!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
I get the sense that your concerns aren't who your husband watches but what your husband's opinions are.
Instead of debating over what Rogan says, maybe just have a conversation with your husband about your concerns. Express your thoughts on issues important to you and see how that goes. Maybe your husband just likes the drama and doesn't put much weight into Rogan's hot takes.
This is good advice! I listened to his podcast for a little while because I was interested in a particular guest and I wanted to hear what the guest had to say, not what Rogan thought. I found a few other guests I liked but I quickly stopped listening because Rogan always makes interviews about his interests and it grew old.
The real answer. Everyone is different, can't really judge a person's views by who they watch. I know people that watch a lot of Fox because they want to know what kind of crap they're spreading.
Behind the Bastards and Some More News have covered him albeit tangentially. Knowledge Fight has covered when Alex Jones has been on Rogan and it really illustrates how dangerously unprepared he is to deal with people like Alex
I dont think anyone can be prepared enough to deal with someone like Alex Jones.
The guy is literally a Warhammer 40k space marine in real life. Well, not physically, but he thinks and talks like one.
You should check out Knowledge Fight. They are the experts. When the Times wants to cover him they call them.
America's not even ready for those people.
I agree with many of the other commenters that OP debating their husband might not be the best idea.
But if that's what they want, "Decoding the gurus" did at least one Rogan specific episode, and I think they do a better job covering and dismantling Rogan's rhetorical approach than the podcasts above.
I'm listened to Jones on the Joe Rogan show when he was on with Eddie Bravo. It ended up with them getting wasted and spouting some really off the wall shit. Bravo was deep into chem trails. Jones confidently proclaimed that "interdimensional child molesters" were the biggest threat to humanity. If they were trying to get people to believe in that stuff they were doing a terrible job of it. Unless you're already primed to think that way, it was obvious they weren't thinking rationally.
Sorta the problem with the joe Rogan podcast is that Joe doesn't have an agenda, but every guest he has on does. Some folks think that platforming scumbags and allowing them to say awful things isn't cool, and therefore refuse to go on the show, which means fewer same people and more insane. This then repeats until only insane guests are in the show.
He does have an agenda now, though it's not a political one. It's the chasing of those strokes to his ego that his alt-right audience gives him every time he says something they like.
I mean that's fair. It may not even be ego, might be money. But the point stands either way.
wouldnt be the first time hard right wingers were found out to be only in it for the money. tucker carlson's leaked texts and emails come to mind. or all of ann culters college law papers that were pretty moderate. grift the rubes, never fails.
he definitely puts his own agenda into his show. like, with COVID, he only invited guests with one opinion. he picked the anecdotes and every part of the show that wasn't pure interview. he very very clearly and strongly wanted to push that vaccines are bad and COVID is overblown. that was not a guest doing that.
Only segment of his show I ever saw was Bill Burr calling him a Knuckle Scrapper when masks were brought up, lol.
I don't know your relationship but you might want to reflect on your desire to debate your husband. This seems like a recipe for disaster. If you're concerned he might be sliding into a bad rabbit hole maybe you could try exposing him to some contrary view points, that way he doesn't feel like his loved one is attacking his beliefs.
What? She's trying to be more informed, to better understand the source material. She isn't intending to debate him for fun, like a highschool club, but clearly takes issue with some of the topics and acknowledges she does t know enough to competently engage.
Use https://piped.video to watch his content. It is a privacy respecting alternative front end for YouTube that will strip out ads and such so you don’t give your support to the content creator if you don’t want to. I use it to keep up with Trump stuff without fully supporting those who choose to host him.
neat. i'm always vaguely curious about some of that stuff, but if you watch even 5 minutes of a video about Jordan Peterson you get spammed with OWN THE LIBS videos and nonsense for weeks. it's to the point where i don't even bother.
Piped is the service for you then. I have noticed 0 change in the holy algorithm from the things I have watched on Piped, so that must mean that the privacy measures are working.
Consider joining a Joe Rogan community or similar. As a lurker, you can learn a lot about whats going on just by listening to how other people react.
The Joe Rogan subreddit has basically turned on him since Covid, and the comments are usually a good source of critique and counter arguments against him and his guests.
One good way to get an understanding is to watch the summary of Joe Rogan that Johnny Harris, a YouTube journalist did.
While it won't give you a summary of each episode that Joe Rogan does it will give you an unbiased look at what Joe Rogan's program is all about
Thankyou for those that gave constructive answers and didn't assume anything about my relationship
As a man who works with a bunch of guys that listen to him, nothing worth listening to.
That being said, I'm not married to the guys and work and your going to have way more to deal with in his viewership than I do.
You can also read into some of the very easily disprovable professional morons that appear on show. Jordan Peterson is a great example because he's obviously wrong in a very well researched area.
I'd just find the comedy special from many years ago where he told his audience that "I'm not an expert in anything except smoking weed. I'm a moron. I don't know anything. Nobody should listen to me or take me seriously."
That bit on stage is the first thing I ever think of whenever his name is mentioned these days, since he didn't even take his own God damn advice.
I’m pretty sure I’ve seen several different clips where he repeats the same "I’m a moron" spiel.
While I have only watched what few clips came my way, I was under the impression that was the entire point of his podcast: Invite interesting* people, then validating them in discussion by agreeing to most of their takes regardless of how bizarre they are so that they freely speak of their topic.
*wherein "interesting" is usually something from the categories of fringe beliefs (often conspiracies), drugs, culturally influential people, or experts on whatever is a big topic for his viewership at the time.
Many of the experts are also those of the fringe belief kind.
Basically, if you take Rogan’s views significantly more seriously than the beliefs of your local meth head, you are doing it wrong.
You can ask him to explain the episodes to you. It might help him reflect on the information and give you something to talk about.
If he's difficult to "debate" it might be that the format of your conversations are to blame. Sometimes arguing, especially by throwing "facts" and trying to prove someone that their views are wrong, just creates tension and pushback causing the opposite effect. There's something called Street Epistemology that can help open the door to actual conversations and reflection, instead of antagonistic debating.
https://streetepistemology.com/
If that fails, there's also the option for couples therapy if you feel like you're not communicating.
Johnny Harris has a good video: https://youtu.be/sLaXSvpfDZs?si=ckqeiEdfaknWnBeu
But if you want to debate your husband on what he sees, you're going to need to get a good idea of the guest. The problem with Joe Rogan is that Rogan does very little pushback as an interviewer.
There was one interview that I watched with Mel Gibson touting a stem cell cure-all treatment being given out in Panama and making claims about it helping to cure anything. That treatment was beginning to undergo Phase 2 FDA trials, which basically meant they were studying to see if it would kill people, not what benefits the drug had.
If you are going to debate, ask for a non-Rogan source to back him up. It will at least get your husband to start fact checking. And if your husband asks why you need a second source, you can tell him that Rogan describes himself as an idiot.
Don’t kid yourself, you “giving” him a few views isn’t gonna make any difference, taking a principled stance on it is like peeing in the ocean.
Just watch a few of his videos or listen to some of his podcasts, instead of letting other people give your their viewpoint on him just get your own viewpoint, do it without any bias either.. pick an episode that you are interested in pick something you don’t agree with and pick something that could go either way. You might agree with some stuff and not other things but at least you determined that for yourself
I used to listen to his podcast but lost interest plus I’d only listen to the stuff I had any interest in, science and technology stuff. He had some odd views/stuff I didn’t agree with but that’s living in reality you aren’t always gonna agree with people.
Watch it with him and discuss the video afterwards. No matter how many people sit in front of a screen, it counts as one view.
JR lost touch with reality a few years ago. Hosts nonsense guests on his show who spread BS. To debate him, you simply require a brain and any simple reasoning skills.
He's big enough that a lot of people tend to make videos explaining what he is wrong about and how. Searching YT for "Joe Rogan is wrong" or similar and picking some large looking channels from the list tends to give useful results.
That is the path I would take. All JR does, and all people like him do, is provide people with a encyclopedia of logical fallacies to use during arguments.
An "argument" with these kinds of people usually just drives you into a state of confusion trying to debunk lists of interconnected "facts" they are spewing out. Not only does it put that person in a place to "win an argument by default", they are generally masters at shifting the burden of proof on to you.
Two approaches I take are: Recognize what a person is about to spout off and counter each "fact" they come up with, immediately. Or, you ignore that person and walk off.
You can just watch a little bit of him, it wont hurt you that much to give him viewership and will help you understand what your husband is watching better. You can also find some video clips or compilations on YouTube.
Be careful of clips and compilations though, because those are easy to miss the context of a conversation with.
Hey, pure coincidence , Johnny Harris from youtube recently put out an informative video on Joe a month ago:
https://youtu.be/sLaXSvpfDZs?si=CPwiMtAEdhaWA3Jj
His video is nuanced and informative, but I cannot say it is unbiased and it leaves with a very centrist conclusion, but this might be the best for someone unfamiliar with Joe.
If I may add my own take on him, his show should be considered purely entertainment, and any semblance to actual discourse or debate is purely coincidental and done for entertainment. At best, it should encourage people to start forming their own ideas and opinions (without actually providing reliable resources where to start proper, sadly), and at worst it validates the unfounded opinions and hypotheses of those who believe their internet look-up and echo chamber chatter is equally reputable as peer-reviewed, documented, proper research.
And lastly to alleviate any concerns you have, people who watch Joe simply yearn to be more knowledgeable, even if his show isnt a good chanel for it. Your partner may be able to understand your concerns with a good discussion and communication, so I wish you the best in talking to them and a prosperous outcome. Cheers!
A divorce would probably be less painful than acrually watching Joe Rogan videos.