17 votes

The Joe Rogan Experience podcast will be exclusive to Spotify later this year, with a multi-year deal

41 comments

  1. [14]
    cfabbro
    (edited )
    Link
    I was a huge Joe Rogan/PowerfulJRE fan for many years time, barely missing any episodes (esp since I love MMA)... but I am pretty much done with him now. Between the constant hosting of alt-right,...

    I was a huge Joe Rogan/PowerfulJRE fan for many years time, barely missing any episodes (esp since I love MMA)... but I am pretty much done with him now. Between the constant hosting of alt-right, homophobic, and/or conspiracy theory assholes (including his personal friends Brendan Schaub and Eddie Bravo who are both conspiracy nuts), while at the same time rarely including any counterpoint guests, especially from the LGBT community, and now with him spreading his insanely conspiratorial and misinformed takes on COVID, I just can't listen to him anymore in good conscience.

    TBH, I am actually surprised that Spotify even wants him anymore after his latest COVID ramblings. At some point I can almost guarantee you that he is gonna say something really fucking stupid and offensive about his beliefs regarding COVID, and Spotify will have to disown him. This is a risky move on their part, IMO.

    p.s. For those unaware of what I'm referring to:
    https://old.reddit.com/r/JoeRogan/comments/gfzo7n/jre_mma_show_95_with_brendan_schaub/fpwtq9p/

    32 votes
    1. [6]
      AnthonyB
      Link Parent
      I remember when I first got into the JRE podcast. I was actually a pretty early adopter after coming across an AMA he did back in 2010 after about 30 or so podcasts. Back in those days, he really...

      I remember when I first got into the JRE podcast. I was actually a pretty early adopter after coming across an AMA he did back in 2010 after about 30 or so podcasts. Back in those days, he really only had comedians on the show, but the content was similar, with conversations going in all different directions. Those podcasts were very entertaining and perfect for having something on in the background while doing other stuff. It didn't take long, however, before I realized that a lot of the "deep" conversations were little more than hot air. I was in college at the time and occasionally Joe and his guests would touch on some of the topics that I was studying and they would be so wrong about even the most basic concepts. Yet they spoke with so much confidence and authority, I would sometimes go back and make sure I wasn't misunderstanding my coursework. Over time I phased it out of my regular rotation, but I still go back every now and then when I'm playing Civ or another game that doesn't require active listening. It's crazy to me that over the course of 10 years he has been able to cultivate an image as some sort of intellectual free thinker. In reality, he is more of an impressionable stoner that happens to be more interested in the world than your average person. You really can't trust anything he talks about unless it relates to pool, archery, or MMA. Every time I come back after taking a break from the show, he seems to have gone further to the alt-right/conspiracy loony land. I know he presents himself as a moderate, and he voiced support for Bernie and Tulsi, but his guest list skews pretty far to the right and he seems to hold liberals to a completely different standard in that he is a lot quicker to criticize the left (particularly anyone that might be an "SJW") than pretty much anyone on the right. There was a short stretch last year where I listened to a handful of episodes and I remember he kept going off on Carlos Maza, as if Maza was some radical psychotic moron, but would play devil's advocate for Trump every time his name came up. I can't listen to it anymore because I find myself saying, "Oh, shut the fuck up, " way too often.

      Having said that, I wish more liberals would try to get on the show. He seems pretty open to having just about anyone on, and it is a huge platform that would reach a large audience that might not be used to hearing that perspective. Plus he is pretty non-combative (no pun intended) with his guests. I'm worried that he is being lumped in with other conservative outlets that liberals/progressives/leftists/etc refuse to go on. I remember Yang and Sanders raised some eyebrows after going on the show. It's hard to imagine a scenario where someone like Natalie Wynn goes on the JRE podcast without facing some criticism for it.

      16 votes
      1. [4]
        cfabbro
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        Ditto. At one point a few years ago, I even tried to reach out to Sarah McBride (who I really admire) to get her to go on JRE because I was getting so sick of all Joe's misinformed ranting about...

