Why Joe Rogan's Recent Tilt Is So Dangerous

Did Douglas Murray's arrow hit the bullseye?
And more important, does it matter?
More from The Hollywood Reporter
Joe Rogan Scolded by Own Guest for Pushing Conspiracy Theories
Amid Political Creator Boom, Megyn Kelly Launches Podcast Network (Exclusive)
How New Documentary 'October 8' Is a Touchstone for People Worried About Antisemitism
To anyone watching with growing alarm as Joe Rogan in recent weeks has platformed Darryl Cooper and Ian Carroll — both Carroll and Cooper have been accused of disseminating antisemitic ideas — as well as anti-vax flame-throwers like Suzanne Humphries, a sitdown with the British neoconservative thinker Murray was the Robin Hood moment most needed.
With his hosting of the unholy trio, the most popular podcaster in the world — some 15 million accounts follow The Joe Rogan Experience on Spotify while millions more consume its content elsewhere at least four times a week — has been on a tear of the kind never seen by an information megaplatform.
Murray got in the chair last week and had none of it.
'I feel you've opened the door to quite a lot of people who now got a big platform, who have been throwing out counter-historical stuff of a very dangerous kind,' Murray said to Rogan and Dave Smith, the comedian-commentator who had been invited to the party too.
'These guys are not historians; they're not knowledgeable about anything,' Murray said, alluding to Cooper and Carroll.
Rogan got mealy mouthed. He said he didn't believe he was platforming dangerous figures. 'I don't think about it that way,' he told Murray. 'I just think, 'I'd like to talk to that person.'' Welcome to the new 'just asking questions.' 'Just talking to people.'
Ah, but what are those people saying?
Carroll spent stretches of his nearly three hours insinuating (and sometimes doing more than insinuating) ominous-sounding connections between Jeffrey Epstein, Israel, organized crime and 'global Jewish billionaires,' egged on by a credulous and enthusiastic Rogan. Carroll straight-facedly dropped allegations that Epstein was sex-trafficking on behalf of the Israeli government while Rogan nodded thoughtfully, agreeing that it's 'the deep state of the intelligence agencies in Israel.'
'Jews are regular people just like everyone else,' is the kind of thing Carroll says, softening the audience so they barely clock what comes next, about the plans the 'powerful Jewish people' are making.
A week later Darryl Cooper arrived to perform his act, which can be described as offering outrageous provocations he then half walks back so he could repeat them all again tomorrow. In September Cooper had appeared on Tucker Carlson's podcast to say that Churchill was the real villain in World War II and that Nazis didn't want to kill Jews in concentration camps; Jews only 'ended up dead' because Germany didn't have the resources to take care of them. Two dozen Jewish Congresspeople called out Cooper's appearance and Carlson's implicit endorsement. Cooper later said he was being 'hyperbolic' about Churchill. Of course by that point it didn't matter.
On Rogan, Cooper went on a jag essentially about how he was not given free rein to empathize with Nazis and how antisemites were being unfairly banished from the public square.
'Antisemitism is a weird thing,' he said. 'I think a lot of it also has to do with the fact that so many of these questions have really been made you know, it's not like they're off limits like they're illegal and you're gonna go to jail if you talk about them; I'm still sitting here. I mean, I'm on your podcast and so that's a big platform to talk about these things. It's not like that. But the attempt is to make it so that you can't be in any kind of respectable society. Yeah, the attempt is to make you radioactive.'
Cooper went on to allude to 'your paranoid Jewish friends who think that everybody's antisemitic,' with a bizarre lack of self-awareness at how his own remarks might have just disproved the adjective. One hardly needs to have studied the lessons of WWII — and a good thing, as for all his claims Cooper does not seem to have — to understand where both men's demonization of Jews can lead.
If you thought Humphries came off any sounder, think again; her folksy country-doctor turn on Rogan did not make her scientifically disproven howlers any less howl-y. Among the claims the scientifically discredited Humphries made was that TB was a 'side effect of the smallpox vaccine,' the evidence-free claim that the COVID vaccine contained snake poison and that polio was caused by DDT (she's suggested that sanitation and not vaccination primarily stopped its spread).
Rogan was as welcomingly agreeable to her as he was to Cooper and Carroll, saying he now saw the truth about vaccines and cringed at his previous assumptions that vaccines 'saved us from polio, it saved us from smallpox.' He called Humphries 'a very brave and brilliant woman' and called COVID 'this enormous gaslighting experience that we all just went through.'
But as the BBC journalist Shayan Sardarizadeh noted, Humphries 'rolls out a series of false, repeatedly debunked claims about vaccines for polio, tetanus and other diseases being unsafe and harmful.'
The episode was so filled with apparent falsehoods it even got a slapdown from Elon Musk, who posted in response that 'vaccines, essentially training your immune system for battle, do work well for addressing many diseases.'
It was into this chasm that Murray tossed his grenade — this was all dangerous stuff. 'There's a point at which 'I'm just raising questions' isn't valid anymore,' he told Rogan. 'You're not asking questions — you're telling people something.'
And with the host's fans it landed … nowhere. Reactions on YouTube, X and other forums were spiritedly pro-Rogan. Glenn Greenwald, perhaps the best cautionary tale for Rogan of a once-respected indie outsider, described Murray as 'fall[ing] apart.' The troll-y Fox-owned sports site Outkick said Murray had been 'humiliated' and acted 'absurd.' Scores of posters — as of this writing it totaled some 110,000 — flowed onto YouTube, many to pile on Murray. No matter how trenchant his argument or needed his message, it seemed to move neither host nor follower.
