• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Joe Rogan Podcast

T

TheBigA

Here's an interesting analysis of the Joe Rogan podcast. Keep in mind that Spotify is an international platform, so all download numbers are based on that. Also, just because someone downloads a podcast doesn't mean they listen to it:

www.insideradio.com

Donald Trump’s ‘Joe Rogan Experience’ Appearance Is Most Viral Episode Ever.

The highly anticipated “Joe Rogan Experience” podcast featuring Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has become the most viral episode in the series’ history. The podcast's video has amassed more than
www.insideradio.com www.insideradio.com

This article goes even further, examining why some podcasts don't get involved in politics:

www.insideradio.com

Why Some Podcasters Are Saying ‘No’ To Pitches From Political Teams.

There have been plenty of high-profile appearances by politicians on podcasts this campaign season, with a bipartisan agreement that the medium has gone mainstream. But while lots of headlines have
www.insideradio.com www.insideradio.com
 
Last edited:
This article has demographic information for the podcast listed at the end.

www.insideradio.com

Joe Rogan Podcast Invites JD Vance; What Happened To Kamala Harris?

Following his interview with former President Trump, podcaster Joe Rogan welcomes Republican Vice-Presidential nominee JD Vance to “The Joe Rogan Experience.” Vance is scheduled to record an interview with Rogan
www.insideradio.com www.insideradio.com

According to Edison Podcast Metrics, 54% of weekly Joe Rogan listeners lean toward Trump, while 26% favor Harris. The 16% undecided among Rogan’s audience highlights a critical group that both candidates are vying for. Rogan’s audience skews overwhelmingly male (80%), Edison says, with a majority of listeners (51%) falling within the critical 18-34 age range. Politically, 35% of listeners identify as Independent or “something else,” while 32% align with Republicans, and 27% align with Democrats.
Click to expand...
 
boombox4 said:
She had an offer to be on the show and turned it down. Who's fault is that? Rogan's? Nope. The ball was in Harris's court. She bailed.
Click to expand...
Harris wanted Rogan to meet her for an hour-long interview. He wanted her to come to his studio to do an entire three-hour show. Neither "bailed"; they just couldn't agree on the logistics.

Rogan's show was friendly territory for Trump, just as Howard Stern's show was friendly territory for Harris. I don't recall anyone criticizing Trump for not going on Stern? And none of his supporters cared that he bailed on the 60 Minutes interview.
 
kevtronics said:
Harris wanted Rogan to meet her for an hour-long interview. He wanted her to come to his studio to do an entire three-hour show. Neither "bailed"; they just couldn't agree on the logistics.
Click to expand...

And we should mention that there are no "equal time" rules for podcasts. The FCC is not going to fine Joe Rogan or say he must be fair to anyone.
 
boombox4 said:
How is interviewing a presidential candidate influencing anyone?
Click to expand...
I assumed he was referring to Mr. Rogan's endorsement of Mr. Trump, a few days after the show was taped.

www.nytimes.com

Joe Rogan Endorses Trump, and Trump Calls Him ‘the Biggest There Is’

Mr. Rogan has hosted Donald J. Trump, JD Vance and Elon Musk for lengthy and friendly interviews in recent weeks.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

Of course many mainstream media outlets have offered endorsements of candidates for high office, and I don't recall much consternation over that. I also don't think many voters are waiting on tenterhooks for the LA Times to release its endorsement.
 
boombox4 said:
How is interviewing a presidential candidate influencing anyone? It was just an interview, and Kamala had a chance to also be on Rogan. She had an offer to be on the show and turned it down. Who's fault is that? Rogan's? Nope. The ball was in Harris's court. She bailed.

MSN

www.msn.com

MSN

www.msn.com
Click to expand...
Rogan was very MAGA leaning for at least half a decade. It would not have helped her...his audience would probably look for ways he "owned" her. 🙄
 
kevtronics said:
Harris wanted Rogan to meet her for an hour-long interview. He wanted her to come to his studio to do an entire three-hour show. Neither "bailed"; they just couldn't agree on the logistics.

Rogan's show was friendly territory for Trump, just as Howard Stern's show was friendly territory for Harris. I don't recall anyone criticizing Trump for not going on Stern? And none of his supporters cared that he bailed on the 60 Minutes interview.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. But I think if she had done the three hours, it could have gotten her votes. It's not like she didn't have access to logistics to fly out to his studio to do the interview. If you're running for President, you've got to try to win of the Independent voters, and there were a lot of them this election, and chances are probably high that a lot of Rogan's viewers are Independents.