        Having said that, I wish more liberals would try to get on the show.

        Ditto. At one point a few years ago, I even tried to reach out to Sarah McBride (who I really admire) to get her to go on JRE because I was getting so sick of all Joe's misinformed ranting about transgender rights (esp in sports), pronoun use, etc. and pissed off at how many openly transphobic assholes he kept having on the show (e.g. Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, etc). Sadly, she never responded, but TBH I don't blame her... because:

        It's hard to imagine a scenario where someone like Natalie Wynn goes on the JRE podcast without facing some criticism for it.

        I would love for Natalie to go on too, but unfortunately I suspect she would get far more than just criticism, and would probably wind up getting harassed and even threatened to no end by a large portion of Joe's fanbase if she went on the show. Just look at the hatefest that spills out every time Joe has had a female comedian on. The responses are so fucking predictable at this point it makes me sick to my stomach, and I really wish Joe had the balls to tell his misogynist idiot fans to fuck off. But clearly $$$ > principles, as evidenced by this move to Spotify... so I doubt he would ever dare risk pissing off a significant portion of his fanbase no matter how hateful they are, even if he disagrees with them (which I'm increasingly not sure he even does).

        6 votes
        1. [3]
          Chrozera
          Link Parent
          But I would like to know more so I can be more informed in my opinions.

          Joe's misinformed ranting about transgender rights (esp in sports)
          Where could I find more accurate information about transgender rights in sports.
          Because I'm not well informed but I think his points of there being physical differences that make many sports unfair to be something that makes sense to me.

          But I would like to know more so I can be more informed in my opinions.

          2 votes
          1. [2]
            cfabbro
            (edited )
            Link Parent
            Well to start, there may actually be far less physical advantages for transgender athletes than you might assume. See:...

            Because I'm not well informed but I think his points of there being physical differences that make many sports unfair to be something that makes sense to me.

            Well to start, there may actually be far less physical advantages for transgender athletes than you might assume. See: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/07/scientist-racing-discover-how-gender-transitions-alter-athletic-performance-including

            Well worth reading the whole article, but key points:

            A study of transgender women found their race times slowed after transitioning, but their age grades, which compare people to the best runners of the same sex and age, hardly changed, suggesting they have no advantage over non-transgender women.
            ...
            Harper has since shown similar results for a transgender rower, a cyclist, and a sprinter. Together, the findings make a case that previous exposure to male levels of testosterone does not confer an enduring athletic advantage.

            But TBH, I am far from an expert, and this topic is such a fucking minefield (which I have gotten into heated arguments on Tildes about before), so I unfortunately have very little desire to dip my toes back into it. I know that's pretty unfair to you, since you seem to be asking out of genuine interest and are acting in good faith, so I'm genuinely sorry for bowing out early like this... but this subject honestly makes me incredibly anxious because of how much hate and vitriol there is out there about it, and how much of a trigger even discussing it seems to be with some people (even here on Tildes). :(

            8 votes
            1. Chrozera
              Link Parent
              No problem it is kind of a minefield of a topic indeed, thanks for the information though.

              No problem it is kind of a minefield of a topic indeed, thanks for the information though.

              1 vote
      2. skybrian
        Link Parent
        I've never listened to the show, but I think curiosity could at least partially make up for a lot of other flaws. He seems to have interesting guests sometimes? I know Yang got a lot of exposure.

        I've never listened to the show, but I think curiosity could at least partially make up for a lot of other flaws. He seems to have interesting guests sometimes? I know Yang got a lot of exposure.

        1 vote
    2. NaraVara
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      This seems to be a pattern with a lot of sorta-mainstream acts that slide alt-right. They'll say some ignorant shit, catch a lot of flack for it, blame the "snowflakes" for getting pissed off and...

      TBH, I am actually surprised that Spotify even wants him anymore after his latest COVID ramblings. At some point I can almost guarantee you that he is gonna say something really fucking stupid and offensive about his beliefs regarding COVID, and Spotify will have to disown him. This is a risky move on their part, IMO.