Rogan's new tilt is, if nothing else, a boon to listenership. The Carroll episode drew 3.5 million views on YouTube alone, one of the most popular episodes of the year. Conspiracy theories sell, and conspiracy theories from people who head-feint that they're not conspiracy theorists sell even bigger. And if something goes viral, all the better; the content that the Murray episode spun off, in quarters ranging from Piers Morgan to The Hill — the debate ABOUT the debate — only further sends cash into Rogan's pocket, ensuring more conspiracy theorists in the future. The only real fact to take away from these episodes is that sober truth-telling is bad for business.
What seems to be emerging here is nothing less than a new kind of mainstream infotainment, a genetically mutated Frost-Nixon, in which instead of public officials squirming in the chair at questions from well-informed journalists, one-eyed armchair provocateurs show up to peddle juicy stories that go encouraged by the dollar- (or chaos-) minded hosts who invite them there.
But what also is emerging is something more dangerous and specific to the man peddling it. With many of his episodes Rogan reaches more people than all three network nightly news shows combined. Those networks have also reported on fringe conspiracists, of course. They just haven't given them three-hour primetime specials.
Rogan isn't just platforming hateful voices; that would be bad enough. His is an active way of denying basic truths about history and science through the clever curation of guests. Almost as important as who Rogan has had on is who he hasn't had on. Carroll, Cooper and Humphries each got their limitless screen time, feature films of truthy-sounding 'facts' to back up their agenda-driven action sequences. But there exists no sequel, no set of scenes to countermand them at the intellectual box office, leaving millions of people with the idea that reasonable people can believe that global Jewish billionaires run sex-trafficking rings with the help of the Israeli government; that Hitler had no interest in exterminating Jews; and that polio was and future epidemics could be eradicated by little more than a few extra paper towels.
An X user voiced what at least some longtime listeners instinctively feel about a 15-year-old podcast whose past guests include the likes of Neil de Grasse Tyson and Bernie Sanders 'When Joe first began his show, he showed legitimate curiosity. Listening to people of all perspectives. I wonder what happened in recent years to cause him to have firmly entrenched beliefs.' Rogan's conspiracy episodes are red-pill moments, alright, but not in the way he intends: once you see what he's peddling, you can't unsee it.
In some ways of course we have been here before with Rogan. The podcaster had a friendly interview with infamous vaccine skeptic Robert Malone deemed littered with falsehoods, prompting Neil Young and Joni Mitchell to exit Spotify in response. But that was in 2022, when misinformation seemed to matter to platforms. Where we haven't been before is here, in 2025, when Spotify wouldn't even dream of censuring Rogan, lest it send the manosphere into an uproar over 'free-speech suppression' that no one is trying to suppress.
Any hope that artists will save us should be quickly snuffed out too; even icons know their power barely matters anymore in the shadow of Silicon Valley. As Young himself admitted when he returned to Spotify two years after Rogan's Malone episode, the platforms are simply too big to fight. 'Apple and Amazon have started serving the same disinformation podcast features I had opposed at Spotify. I cannot just leave Apple and Amazon … because my music would have very little streaming outlet to music lovers at all.' How can you run when you know?
On Friday Donald Trump appeared to back Murray, promoting the author's new book on Truth Social at a moment when Murray was taking fire from many MAGA supporters over the Rogan appearance. But coming from a president who has played cozy with election conspiracy theorists and antisemitic conspiracy theorists, appointed a vaccine skeptic to run Health and Human Services and a 9/11 conspiracy theorist as a close adviser, such a post hardly could play as a noble stand for facts and research. More likely it was a clapback at Rogan for his criticism of Trump's handling of Venezuelan deportations.
Trump's ulterior motive won't surprise anyone who's followed him the last ten years. But it does underscore how hard up the truth is for friends right now. An Oval Office boost for a man calling for basic sanity on the Holocaust is nice — until you realize the boost was happening because the occupant of the Oval Office wanted to round up people and ship them out of the country.
Murray went on Sky News Australia Tuesday to offer his recap of what happened with Rogan. 'When you get pseudo-historians talking, for instance, on Winston Churchill claiming Adolf Hitler wasn't openly antisemitic in the 1930s … you are in very dangerous territory if you leave such ideas out there and leave them unchallenged. I'm all for debate,' he added. 'But what I see in certain realms of the right is not actually a debate.' Of course that assumes anybody in those realms wants one.
The good news is that when people go off the deep end conspiracy-wise they tend to see their influence drop too, and if you don't believe that just ask Glenn Beck. The media has a self-regulating mechanism in place; the further flung the theories, the narrower the audience.
At least it had a self-regulating mechanism in place. We've never seen the quality of conspiracy-theory storytelling this high (Carroll and Cooper are if nothing else compelling speakers); these once-alternative platforms so large; and the susceptibility of people to disinformation so great. So has wrought two decades of active disinfo-peddling by online and cable news opportunists and (far less often) trust-eroding messups from legacy media outlets.
So it leaves us in this place, with a Joe Rogan who believes, or at least believes his audience believes, that Ian Carroll and Daryl Cooper are the proper voices to center, and a fact-oriented thinker like Douglas Murray little more than the foil and sporting fool.
Few signs of an easing await either — Rogan's most prominent upcoming political guest appears to be Glenn Greenwald. Rogan is just talking to people. But given a personality who can reach nearly as big an audience as Walter Cronkite in his heyday, we should probably make sure we're doing plenty of listening too.
Best of The Hollywood Reporter
Most Anticipated Concert Tours of 2025: Beyoncé, Billie Eilish, Kendrick Lamar & SZA, Sabrina Carpenter and More
Hollywood's Highest-Profile Harris Endorsements: Taylor Swift, George Clooney, Bruce Springsteen and More
Most Anticipated Concert Tours of 2024: Taylor Swift, Bad Bunny, Olivia Rodrigo and More

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Hamilton Spectator

32 minutes ago

• Hamilton Spectator

Iranian Canadians and others watch and worry after U.S. strikes on nuclear sites

Iranian Canadians and Jewish groups turned worried eyes to the Middle East on Sunday, as U.S. strikes against three Iranian nuclear sites raised fears of escalating violence. Nimâ Machouf, a member of a Montreal Iranian women's association, said family members in Iran are living 'from one bomb to another.' 'I'm very worried because this will only accelerate the violence in the region,' she said in a phone interview. 'It will further aggravate the problem and take us further away from peace.' Machouf, who is also an epidemiologist and former NDP candidate, believes the strikes will only hurt the people who are fighting to free themselves from Iran's repressive regime. Attacks from other countries means that Iran's people 'are not protected by their government, nor protected by others, by the international community,' she said. 'So people feel abandoned by everyone, everywhere.' The United States inserted itself in Israel's war against Iran early Sunday as it launched strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites. Prime Minister Mark Carney wrote on social media that U.S. military action was designed to alleviate the 'grave threat' Iran's nuclear program represents to international security. 'Canada has been consistently clear that Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon,' he wrote. But Carney said the situation in the Middle East was 'highly volatile,' and urged the parties to return to the negotiating table and reach a diplomatic solution. The interim president of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs described Iran's nuclear program on Sunday as a 'grave danger to global peace and security.' 'Eliminating this threat is an essential step toward achieving a safer Middle East and a more secure and peaceful world,' wrote Noah Shack, who urged the federal government to 'stand strong against the Iranian threat.' Kaveh Shahrooz, a lawyer and a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, says many Iranians are worried about the impact the U.S. decision will have on civilians. 'I think there's quite a bit of (concern) simply because there's a lot of unknowns,' he said. Shahrooz said Iran's regime offers virtually no protection to its own citizens in the form of air raid sirens or shelters, and internet has been cut off. 'So there's a lot of fear about what we will find out once internet connection is restored and we're able to talk to our families again,' he said. He said feelings among Canada's Iranian diaspora vary, from anger at the strikes to support for U.S. actions. 'Among the people who are not supportive of Iran's regime, I think there are some who are cheering and who are saying this was long overdue,' he said. 'And they're happy to see the Iranian regime's nuclear program effectively dismantled and to see that regime humiliated.' Machouf, on the other hand, called any suggestion that Israel will 'liberate' Iran's people a 'masquerade' and said regime change must come from within. Gur Tsabar, a spokesperson with Jews Say No to Genocide, said a rally called 'Hands Off Iran' was organized for Sunday afternoon in Toronto to demand sanctions on Israel and a two-way arms embargo. He described recent Israeli and American actions in Iran as 'beyond disturbing.' Tsabar said the rally scheduled for Sunday afternoon is co-organized by 16 groups, including the Iranian Canadian Congress, Palestinian Youth Movement, Jews Say No to Genocide and a number of labour unions. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 22, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

Boston Globe

2 hours ago

• Boston Globe

Europe is finally ready to spend more on defense. The hard part is how.

Advertisement This is a 'global reset,' Lieutenant General Sean Clancy, the new chief of the European Union's military committee, said at a security conference in Brussels this month. But 'we haven't even defined what the transition looks like.' Money, though, is far from the only issue Europe confronts now that it has reluctantly accepted the reality that it must be able to protect itself without help from the United States. Formidable political, strategic, and regulatory hurdles remain. EU leaders must maintain public support for common military spending and joint weapons procurement, even as right-wing nationalist sentiments oppose giving the bloc more power. And the farther from the Russian border, the less urgent the threat feels. Poland, for instance, is already spending nearly 5 percent of its gross domestic product on defense while Spain dedicated just 1.3 percent last year. Advertisement The European Union and Britain must also figure out how to prepare for the new kind of war that Russian aggression presents. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Europe's military has been focused on deploying troops to hot spots like Afghanistan and Iraq. Now they must be able to defend their own territory. Intelligence officials warn that Russian forces could be ready to attack a NATO country in five years. Complicating the decision-making are rapid advancements in intelligence, surveillance, battlefield management, and cyber technologies. Warfare is undergoing a transformation that is akin to what occurred during World War I, when horse-drawn wagons, muskets, and swords were replaced by tanks, machine guns, and airplanes. Look at Ukraine's battlefields. They are dominated by new technologies and throwback strategies, millions of drones and muddy trenches. 'Today 80 percent of targets in Ukraine are destroyed by drones,' said Andrius Kubilius, European Commissioner for defense and space. 'Every two months, there is a need for radical innovation of the drones in operation.' In recognition, the British Defense Ministry announced this month a startling overhaul of its warfighting approach, moving away from the Cold War-era focus on heavy armor and mechanized infantry. Under the plan, 80 percent of combat capability will rely on remote-controlled, reusable ground vehicles and drones as well as missiles, shells, and self-destructing drones. The EU has also taken steps to revise its strategy. In March, the 27 member nations issued a blueprint for combat readiness by 2030. Last month, the EU created a 150 billion euro (about $173 billion) program allowing joint investments in security. (Twenty-three countries are members of both the EU and NATO.) Advertisement But higgledy-piggledy rules and practices still hamper efforts to rapidly turn Europe's fragmented defenses into a unified and efficient fighting force. Joint financing is more the exception than the rule. Red tape, lack of coordination, and slow decision-making across the continent are causing delays, supply shortages, waste, and duplication, according to political and industry leaders. Overall strategy and standards are set by NATO commanders, but military budgets, specifications, quality control, export licenses, purchasing, and planning are handled by individual nations. The result is that a German-made component going into a French-made plane needs a separate export certification that can delay delivery by months. And though 12 European countries use NH90 helicopters, there are 17 versions, said Camille Grand, a former senior NATO official who leads defense studies at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Europe is also looking to decrease its dependence on American weaponry. The share of military equipment supplied to the European members of NATO by the United States has grown to nearly two-thirds, from about half less than a decade ago, according to a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Europe has put a priority on investment in its own defense industry and is looking to make its supply chains for key materials, like gunpowder, more resilient. 'There is an adjustment in terms of the business model for the European defense industry,' Grand said, as it shifts to standardized mass production. That, he said, will require more consolidation to create economies of scale and joint procurement. Industry leaders, meanwhile, complain that they cannot invest in expanded production and research without more direction from government officials. Advertisement 'The political machinery is slow,' said Jan Pie, secretary-general of ASD, a trade group that represents 4,000 companies across Europe. 'So it's difficult to scale up.' Environmental approvals needed before a new weapons factory may be built can take up to five years, Pie said. He said that despite the talk about the need for urgency, the defense industry was not given priority in times of shortages. Nammo, a Norwegian ammunitions manufacturer that supplies Ukraine, for instance, was unable to ramp up production in 2023 because a nearby TikTok data center had already bought up the region's surplus electricity. As economies slow across Europe, budget battles are expected to continue to soak up the spotlight. It's doubtful that some countries will ever reach the 5 percent target. Still, as far as funding goes, Europe has turned a corner, several European leaders and military experts said. 'There's a lot of discussion about numbers, percentages, financing,' Nadia Calviño, president of the European Investment Bank, the EU's lending arm, said in Brussels recently. 'But I want to be very clear: Europe is a rich continent, and we can mobilize the necessary financing.' This article originally appeared in

Chicago Tribune

3 hours ago

• Chicago Tribune

US boosts emergency Middle East evacuations and travel warnings after Trump orders strikes in Iran

WASHINGTON — The State Department has doubled the number of emergency evacuation flights it is providing for American citizens wishing to leave Israel, ordered the departure of nonessential staff from the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon and is stepping up travel warnings around the Middle East amid concerns Iran will retaliate against U.S. interests in the region. In internal and public notices, the department over the weekend significantly ramped up its cautionary advice to Americans in the Mideast. In a notice on Sunday, after American strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, the department said it had ordered nonessential personnel and the families of staff at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut to leave Lebanon 'due to the volatile and unpredictable security situation in the region.' The notice made no mention of any potential evacuation flights or other assistance for private Americans wanting to leave Lebanon but said those who want to should try to use existing commercial services to depart. At the same time, the department issued warnings to U.S. citizens in Saudi Arabia and Turkey to take extra security precautions given the uncertainty. 'Given reports of regional hostilities, the U.S. Mission to Saudi Arabia has advised its personnel to exercise increased caution and limit non-essential travel to any military installations in the region,' the department said in its notice for Saudi Arabia. In Turkey, the department said U.S. personnel 'have been cautioned to maintain a low profile and instructed to avoid personal travel to the U.S. Consulate Adana consular district,' which includes the NATO airbase at Incirlik. 'Negative sentiment toward U.S. foreign policy may prompt actions against U.S. or Western interests in Turkey,' the statement said. Late Saturday, the department said it was stepping up evacuation flights for American citizens from Israel to Europe and continuing to draw down its staff at diplomatic missions in Iraq. But even before the U.S. airstrikes on Iran were made public by President Donald Trump on Saturday evening in Washington, the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem had announced the start of evacuation flights for private Americans from Israel. Sixty-seven American citizens left Israel on two government flights bound for Athens, Greece on Saturday and four more evacuation flights to Athens were planned for Sunday, according to internal State Department document seen by The Associated Press. A nongovernment charter flight is scheduled to depart Israel for Rome on Monday. In addition to the flights, a cruise ship carrying more than 1,000 American citizens, including several hundred Jewish youngsters who had been visiting Israel on an organized tour, arrived in Cyprus, according to the document. It also said the evacuation of non-essential personnel at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad and consulate in Erbil is continuing. Those staffers had been ordered to leave even before Israel began its military operation in Iran more than a week ago. 'As part of our ongoing effort to streamline operations, additional personnel departed Iraq on June 21 and 22,' the department said. 'These departures represent a continuation of the process started on June 12.' As of Saturday, more than 7,900 Americans had asked for assistance in leaving Israel and more than 1,000 had sought help in leaving Iran, where the U.S. has no diplomatic presence, the document said. There are roughly 700,000 Americans, many of them dual U.S.-Israeli citizens, in Israel and many thousands of Americans, most of them dual in Iran. It was not clear how many Americans had successfully made it out of Iran through overland routes, although the document said more than 200 had entered neighboring Azerbaijan as of Saturday since the conflict began. After the U.S. strikes in Iran, security officers at all U.S. embassies and consulates have been instructed to conduct reviews of their post's security posture and report back to the State Department by late Sunday.