacent views are espoused the terms carry no weight or credibility whatsoever. Can you give a single, solitary example of something he's said that's actually nazi-esque or barring that, actually racist? And no, quoting FBI crime stats does not count.
It's almost as if people have different views than yours, imagine that.
You have guys like keith olberma
Re: (Score:2)
i accept your concession ;)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Huh, well if I'm being totally honest I haven't listened to his podcasts; and i guess now I can't (at least the interesting ones).
but was he actually being """"racist"""" or did he simply utter the super bad, mega awful no no naughty word? Or talk about race relations from a starting position other than whites being automatically evil monsters?
Progs tend to clutch their pearls at the merest hint of racism (depending on the speaker, of course), so I tend to take such them, and other such nonsensical things
Re: (Score:2)
well if I'm being totally honest
That would be a first.
I haven't listened to his podcasts
Then why are you posting about them?
Just FYI, calling a skinhead white supremacist a Nazi isn't hyperbole, it's an accurate description.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't believe him to be an actual skinhead (aside from his hair? PED's will do that to a man after years perhaps) -- because again, just because you nutty hare-brained progs keep saying it doesn't make it actually true.
BUT haha, most of the people in this thread either:
A) find him abominable but listen anyways (which is insane)
B) haven't listened to him either, and by your logic and shouldn't be discussing his podcasts?
So again, what has he said that makes you think he's an ACTUAL skinhead/nazi whatever?
Re:Take this with a grain of salt (Score:5, Informative)
Well if you haven't listened, then take a look at this wonderful clip [mediaite.com] where he spends 2 minutes laughing and feigning sincerity about how Biden is senile and should be pulled from service like a defective part due to talking about "not having enough airports" in the Revolutionary War, and guffaw with his yes-man guest about how "the media is just gaslighting everyone" and "projecting narratives" just to have his producer instantly inform him that it was actually a Trump quote that Biden was mocking once you expanded your view about 2 degrees wider to include some surrounding context. And then he played the Trump video.
And what was Rogan's response to being informed that he just gaslit everyone watching / listening? "Oh, then he fucked up. Heh heh heh" followed by his guest figuratively contorting himself into knots to minimize the exact same god damn thing from Trump, and then the subject was INSTANTLY CHANGED. No apology for gaslighting after immediately whining about media gaslighting. No apology to Biden for very publicly mocking him in a fantastically ageist fashion with his "proof" being obliterated by his own producer in a realtime fact check. No demands that Trump have any cognitive impairment testing for saying the exact same obviously stupid fucking statement - just equivocation and excuses when it's the guy from their chosen tribe saying it.
He's unbelievably biased, and if you believe anything coming out of this guy isn't biased in the extreme, then you may as well believe anything coming from far-left morons that are just as guilty.
Re: (Score:1)
What does President Biden have to do with any of this? I don't hear you saying word one of how Jared Kushner recieved 8 times that amount of money for having zero qualifications other than having his loser father-in-law hand over classified information. Or how Jared and Ivanka got two and a half times that amount for being incompetent at their do-nothing government jobs.
Let us not forget the secret Chinese bank account [vanityfair.com] the l
Re: (Score:2)
And while we're here, let's not forget how Putin was extorting Trump with videos of hookers peeing on his hotel bed and that Trump server that was reporting back to a Russian server and that ugly woman a famous billionaire raped in a public place.
Re: (Score:2)
She wasn't murdered. That was just a cover story. She transitioned and is now going by Charles.