      This seems to be a pattern with a lot of sorta-mainstream acts that slide alt-right. They'll say some ignorant shit, catch a lot of flack for it, blame the "snowflakes" for getting pissed off and start hosting increasingly ignorant people who say more ignorant things, catch more flack, and on and on. It's like a self-radicalization cycle.

      This is happening with tons of comics who were big in the 90s and early 2000s. Those were great times to play up an "irreverent, asshole, truth teller" shtick. Some people have realized it's worn thin and embarked on journeys of personal growth so their material/careers have moved along with the times (e.g. Marc Maron). Others have decided to double down and they're all turning into late 2000s Dennis Miller.

      8 votes
    3. [2]
      emdash
      Link Parent
      I don't understand what people see in JR, at even a basic level. I've heard some say "Oh, he's a good interviewer", but nothing I've listened to of his has actually indicated this. It's all...

      I don't understand what people see in JR, at even a basic level. I've heard some say "Oh, he's a good interviewer", but nothing I've listened to of his has actually indicated this. It's all low-information noise that is so subjectively boring to me I honestly can't even submit myself to it for more than a couple of minutes at a time—you'd think even Elon Musk would be somewhat interesting to listen to (pre-2020 insanity, I should add), but even his chats with Elon were so mindnumbingly dull I zoned out and clicked away after not too long.

      What sort of demographics does JR fucking target, exactly? Because I am clearly not it.

      6 votes
      1. cfabbro
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        MMA fans. Stoners/Psychonauts. People who are fans of rant style observational comedy (hence the Doug Stanhope/Bill Burr fandom crossover). The list goes on... and I am in several of those demos,...

        What sort of demographics does JR fucking target, exactly?

        MMA fans. Stoners/Psychonauts. People who are fans of rant style observational comedy (hence the Doug Stanhope/Bill Burr fandom crossover). The list goes on... and I am in several of those demos, so that probably explains why I was a fan for so long.

        5 votes
    4. [4]
      krg
      Link Parent
      Pretty much the only time I come across his podcast (via Youtube) is when I want to watch a fighter talk. I'm aware of his controversies and his "big brain" takes and can't imagine listening to an...

      (esp since I love MMA)

      Pretty much the only time I come across his podcast (via Youtube) is when I want to watch a fighter talk. I'm aware of his controversies and his "big brain" takes and can't imagine listening to an entire episode. Still, I do think he's a pretty good commentator/post-fight interviewer. Even considering his penchant for getting too excited too fast ("OH HE'S HURT!!").

      Anyway, guess I'll just catch fighters talking on Helwani's show, now.

      1 vote
      1. [3]
        cfabbro
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        I would even argue that Joe is the GOAT when it comes to MMA commentating. Bas Rutten is about the only person that I can think of that might be able to give him a run for his money in that...

        I would even argue that Joe is the GOAT when it comes to MMA commentating. Bas Rutten is about the only person that I can think of that might be able to give him a run for his money in that department... maybe Chael Sonnen too, if I'm feeling generous. I like technical analyst/colour commentators, can you tell? :P

        p.s. Yeah, ESPN MMA is where I get my fix these days too.

        1 vote
        1. [2]
          krg
          Link Parent
          Personally, I'd put Bisping as my #1 at the moment. Bas Rutten is who I cut my teeth on, though (HDNet Fights)... and, yea, he's entertaining as hell.

          Personally, I'd put Bisping as my #1 at the moment. Bas Rutten is who I cut my teeth on, though (HDNet Fights)... and, yea, he's entertaining as hell.

          1 vote
          1. cfabbro
            (edited )
            Link Parent
            In my brain, "It's going to be a link to Bas' self-defense video isn't it? Yep!" My best friend (RIP) used to own a physical copy of it on VHS and we watched the shit out of it back in the day...

            In my brain, "It's going to be a link to Bas' self-defense video isn't it? Yep!" My best friend (RIP) used to own a physical copy of it on VHS and we watched the shit out of it back in the day (along with Gracie's BJJ videos). :P I also cut my teeth on Bas too, starting in his Pancrase days, and later Pride commentating.

