Who is the Joe Rogan of literature?

Who is the Joe Rogan of literature?

isn't he a giant pseud

yes, but he's fun

It's so funny when someone is so short you can identify him as manlet without any scale reference.

He's a typical LA guy from what I heard and noticed.
Like he only hangs out with you when there's some status to be gained ( comedy store bullshit, talking to you in a podcast format ) or to get high.
Chris Ryan was complaining one time that most of the conversations Rogan wants to have with him are always in front of a mic.

And the way he talks to Jamie is pretty condescending. He did the same with Redban. This LA star attitude of "I'm attuned to the world's concerns... ughhh I'm surrounded by idiots... oh btw let's get high/do something so the world notices."

This. I listened to him for a few years until eventually his attitude towards Jamie became unbearable as a listener.

Mike Cernovich

...

no more than sam harris or jordan peterson

they are the three of them intellectual peers.

>Comparing this guy to Harris and Peterson

>implying

Phillip K Dick

jre is a million times better than seeing the same guests go through the standard TV "interview"

charlie rose is probably the best TV analogue

Is there a more likable pleb?

nah larry king

howard stern does decent interviews too when you skip the otherwise degenerate shenanigans

>degenerate
The easiest way to spot a bitter virgin

>bitter virgin

The easiest way to spot a miserable hedonist

Jaime is his employee, not his friend who is doing all this work for free. Of course he might be a bit sharp with him sometimes.

and Brian Redban is an idiot. Whatever he has, he owes to Joe's inclusion of him.

>not friend
>employee
>for free

what
worse than janitors here

>Who is the Joe Rogan of literature?
chuck palahniuk

Wasn't he heavily influenced by Terence McKenna? He was a fucking psychedelic bullshitter of the highest order, but he was entertaining with it.

>influenced
Who do you think he is? Some commentator on the intellectual path of the world?

Sure, the guy knows his MMA (biased as fuck, of course), but he makes no commentary of his own. He reads internet articles and recites them on a podcast. He talks to random "celebrities" and attempts to wring opinions on his world view out of them.

He's fun, and I hold no grudge against the guy, but why exactly is he being discussed here? Quit this shit.

I think that anyone that had a three hour format where they talked about their opinion with another person episode after episode would get annoying.
The way the podcast is structured, Joe Rogan becomes the 'expert' because he's the one asking the questions. People don't even realize they are giving him this status but I see it everywhere he's mentioned.
I only heard about him through /tv/ and his podcast introduced me to a lot of interesting people that do great work that I would have easily missed.
The podcasts he has with comedians are fantastic. It's more good radio than anything else because he's genuinely interested and that's really all you need to be a decent media guy.

pretty sure redban did a shitload of work getting jre up many years ago

redban is also a decent comedian most anons would like

>all these plebs ITT talking about some radio/tv personality hack instead of discussing literature

Pathetic

And yourself the worst of all, taking pleasure in imagining your own superiority

You're talking about Joe Rogan, host of Fear Factor, on a literature board.

It is not imagined.