May 20, 2020
Can Joe Rogan retain his Joe Roganness when he's paid $100 million to put his show inside Spotify?
I don't know! He's got some brilliant kind of magic, and congratulations to him for making something that Spotify wanted to buy for that much money. But it's an ongoing show and it's got to be an immense challenge to keep it fresh and alive. But who knows? It could get better — like the way Howard Stern got better when he took the money and enclosed himself inside Sirius radio.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
41 comments:
Who pays the piper calls the tune.
I am not a podcast guy, but I've seen him on his youtube blog once or twice and I personally find him as unwatchable/listenable as Howard Stern.
-XC
PS - I like the new comment boxes and the reply option!
I don't get his appeal. Scott Adams likes him.
Scott Adams says the subscription model separates the trolls from the people who care, but he leaves out the people who care but won't pay, who are I'd say a majority.
He has traded his (relative) freedom for $100 million.
That is a very good price.
Stern is so last century. When he went to Sirius is when I stopped listening. I dont believe I missed a thing.
"He's got some brilliant kind of magic, and congratulations to him for making something that Spotify wanted to buy for that much money."
Definitely magic. No doubt about that. But having trouble with the word 'brilliant". He's working-joe, everyman shtick is good, but I don't get a "brilliant" vibe. But I like him and now he's really, really rich, and he's tire of the California lockdown, so all good.
Howard Stern is different. His show is different, and not as funny as it used to be. Money made him turn into Mr. Hollywood. Thanks, but no thanks.
I once was offered a $100 million contract, but it was for 100 million years.
Joe Rogan must have great content although my only knowledge of him is via this blog.
Althouse has great content. That's why the NYT tried to hire her. If Ann wanted to, she could really monetize her content.
I'd like to know if you can get his show on the free version of Spotify. If not, he's made himself into premium content, which is elitist.
So does this mean no more Youtube version of the show? That's pretty much the only way I consume it now.
Darrell, as long as that is guaranteed money, paid upfront, might be worth taking it.
Devil is in the details.
Unless the Devil was offering the deal...then you should decline.
The NYT made Ann an offer of employment?
I hope he continues to succeed at this. It'd be interesting to see every presidential candidate in the next election cycle spend two hours with him. It'd be orders of magnitude more informative than the political journalism we're currently stuck with.
Also, what new comment boxes and relpy option? Where?
Howard Stern disappeared when he switched to Sirius radio. He may have gotten better, I suppose, but no one will ever know.
The YouTube episodes and clips will be gone (even the old ones will come down). I like Joe, but generally don't want to listen to lengthy podcasts. The clips are great, and they indicate what is being talked about.
Also, what new comment boxes and relpy option? Where?
So, Althouse, did you remember what the problem was?
Also, what new comment boxes and relpy option? Where?
So, Althouse, did you remember what the problem was?
Stern has gotten predictable, conventional and safe for the timid, the opposite of what made his show interesting. How in the world is it better??
Turns out $100 million was cheap. The value of Spotify's stock has increased by several billion dollars since this deal was announced yesterday.
$100 million? Wow. I always thought he was pretty obscure, so I wikied him; he started out as a comedian.
Here's one told by Jimmy Stewart -
A couple are having a good breakfast on a fine sunny morning and out of the blue the wife asks her husband, "Would you get remarried if I died?" and the husband says "I don't want to talk about death while we're having such a nice breakfast!", but she keep pestering him and he finally says "Yes, I guess I would get remarried", then she asks him "Would you sell the house?" He's not sure. "Would you sell our bed?" "Oh, no, it's our bed, I'd keep it" and then she asks "Would you let her use my golf clubs?" and he says "No, of course not, she's left-handed."
Bay Area Guy said...
"He's got some brilliant kind of magic, and congratulations to him for making something that Spotify wanted to buy for that much money."
Definitely magic. No doubt about that. But having trouble with the word 'brilliant". He's working-joe, everyman shtick is good, but I don't get a "brilliant" vibe. But I like him and now he's really, really rich, and he's tire of the California lockdown, so all good.
5/20/20, 9:15 AM
On the youtube vids of his that I have seen, I appreciate that he [at least comes across] as willing to admit he does not know everything and he asks questions. He acts like he is willing to be convinced and not that he is going all out to defend his position, if he has one. The conversations take some "strange" turns sometimes too.
TML said...
Also, what new comment boxes and relpy option? Where?
5/20/20, 9:47 AM
Apparently it comes and goes. Not sure what is going on...
TML
The way I recall it, Ann was offered some kind of money opportunity to write op-eds for the NYT. She turned it down as it wasn't the same as blogging; which she prefers. Ann can give you the details. I might be wrong on some aspects of this.
I don't get the appeal either. Wouldn't pay a nickel for him. Spotify is a music site, giving Rogan $100 million doesn't seem to make a lot of sense but no doubt they've figured that all out.
I have only watched a handful of his podcasts, and while I liked what I saw, I don't see how this is worth even $1,000,000 to Spotify. At $100,000,000, though, I strongly suspect that the things I did like about Rogan's podcasts will now become impossible for him to do- Spotify's management is just as left-wing nutjobs as every other social media company's management, and they aren't going to put up with Rogan's relatively unbiased approach to interviewing and guest selection. I hope to be proven wrong in this prediction, though.
I watch Joe on youtube ever so often but would never dream of paying money to see him. In fact there is very little media or entertainment I would bother paying for unless it was packaged with some streaming channel I pay for. Good luck to him, its a great angle but it remains to be seen whether he will just pull a Dave Chappelle and disappear after he gets enough money.
You won't have to pay. From the LATimes:
“It will remain free, and it will be the exact same show,” Rogan said in an Instagram post. “It’s just a licensing deal, so Spotify won’t have any creative control over the show. ... We will still have clips up on YouTube but full versions of the show will only be on Spotify after the end of the year.”
A few things...First, if you haven't watched or listened you should. I've been reading this blog for 15 years and have been a JRE fan for 5. I feel as though Joe and Ann are similar people, curious about the world and open-minded enough to look at the world neutrally. He has guests on from all walks of life, and while not all of the episodes are great, most offer tremendous value and are highly enjoyable. Second, on Instagram yesterday he said the show would remain free. Third, this will make his show better. For the last year or so even he was having to tip-toe around certain subjects or he shied away from playing music/video clips for fear of being dropped by YouTube. Fourth, if Spotify execs are worth their pay they won't try to change a thing. The show has grown organically and is as popular because it is all Joe's creation. If they start forcing editorial decisions on him they will kill what they have invested in.
He'll be much less popular behind a paywall.
Rogan is a Bernie supporter. I don't need to know anything else.
I've heard a little bit of Rogan, he doesn't do it for me.
I've been listening to Crowder and he's great fun. The banter with his co-hosts is enjoyable, and he doesn't take insane positions like supporting Bernie.
The only downside are the skits. Gad, they are ghastly. Sub-SNL ghastly.
When you listen to some of the classic Stern shows they periodically run, you realize the enormous talent of Jackie Martling and Artie Lange. To use a orchestra analogy, Stern is a great conductor, but without great musicians the concert is just average.
I would say he's fully committed to his show for the rest of it's duration. And that may be 6 years or 16 years. Whatever. Congratulations to him. He created a famous life out of nothing and is getting paid tremendously for it.
I'm sure there's a lesson in there somewhere.
“ The way I recall it, Ann was offered some kind of money opportunity to write op-eds for the NYT.”
No, it was Slate, and it was only for 2 posts a week, I think. I did make a deal, but it fell through for some reason. No regrets about losing that. It takes a lot out of your mysterious magic, but for many people, playing for money makes it interesting. Depends on a lot of things.
Stern used to be good, often great. Then he wanted to be liked by Hollywood and the left, probably greatly influenced by his new wife. His recent interview of Hillary Clinton was a slobbering lovefest, it was disgusting. It made me long for the old Howard.
Did Jimmy Kimmel lose his “kimmel-ness” after he left “The Man Show”?
Nope. He's finished, as far as I'm concerned.
Rogan will be able to say and do a lot more without worrying about being de-monetized.
He was always my favorite character on NewsRadio.
Well, except for Lisa. She was hot.
Post a Comment