Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Alternative 'rona thread


Pureblood
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Boss said:

 

I don't see how any of those things make him a grifter. He is selling merchandise to people that like his podcast. He's not making claims that his t-shirts will cure COVID. He's not knowingly deceiving people, which is the very essence of what the term grifter means. 

 

You were saying that he was promoting his podcasts on free platforms, as if that's something in his favour. I was pointing out that, while they may have been free to the listener, he's certainly not doing this for altruistic reasons. He's getting paid in full. 

 

And, while, barely knowing the guy, I don't know for a fact that he's deceiving people, I wouldn't go around saying with any confidence that he's being sincere either. Not when there's 100 million reasons why he might be motivated to say what his audience wants to hear.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

You was saying that he was promoting his podcasts on free platforms, as if that's something in his favour. I was pointing out that, they maty have been free to the listener, but he's certainly not doing this for altruistic reasons. He's getting paid in full. 

 

And, while I don't know that he's deceiving people, I wouldn't go around saying with any confidence that he's being sincere either. Not when there's 100 million reasons why he might be motivated to say what his audience wants to hear.

 

How much money was he making on Youtube when he started in 2009? He was one of the first famous people to start a podcast. He was already making loads of money from the UFC. He made virtually nothing from the podcast. He did it purely for his own enjoyment.


In relation to your claims that Spotify are influencing his content. It even says in the article you posted:

 

Quote

"It will remain free, and it will be the exact same show. It's just a licensing deal, so Spotify won't have any creative control over the show. They want me to just continue doing it the way I'm doing it right now.

 

Therefore, I can only deduce you are calling him a "grifter" because he's anti-vax. And you're somehow suggesting Spotify are putting him up to all this. Why would Spotify want to promote not taking the vaccine?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Boss said:

 

How much money was he making on Youtube when he started in 2009?

 

Zero - then more every subscriber - that is how youtube works.

 

He is a performer - he gets paid every single time he shows up. No one is saying he shouldn't get paid. 

 

Forbes magazine named Joe Rogan the highest-paid podcaster of 2019. Between his ad revenue, YouTube broadcasts, and live shows, the comedian earned $30 million last year. According to the Wall Street Journal , Rogan’s new deal with Spotify is worth $100 million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Boss said:

 

How much money was he making on Youtube when he started in 2009? He was one of the first famous people to start a podcast. He was already making loads of money from the UFC. He made virtually nothing from the podcast. He did it purely for his own enjoyment.


In relation to your claims that Spotify are influencing his content. It even says in the article you posted:

 

 

Therefore, I can only deduce you are calling him a "grifter" because he's anti-vax. And you're somehow suggesting Spotify are putting him up to all this. Why would Spotify want to promote not taking the vaccine?

 

 

As his audience grew, he would have made money from his Youtube channel. 

 

I don't know why you keep on flagging up the fact that his podcasts are free to the listeners, as if that absolves him of the possibility that he's profiting from them. I've already shown that he is. Handsomely. 

 

I doubt if Spotify have told him to promote anti-vax content. But I've no doubt that he knows his contract relies on him pulling in a big and loyal audience by any means necessary. Fuck, I would tell people that Bill gates is microchipping every vaccine, or some equally bizarre bollocks, if it got me the audience that attracted £100 million contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

As his audience grew, he would have made money from his Youtube channel. 

 

I don't know why you keep on flagging up the fact that his podcasts are free to the listeners, as if that absolves him of the possibility that he's profiting from them. I've already shown that he is. Handsomely. 

 

I doubt if Spotify have told him to promote anti-vax content. But I've no doubt that he knows his contract relies on him pulling in a big and loyal audience by any means necessary. Fuck, I would tell people that Bill gates is microchipping every vaccine, or some equally bizarre bollocks, if it got me the audience that attracted £100 million contracts.

 

He was a multi-millionaire before he started the podcast. The podcast was just him and his mates chatting. Youtube - back in 2009 - paid hardly anything by today's standards. Even if he had millions of subscribers - which he didn't back then - it would've paled in comparison to his revenue from the UFC. 

 

He is anti-vax because he believes it's right. Whether you agree with his stance on that is your own concern, but he is sincere in his beliefs. If he wasn't, he would've been vaccinated, wouldn't he? Because technically, he would've been promoting the anti-vax rhetoric for views, right? The fact he sought out alternative therapies when he got COVID proves, beyond doubt, that he was sincere in his beliefs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Boss said:

 

He was a multi-millionaire before he started the podcast. The podcast was just him and his mates chatting. Youtube -back in 2009 - paid hardly anything by today's standards. Even if he had millions of subscribers - which he didn't back then - it would've paled in comparison to his revenue from the UFC. 

 

He is anti-vax because he believes it's right. Whether you agree with his stance on that is your own concern, but he is sincere in his beliefs. If he wasn't, he would've been vaccinated, wouldn't he? because technically he would've been promoting the anti-vax rhetoric for views, right? The fact he sought out alternative therapies when he got COVID proves, beyond doubt, that he was sincere in his beliefs.

 

As I said above, I'm not in a position to state whether or not he's sincere in what he says on his podcasts. I was just taking issue with your implication that, because his podcasts are free to the listener, he's not making money from them, thus he's not a grifter. He is making money from them, an enormous amount, and enough for me at least to question the motivations behind what he says to his audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

As I said above, I'm not in a position to state whether or not he's sincere in what he says on his podcasts. I was just taking issue with your implication that, because his podcasts are free to the listener, he's not making money from them, thus he's not a grifter. He is making money from them, an enormous amount, and enough for me at at least to question the motivations behind what he says to his audience.

 

His podcast initially had nothing to do with money; it was a labour of love. Over time, as Youtube grew as a platform, and as the podcast space exploded, his podcast became successful. Naturally, companies want to align themselves with successful things. All those factors are external to him. He's just producing something he loves, and over time, a company has decided to attach a monetary value to it because they think it can draw in millions of new users to their platform. 

 

I don't see how making money from producing a labour of love makes a person a grifter. Following that logic, Picasso, J.R.R Tolkien, George Orwell, The Beatles, Bob Dylan, Elvis Presley, Da Vinci, Rembrandt, and Shakesphere are grifters. They've all made money from something they initially created for the love of it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

They reached the same audience they did when you saw them on Fox.

 

Actually much smaller.

Didn't have the same seismic impact this Rogan exposure has had, in my opinion. 

 

What had the biggest impact was talking about mass formation psychosis.  That got people interested and asking questions. It wasn't a data set or a graph that got people talking, it was the psychology. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jack the Sipper said:

Fuck, I would tell people that Bill gates is microchipping every vaccine, or some equally bizarre bollocks, if it got me the audience that attracted £100 million contracts.

Which is what he's done.

 

He panders to the likes of Alex Jones, and has increasingly become more conspiratorial, anti vax, and anti 'woke' to play to his core demographic.

 

He pushes the same kind of bullshit supplements to his gullible audience as the likes of info wars do through his sponsors (ironic given his anti-vax stance), or supplements he has a business interest in, and uses his shows to warn viewers against products that the products he's pushing just happen to be the counter for (until they're found to be the same just more expensive, but as long as it makes him money hey).

 

As soon as he's called out on something he either back tracks or acts like he wasn't making a statement he was just asking the question.

 

Even Bill Burr has taken to calling him out.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, TK-421 said:

What had the biggest impact was talking about mass formation psychosis.  That got people interested and asking questions. It wasn't a data set or a graph that got people talking, it was the psychology. 

It got morons parroting the term, it didn't get them interested.

 

Feels like you only started parroting it after the podcast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

It was better when it was all about comedy.

 

In fact- since the pandemic his best stuff is  with comedians. Bill Burr episodes are legendary.

 

To be honest, I haven't watched any of his episodes since he moved to Spotify. I like the Joey Diaz episodes though, especially the older ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...