Agreed that whether Kamala or Trump decided to go on whatever show they wanted to -- it was their choice.

But TallGuy implied that Rogan helped Trump's campaign. I'm not seeing it. Rogan offered Kamala time to do a long-form interview. It didn't work out. Of course, it's past history now.
tall_guy1 said:
Rogan was very MAGA leaning for at least half a decade. It would not have helped her...his audience would probably look for ways he "owned" her. 🙄
Click to expand...
I don't think for a minute that Rogan changed anyone's mind to vote MAGA. If Kamala had actually done the three hour interview, she may have won over more voters to her side than Rogan got for Trump by endorsing him.
 
boombox4 said:
Fair enough. But I think if she had done the three hours, it could have gotten her votes. It's not like she didn't have access to logistics to fly out to his studio to do the interview. If you're running for President, you've got to try to win of the Independent voters, and there were a lot of them this election, and chances are probably high that a lot of Rogan's viewers are Independents.

Agreed that whether Kamala or Trump decided to go on whatever show they wanted to -- it was their choice.

But TallGuy implied that Rogan helped Trump's campaign. I'm not seeing it. Rogan offered Kamala time to do a long-form interview. It didn't work out. Of course, it's past history now.

I don't think for a minute that Rogan changed anyone's mind to vote MAGA. If Kamala had actually done the three hour interview, she may have won over more voters to her side than Rogan got for Trump by endorsing him.
Click to expand...
He essentially is a right wing talk host. Family Guy and The Simpsons even caught on to him. It was the same as Obama doing Bill O'Reilly show. That is not her audience anyway.
 
Harris could not do a 3 hr interview, Joe & Trump never ran out of stuff to discuss.
 
tall_guy1 said:
He essentially is a right wing talk host. Family Guy and The Simpsons even caught on to him. It was the same as Obama doing Bill O'Reilly show. That is not her audience anyway.
Click to expand...
Kamala's audience was the American People. Kamala was running to be President of -- as she said, in her own words -- ALL Americans, not just left leaning people. She, and her party, knew -- just as most other people know -- that Independents outnumber each individual party by around 10%.

45%+ of Americans identify as independent politically, compared to 26-27% who identify as D, and 22-23% who identify as R (according to Gallup). If Kamala didn't want to take three short hours out of her campaign to reach Americans on one of the largest podcasts in the US, then that shows us at least one reason she lost. Even Democrats I know personally think that she didn't campaign well.

Like I said, it's all past history now, though. We've got what we've got until January 2029, and maybe changes during the Midterms in 2026.

And at the very least the importance of internet podcasts during this election is a bellwether. It shows that the importance of legacy media like broadcast media is declining, while YT and other podcasting is on the increase in importance.
 
boombox4 said:
Fair enough. But I think if she had done the three hours, it could have gotten her votes. It's not like she didn't have access to logistics to fly out to his studio to do the interview. If you're running for President, you've got to try to win of the Independent voters, and there were a lot of them this election, and chances are probably high that a lot of Rogan's viewers are Independents.

Agreed that whether Kamala or Trump decided to go on whatever show they wanted to -- it was their choice.

But TallGuy implied that Rogan helped Trump's campaign. I'm not seeing it. Rogan offered Kamala time to do a long-form interview. It didn't work out. Of course, it's past history now.

I don't think for a minute that Rogan changed anyone's mind to vote MAGA. If Kamala had actually done the three hour interview, she may have won over more voters to her side than Rogan got for Trump by endorsing him.
Click to expand...

boombox4 said:
Kamala's audience was the American People. Kamala was running to be President of -- as she said, in her own words -- ALL Americans, not just left leaning people. She, and her party, knew -- just as most other people know -- that Independents outnumber each individual party by around 10%.

45%+ of Americans identify as independent politically, compared to 26-27% who identify as D, and 22-23% who identify as R (according to Gallup). If Kamala didn't want to take three short hours out of her campaign to reach Americans on one of the largest podcasts in the US, then that shows us at least one reason she lost. Even Democrats I know personally think that she didn't campaign well.