            I do like Bisping for entertainment value too, although he (much like Chael) can be an insufferable prick at times.

            2 votes
  2. JoylessAubergine
    Link
    Cold day in hell before i use a platform exclusive podcast. This is probably good for Joe and the podcast. Hopefully the massive cheque he is getting allows him to slow the fuck down and lean more...

    Cold day in hell before i use a platform exclusive podcast.

    This is probably good for Joe and the podcast. Hopefully the massive cheque he is getting allows him to slow the fuck down and lean more towards quality. I was an early adopter of both podcasts and the JRE. I think the first one i listened to was #13 and i stopped listening at about #150 because it was getting repetitive as fuck. I've probably listened to 10 complete JRE podcasts since. The rate he has been putting out podcasts is completely unsustainable and it shows. Outside of the few guests a year who are 1. Interesting to him. 2. On the podcast for the first or second time. 3.Confident enough to not let him run roughshod. they are like a bizarre, barely functioning bot conversations. I cant imagine the last time he reflected on what he said on a podcast without some sort of approval from one of his lackeys.

    I still like Joe (even though he banned me from the board for doubting his libertarian credentials) and he still has the occasional great podcast. Hopefully this deal will give him space he needs to get out of the bubble he built for himself.

    11 votes
  3. emdash
    Link
    I echo Marco Arment's (developer of podcast app Overcast) sentiment on this. Fuck Spotify, and fuck "podcasts" that are streamable only on one platform—in fact I'm genuinely surprised Spotify...

    I echo Marco Arment's (developer of podcast app Overcast) sentiment on this. Fuck Spotify, and fuck "podcasts" that are streamable only on one platform—in fact I'm genuinely surprised Spotify consider Joe Rogan valuable to the tune of a multi-year deal, given his alt-right conspiracy-pushing tactics (then again, it appears disinformation sells). JRE is such a lame show.

    12 votes
  4. [6]
    culturedleftfoot
    Link
    Maybe I'm not the target demographic, but I still can't figure out why the JRE podcast is so popular. I've caught clips when he's had some interesting guests but Rogan himself never made much of...

    Maybe I'm not the target demographic, but I still can't figure out why the JRE podcast is so popular. I've caught clips when he's had some interesting guests but Rogan himself never made much of an impression on me, even just as a host.

    I did see similar blowback when Joe Budden announced his podcast exclusivity deal with Spotify, but he's kept it available on Youtube, where he originally built its following. I think Spotify gets a three-day release lead or something, maybe it'll be a similar scenario here.

    11 votes
    1. CALICO
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      It's the interesting guests I care about, not Joe Rogan the man. I like that Joe has varied interests, which leads to varied guests. I like that his platform is so large, which gives a reason for...

      I've caught clips when he's had some interesting guests but Rogan himself never made much of an impression on me, even just as a host.

      It's the interesting guests I care about, not Joe Rogan the man.
      I like that Joe has varied interests, which leads to varied guests. I like that his platform is so large, which gives a reason for big names to show up. I like that his general charisma disarms guests, and allows for conversations instead of formal interviews. Interviews feel sterile, conversations are human.

      In the past year we've seen JRE #1300–1476. Out of 176 conversations, I know for a fact I've listened to 32 in their entirety. To be sure, I've definitely forgotten a few. So I watch about one-fifth to one-quarter of what's put out. A rather significant share of the JRE has comedians as guests, which for the most part I do not give a shit about. Joe does seem to have this cult of personality thing going on, and he does entertain some alt-right guests (a small percentage of total, but worth mentioning). But I still keep up with the podcast for the people he has on that I care about, some of them allowed to open up and be human thanks to the format. Some of the guests are entertaining (e.g. Duncan Trussell, UFO guys), some of them are informative (e.g. Forrest Galante, David Sinclair), and some I watch to compare & contrast with knowledge gained from my own individual experiences (e.g. Mike Baker).
      Scientists, and Philosophers are my favorites.

      I'm pretty bummed that it'll be moving to Spotify, but mostly because Spotify is blocked at work. If this switch-over happens before I return to the States, I'll start missing out on anyone interesting. (not enough free time outside work to listen)

      For the curious, my watched over the past year:
      • JRE #1476 - Patton Oswalt
      • JRE #1474 - Dr. Rhonda Patrick
      • JRE #1470 - Elon Musk (only watched half, first Musk episode was better)
      • JRE #1464 - Duncan Trussell
      • JRE #1456 - Michael Shermer
      • JRE #1455 - Lex Fridman
      • JRE #1453 - Eric Weinstein
      • JRE #1444 - Duncan Trussell
      • JRE #1432 - Aubrey de Grey
      • JRE #1428 - Brian Greene
      • JRE #1422 - Lex Fridman
      • JRE #1419 - Daryl Davis
      • JRE #1414 - Mike Baker
      • JRE #1411 - Robert Downey Jr.
      • JRE #1403 - Forrest Galante
      • JRE #1399 - Pavel Tsatsouline
      • JRE #1385 - Paul Stamets
      • JRE #1375 - Edward Norton
      • JRE #1366 - Richard Dawkins
      • JRE #1361 - Cmdr. David Fravor & Jeremy Corbell
      • JRE #1350 - Nick Bostrom
      • JRE #1349 - David Sinclair
      • JRE #1347 - Neil deGrasse Tyson
      • JRE #1343 - Penn Jillette
      • JRE #1342 - John Carmack
      • JRE #1335 - Jim Gaffigan
      • JRE #1330 - Bernie Sanders
      • JRE #1327 - Mike Baker
      • JRE #1325 - Dr. Cornel West
      • JRE #1320 - Eric Weinstein
      • JRE #1315 - Bob Lazar & Jeremy Corbell
      • JRE #1313 - Duncan Trussell

      edited for formatting

      7 votes
    2. [2]
      NaraVara
      Link Parent
      Isn't that kind of the point of being a good interviewer though? They just need to be likeable enough, but guys like Jimmy Fallon or Carson Daly also don't have big personalities on their own....

      but Rogan himself never made much of an impression on me, even just as a host.

      Isn't that kind of the point of being a good interviewer though? They just need to be likeable enough, but guys like Jimmy Fallon or Carson Daly also don't have big personalities on their own. It's all about the zany cast of characters around them. The host is just the MC who keeps some semblance of order to the whole thing.

      5 votes
      1. culturedleftfoot
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        Well, I also don't particularly like or get either of them... those are the interviews I find sterile and anodyne. Late-night shows in general have never been my thing, although I do like the...

        Well, I also don't particularly like or get either of them... those are the interviews I find sterile and anodyne. Late-night shows in general have never been my thing, although I do like the Jimmy Kimmel clips I see now and then. Maybe it's a sense of humor thing? But I don't necessarily mean someone with big personality either, it's just Rogan doesn't seem particularly interesting himself so I don't see what I'd get out of his guests' convos with him over anyone else. I'd watch a Charlie Rose interview before a Joe Rogan pod.

        Edit: It just occurred to me that Rogan might be this generation's Howard Stern, maybe without the shock factor? And that's another one that didn't/doesn't appeal to me.

    3. [2]
      Surira
      Link Parent
      I don't get it either, but I've heard Joe Rogan is like Oprah but for white males.

      I don't get it either, but I've heard Joe Rogan is like Oprah but for white males.

      4 votes
      1. culturedleftfoot
        Link Parent
        That's probably a lot to do with it. I searched to see what other Rogan-related stuff has been posted on here and I found a post/article from last year that I remember seeing but I'd never gotten...

        That's probably a lot to do with it. I searched to see what other Rogan-related stuff has been posted on here and I found a post/article from last year that I remember seeing but I'd never gotten back to: Why Is Joe Rogan so popular? He understands men in America better than most people do. The rest of the country should start paying attention. I still haven't finished going over it but there are some insightful comments.

        2 votes
  5. [2]
    boredop
    Link
    Quoting Ted Gioia here: A musician would need to generate 23 billion streams on Spotify to earn what they're paying Joe Rogan for his podcast rights (assuming a typical $.00437 payout per stream)....

    Quoting Ted Gioia here:

    • A musician would need to generate 23 billion streams on Spotify to earn what they're paying Joe Rogan for his podcast rights (assuming a typical $.00437 payout per stream). In other words, Spotify values Rogan more than any musician in the history of the world. Sound fair to you?
    8 votes
    1. Rez
      Link Parent
      Spotify is intentionally trying to lock up the podcast market since the economics are more favorable to them. For every stream of a song, they're paying out royalties. Every stream of a podcast is...

      Spotify is intentionally trying to lock up the podcast market since the economics are more favorable to them. For every stream of a song, they're paying out royalties. Every stream of a podcast is costless by contrast for them beyond the literal cost of transmission.

      10 votes
  6. minimaltyp0s
    Link
    I've listened to parts of his output for a few years. Over time my curation has gone from just filtering our MMA stuff (not my bag) to filtering out "John/Jane Doe is a comedian, podcast host..."...

    I've listened to parts of his output for a few years.

    Over time my curation has gone from just filtering our MMA stuff (not my bag) to filtering out "John/Jane Doe is a comedian, podcast host..." type episodes because they're just rambling, incoherent nonsense, to now filtering out supposedly "better" content like Eric Weinstein (IMO, the man has never said something that was simultaneously coherent and interesting), Elon Musk (straight up arse-hole) and others.

    It's a shame because he has a good reach and at his best can get some interesting conversations going, but my interest in him and his guests has waned to the point that seeing the Spotify announcement gave me the trigger to just unsubscribe now rather than wait.

    5 votes
  7. [7]
    vegai
    Link
    Spotify needs to be boycotted for what they're trying to do to podcasts. Of course they would turn evil after an IPO, but I'm surprised how bad they became. Apple Music is technically inferior in...

    Spotify needs to be boycotted for what they're trying to do to podcasts. Of course they would turn evil after an IPO, but I'm surprised how bad they became.

    Apple Music is technically inferior in a few ways, but their ethics are way above, which makes them an easy choice for me at least.

    3 votes
    1. [6]
      pvik
      Link Parent
      I may be out of the loop here a bit. What is Spotify trying to do to podcasts? I have been listening to podcasts for several years now, and just use Podcast Addict (or an app). I support streams I...

      I may be out of the loop here a bit. What is Spotify trying to do to podcasts?

      I have been listening to podcasts for several years now, and just use Podcast Addict (or an app). I support streams I really like either on patreon or one time donations. This has worked well for me all this time.
      The way I see it, podcasts are published by their owners (typically over a RSS feed my app waits on for new content), why do I need Apple Music or Spotify for this?

      (I do use Spotify for Music, never have for podcasts)

      3 votes
      1. [2]
        smores
        Link Parent
        Actually, that’s the problem! Spotify has recently been targeting exclusive podcasts, meaning they’re not allowed to syndicate via RSS at all. You can’t listen to them on Podcast Addict, on...

        Actually, that’s the problem! Spotify has recently been targeting exclusive podcasts, meaning they’re not allowed to syndicate via RSS at all. You can’t listen to them on Podcast Addict, on Spotify! At first glance, it’s only so far happened with a few (fairly popular!) podcasts, and I’m not necessarily worried they’ll corner the market or anything, but they are setting a precedent that, if it starts making them money, others might follow, which could very quickly destroy the podcast market as we know it.

        4 votes
        1. pvik
          Link Parent
          That is troubling! I don't follow any of the podcasts Spotify has been subsuming into it's fold, so had not noticed this trend. It feels like we may end up with a bunch of subscription services...

          That is troubling!
          I don't follow any of the podcasts Spotify has been subsuming into it's fold, so had not noticed this trend.

          It feels like we may end up with a bunch of subscription services for podcasts, like the plethora of video streaming services hitting the market. bleh.

          3 votes
      2. [2]
        NaraVara
        Link Parent
        There's a bunch of venture capital floating around (and public capital, from Spotify) trying to throw money at developing a platform monopoly on Podcasting. Currently, most podcasts are completely...

        There's a bunch of venture capital floating around (and public capital, from Spotify) trying to throw money at developing a platform monopoly on Podcasting. Currently, most podcasts are completely open sourced. You just publish your feed to a podcast directory, which is functionally an RSS feed that points to a list of audio files. Your podcast player sees updates in the feed and downloads the latest audio file. Apple is functionally the dominant player, but they don't really care about monetizing it so they're just the stewards of the largest (and default) podcast directory.

        What companies, like Spotify, are trying to do is create Podcast walled gardens with content exclusives. They do this mostly to leverage the fact that monetizing podcasts is hard in the open source versions. It's hard to do ad tech, because everyone is hitting the same RSS feed and you can't control the player they're using so data collection becomes difficult (though some of the big networks have figured out some hacky ways to do targeted ad insertion, they don't work well). A system like Spotify works because they own the player so they CAN creep on you. It's also hard to lock content behind subscription walls, because anyone with access to the feed's URL can download it. Most subscription podcasts I've seen put subscriber content on Soundcloud or Patreon and you have to download it yourself. Apparently RSS can support a feed requiring a username and password, but none of the ones I follow do it.

        3 votes
        1. pvik
          Link Parent
          That is an interesting point I had not considered. I wonder if it would be possible to create an open-source audio content delivery protocol, which gives the actual producers of the show control...

          It's hard to do ad tech, because everyone is hitting the same RSS feed and you can't control the player they're using so data collection becomes difficult (though some of the big networks have figured out some hacky ways to do targeted ad insertion, they don't work well).

          That is an interesting point I had not considered.

          I wonder if it would be possible to create an open-source audio content delivery protocol, which gives the actual producers of the show control over ad tech and makes it easier for players to consume these at the same time.
          Might be asking for too much, but as a engineer (who does not know much about the podcast industry), trying to build something like this seems possible! Obviously the problem will be uptake and actual usage by all the various podcast content producers.

          And with the money that Spotify is willing to shell out to the content creators for exclusivity on their platform, not sure if having an open-source alternative is going to make a difference.

          1 vote
      3. vegai
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        Sorry for the confusion, I mentioned Apple Music in this context only because it's the most direct competitor to Spotify in the music space. Apple Music doesn't have anything to do with podcasts,...

        why do I need Apple Music or Spotify for this?

        Sorry for the confusion, I mentioned Apple Music in this context only because it's the most direct competitor to Spotify in the music space. Apple Music doesn't have anything to do with podcasts, although all Apple devices come with a (well-behaving, hopefully not only temporarily) podcast player.

        smores and NaraVara wrote good replies to your question, nothing to add there.

        3 votes
  8. [5]
    Amarok
    (edited )
    Link
    Seems like Spotify made a couple of billion dollars in stock value since the announcement, pretty good return on a hundred million investment. It's very similar to when Sirius bought Stern. I'll...

    Seems like Spotify made a couple of billion dollars in signups stock value since the announcement, pretty good return on a hundred million investment. It's very similar to when Sirius bought Stern.

    I'll wager the main reason Rogan did this is because he is not interested in Youtube or anyone else telling him what he can and cannot do, or who he can and cannot talk to, on his podcast. He's chafed against that and openly ridiculed those complaints.

    It'll be interesting to see if somewhere down the line, something out of bounds happens, and what Spotify will say and do about it. Spotify is a Swedish company, odds are unless it violates Sweden's hate speech laws they won't lift a finger.

    Edit: Looks like Spotify did indeed ban Alex Jones. We'll see if Joe has him on again.

    Edit2: And now we're seeing stories all over the alt-right sites today courtesy of Alex Jones. He's saying this move is just done to spite youtube and circumvent Google's censorship of Alex and other guests. He claims Joe told him to go hard on this story and gave him this 'exclusive' to break. Alex says he is going to be the first guest on the first Spotify podcast, and that Spotify has already approved this appearance and given Joe clearance to do and say whatever he likes.

    Sigh. Well, we all know where this is going now.

    2 votes
    1. [4]
      Deimos
      Link Parent
      I don't know what this means. You think something like 200 million new people subscribed to Spotify since yesterday, when Rogan's show doesn't even start being on there until September? What info...

      Seems like Spotify made a couple of billion dollars in signups since the announcement, pretty good return on a hundred million investment. It's very similar to when Sirius bought Stern.

      I don't know what this means. You think something like 200 million new people subscribed to Spotify since yesterday, when Rogan's show doesn't even start being on there until September? What info are you basing that on?

      2 votes
      1. [3]
        Amarok
        Link Parent
        Their stock is up big time, and I've seen a couple articles talking about new subscribers though nothing I'd call firm numbers yet. It's safe to say they've more than made up for the cost of...

        Their stock is up big time, and I've seen a couple articles talking about new subscribers though nothing I'd call firm numbers yet.

        It's safe to say they've more than made up for the cost of signing Rogan at this point, though. They made that money back instantly.

        3 votes
        1. [2]
          Deimos
          Link Parent
          Oh, yeah, their stock is way up, but that doesn't really correspond to anything related to how many new subscribers they got. Unless they've said something about that, we probably won't know until...

          Oh, yeah, their stock is way up, but that doesn't really correspond to anything related to how many new subscribers they got. Unless they've said something about that, we probably won't know until their Q2 2020 financial report comes out. In Q1 2020 they added 6 million subscribers and they had a total of 130 million subscribers globally, so I highly doubt this announcement single-handedly doubled their subscribers, especially when it doesn't even come into effect for 3 more months.

          Acquisitions (and similar arrangements like this one) can be weird for business like that. For example, when Amazon bought Whole Foods, their stock went up enough in response to the announcement that they effectively made money by buying another company.

          It's hard to say what Spotify's stock price is based on. They're another one of those VC-backed companies that are just burning through capital at an insane rate with no real clear plan of how they're ever going to start making a profit. They lost €47 million (about $51M USD) in Q1 2020. They lost €186 million (~$200M) in 2019. I can't imagine they're going to lose less this year when they're spending over $100M to get one podcast, while the bottom is also falling out of the advertising market.

          2 votes
          1. Amarok
            Link Parent
            I do enjoy their service. Being able to follow thousands of artists at once and be instantly informed of new albums or even new singles is well worth my $10/mo. Being able to pirate anything in...

            I do enjoy their service. Being able to follow thousands of artists at once and be instantly informed of new albums or even new singles is well worth my $10/mo. Being able to pirate anything in the app into Ogg320 with drag and drop is also a nice feature, but not one they advertise. :P

            They still pay artists almost nothing, though. Their service still treats users as a product and has no real sense of itself or community. They could turn it into the same kind of musical discovery engine I'm hoping ~music will evolve into, but they aren't thinking in those terms yet. In the end, it's just another business, charging a toll for access to a music collection.

            2 votes
  9. [4]
    wundumguy
    Link
    What about the videos of his podcasts?

    What about the videos of his podcasts?

    2 votes
    1. [3]
      Deimos
      Link Parent
      The announcement says:

      The announcement says:

      In addition to the wildly popular podcast format, JRE also produces corresponding video episodes, which will also be available on Spotify as in-app vodcasts.

      6 votes
      1. [2]
        Nivlak
        Link Parent
        I guess what he got from Spotify largely outweighs any YouTube revenue. RIP to JRE YouTube subscribers.

        I guess what he got from Spotify largely outweighs any YouTube revenue. RIP to JRE YouTube subscribers.

        3 votes
        1. Amarok
          Link Parent
          Looks like the clips channel is sticking around. Not surprising since the only reason they created that clips channel was to grab the thunder/revenue from everyone else making compilations of...

          Looks like the clips channel is sticking around. Not surprising since the only reason they created that clips channel was to grab the thunder/revenue from everyone else making compilations of clips from his podcast on their own channels.

          2 votes