I don't think the hate or admiration for Rogan is warranted. Rogan appears to accidentally be a good interviewer: he's amicable, credulous, and lets his guests talk. This can be great for learning a lot about a guest really feels, or at least how a guest really wants to present themselves. However, if the guest makes a bad point, Rogan is unlikely to notice it. (the same goes if the host makes a point in bad faith.) And arguably, the audience may not notice it if neither Rogan nor his guest highlight it. Is this the end of the world? No, not really. Another news publication somewhere else will ask the questions that Rogan cannot. And, in a perfect world, there's value in both kinds of interview: the adversarial interview, and the softball long-form interview. In principle, the softball long-form interview could actually be very damning when compared against other sources of information, such as the adversarial interview.

In a less polarized world, I suspect that Rogan would never have been famous in the first place.

I think he used to be a better interviewer. Over the last couple years I think he has confused having people with interesting things to say on his shows with him having interesting things to say. Now he interrupts guests more frequently and puts less effort into actually understanding them.

"Rogan is not capable of holding Zuckerberg's feet to the fire on anything of consequence." Does every place needs to hold someone's feet to the fire, every interview needs to be an adversarial interview?

Exactly. Not everyone has to be on the attack all the time, however people seem to expect that these days in this highly polarised world.

What is so awful about Joe Rogan ? Just wondering.

He thinks his comedy act is funny.

LOL

He uses a space in front of his punctuation it’s terrible.

That's just typical formatting in some languages, like French...

I haven't yet identified any french posts here. Could you point me to them?

Joe drives drunk and high all over town, often with his guests. He changes opinions based on whoever he's in front of. When given new info he doesn't like, rather than look into it, he ONLY looks at "debunkings". He supports a lot really trash people. For example, Joey Diaz who proudly metoo's women, is addicted to hard drugs, abandoned his daughter, and stomps his poo into the shower drain. There are a hundred other truly trash people he promotes as heroes. Or another example, Anthomy Cumia, an admitted pedophile who got in big trouble for domestic abuse (he admitted to biting a young woman's hand) and just last week tweeted "f**** kill all n***" Maybe he gets some good guests too, but it's always a shallow interview and he'll often ask the same question 5-6 times (the Elon Musk ep, for example). He strongly promotes diets he 100% certainly has never followed, like the Carnivore diet. He's no health expert--he's smoking cigars and drinking whiskey on nearly every show. He had an affair with Ali Macofsky and seems to have abandoned his family. I could go on. I should say, I don't hate the guy. But he is awful and deserves to be made fun of

>stomps his poo into the shower drain.

Am i alone in finding this odd, when added to a sentence about domestic abuse? Why is this with mentioning?

It wasn't a sentence about domestic abuse, it was one point of many demonstrating the trashiness of one person Joe constantly promotes as a hero. There are dozens of other trashy heroes of Joe's. I gave some understated examples. It wasn't my main point, though. The question was "Why is Joe Rogan awful?" One answer: he promotes trashy people and spreads scummy ideas with authority.

"Joe drives drunk and high all over town, often with his guests"

How do you know this?

His guests have said so. And he can regularly be seen on a show called Kill Tony (also filmed in Austin) where it's been revealed morethan once that yes, Joe drove here drunk. Here's the long version: https://youtu.be/qM-mQm3WFvY

Why awful? Truly curious.

joe rogan says awful things, and contributed to a lot of misinformation about a wide range of topics including neo nazi protests/transgender people/vaccines/pandemic... the list goes on and on. In general he gives a platform to a lot of people that say offensive/harmful/incorrect things and he does not challenge their actions or words but encourages it.

Something tells me you haven't listened to his show.

I also think Mark's platform is far more guilty for spreading misinformation (including those from government sources) and radicalizing people than Joe Rogan's conversational show featuring a random comedian or scientist.

It is telling that Rogan keeps referring to the NYPost, a conservative tabloid rag [0], as a respectable paper and reliable source.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post

The Post broke the Hunter Biden laptop story and was temporarily deplatformed for it. The DC left called it a fabrication, as did "mainstream" media. Eventually, even the NY Times admitted it was real. Who is the reliable and respected newspaper here?