Like I said, it's all past history now, though. We've got what we've got until January 2029, and maybe changes during the Midterms in 2026.

And at the very least the importance of internet podcasts during this election is a bellwether. It shows that the importance of legacy media like broadcast media is declining, while YT and other podcasting is on the increase in importance.
Click to expand...
She wouldn't have won over his audience anyway. His audience wouldn't take to her.
 
boombox4 said:
And at the very least the importance of internet podcasts during this election is a bellwether.
Click to expand...

If we're talking about how a candidate used the media, whatever that is, from broadcasting to the internet to everything available to sell the candidate to the public, then it should have been obvious that she was going to lose. The one thing I heard over and over was people didn't feel they knew her. That's the difference between a candidate who's a public figure, who has lived his life in public on the media all the time, and someone who hasn't. That's what made the difference. It wasn't really a fair fight. Moving forward, anyone of any party who is running for president needs to know how to use the media to their advantage. By that, I mean ALL of the media, social media, broadcast, internet, and anything else. She wasn't just running against another candidate. She was running against his media. It's going to be tough to fix that problem because there's so little trust in the media in general. People say they don't trust the media, but they trust certain people. If Joe Rogan is one of those people, then he's who you have to talk to. At the end, his audience may not have voted for her, but they would have felt they knew her.
 
tall_guy1 said:
She wouldn't have won over his audience anyway. His audience wouldn't take to her.
Click to expand...
Joe Rogan has 16.4 million subscribers, and the Trump YT interview alone had about 49 million views before the election occurred. And you are certain that every single one of the 49 million viewers (pre-election) and 16.4 million subscribers are all MAGA?

In politics, every vote can count. FDR knew that. Bill Clinton knew that. Obama knew that. In 2016 Trump went to states he knew he'd never win (like mine, WA), so one could argue that even he was aware of the fact you go where voters are, especially if you know the election may be a close one.

I haven't seen the breakdown of election stats to show just how many votes decided this election in the battleground states, but in 2016 I kept seeing figures mentioned like 50,000 votes here, maybe 20,000 votes there. If you can win over just 20-50K of a massive, multi-million viewer audience like Joe Rogan has, it could make a difference in a close election -- which was what all the news media was saying it was going to be during the weeks leading up to the election.

In a way, I do see your point, TallGuy. A candidate may think it's a waste to be interviewed on a platform they think may be stilted against them. But I also think that any potential leader needs to consider the voters and potential won-over voters who may be watching or listening to any platform they're on, especially if that platform has the numbers that Rogan's has.

Did Kamala's lack of appearance on Rogan have anything to do with the outcome of the election though? I think BigA just said more about that aspect of it than I can.
 
boombox4 said:
Joe Rogan has 16.4 million subscribers, and the Trump YT interview alone had about 49 million views before the election occurred. And you are certain that every single one of the 49 million viewers (pre-election) and 16.4 million subscribers are all MAGA?

In politics, every vote can count. FDR knew that. Bill Clinton knew that. Obama knew that. In 2016 Trump went to states he knew he'd never win (like mine, WA), so one could argue that even he was aware of the fact you go where voters are, especially if you know the election may be a close one.

I haven't seen the breakdown of election stats to show just how many votes decided this election in the battleground states, but in 2016 I kept seeing figures mentioned like 50,000 votes here, maybe 20,000 votes there. If you can win over just 20-50K of a massive, multi-million viewer audience like Joe Rogan has, it could make a difference in a close election -- which was what all the news media was saying it was going to be during the weeks leading up to the election.

In a way, I do see your point, TallGuy. A candidate may think it's a waste to be interviewed on a platform they think may be stilted against them. But I also think that any potential leader needs to consider the voters and potential won-over voters who may be watching or listening to any platform they're on, especially if that platform has the numbers that Rogan's has.

Did Kamala's lack of appearance on Rogan have anything to do with the outcome of the election though? I think BigA just said more about that aspect of it than I can.
Click to expand...
I also think Kamala was doing a balancing act between the more conservative edge of the party (Liz Cheney and to a lesser degree Tim Walz) and the more liberal faction of the party (AOC, Bernie) and didn't want to tip the scale and be super friendly with someone who in the past has disparaged some of her voting block like Rogan or that she agrees or leans towards what he is selling. I think it's different than in the past going on something like Leno which had more of a general audience in the past.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom