There is absolutely, and I mean this with every fibre of my being, nothing remarkable, captivating nor interesting about this man and his podcast other than the sheer mystery as to why he occupies a place as prominent amongst said world, or to be honest, why he even occupies any place within it.

The interviews are dull, drawn out affairs where guests often seem to do nothing but offer out tidbits which are met with all the cadence and depth of somebody half asleep and in some cases, baked af.

Someone please explain it to me – fed / plant? it just doesn’t compute to me.

Posted by noctenaut

19 Comments

  1. Zealousideal-Part815 on

    Only watched a few episodes, seems fine, nothing special but a decent podcast. I’m partial to Danny Jones myself.

  2. One-Garlic5431 on

    Anyone on X with a huge follower count or has a podcast are controlled opposition. Same goes for Shawn Ryan, Ryan Matta, Candace Owens, Ian Carrol, Tim Pool, Tucker Calson…so on and so forth

  3. liquidcourage93 on

    Well he first got the Rogan bump. With his connections and audience he was able to get some high level interview guests. His interviews are very soft but his education and demeanour he still come off as being smart and diving deep. The fact that the interviews always promoting the guests made it was easier for him to get more interviews with high level people.

    The reason people tune in are for his guests, not for him.

  4. MindfulInquirer on

    I agree with the writeup in the OP. Nothing against this young man but he’s completely bland and because of that, yes, it begs the question as to why he’s popular or at least why his YT continues to perform.

    I suppose the controlled opposition/influencer theory makes sense. I guess these guys get approached by either lobbies or organizations to steer their topics in a certain direction and emphasize particular points. Would not be surprised one bit to learn that.

Leave A Reply