June 5, 2025 • 14 mins
This recap episode unpacks Protect Our Parks 15 from The Joe Rogan Experience featuring Mark Normand, Shane Gillis and Ari Shaffir. They discuss humour, encounters with drugs, celebrities and their personal lives including divorce and struggles with fame, and opinions on various public figures and current events like the Israel-Palestine conflict and the Covid-19 pandemic. The conversation also touches on controversial historical figures, the impact of AI and technology, conspiracy theories, and entertainment such as sports, music, movies, and comedy. Additionally, they share personal anecdotes and opinions on various aspects of life.
---
We all love The Joe Rogan Experience and much prefer the real thing, but sometimes it's not possible to listen to an entire episode or you just want to recap an episode you've previously listened to. The Joe Rogan Recap uses Google's NotebookLM to create a conversational podcast that recaps episodes of JRE into a more manageable listen.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Welcome to the Joe Rogan recap. Glad to be diving in.
Today, we're plunging into a well, a mountain of source
material from a recent conversation, specifically
episode hashtag 2333, the Protect Our Parks series.
Right, quite a wide-ranging 1. Exactly.
Our mission here really is to cut through all the noise,
unpack the most intriguing insights, maybe the surprising
(00:23):
details, those moments that really stick out just for you
think. Of it like filtering, yeah.
Yeah. Finding the really compelling
Nuggets in that long stream of talk.
We've got quite a range, I mean everything from unusual objects
and physical mishaps. To deep dives into the music
industry. Some pretty sensitive social
commentary which we need to handle carefully.
(00:43):
Just reporting what was said. Right, And even some strange
observations about people and animals.
OK, let's unpack this. Absolutely.
You sent us a lot to cover here,pulling some discussions that,
yeah, touched on some truly wildand unexpected connections and.
We also have to start right there in the room where it
happened. You know, there were those
specific visual things they mentioned.
Yeah, the stuffed animal, that little mech head thing on the
(01:04):
table, like a robot head toy. But the one that really grabbed
attention and they spent some time on it was the Aztec death
whistle. Yes, the death whistle, that
thing that makes that chilling screaming sound.
And the discussion brought up this truly bizarre claim made in
the conversation that when someone can blew this whistle on
(01:26):
a past podcast about a month later the pandemic started
specifically mentioning LA locking down.
Wow, OK, so presented as this strange, almost like
conspiratorial link people were making.
Exactly. It just highlights how sometimes
you know these long talks, people look for patterns, for
connections. Even in the most unlikely
(01:47):
places. Right, linking things that seem
totally unrelated. It does.
And Speaking of strange things and physical impacts, they also
talked about that pretty jarringanecdote about comedian Heather
McDonald falling on stage. Yes, and it wasn't just a simple
trip, was it? The detail they really
emphasized was hitting her head directly on hardwood.
They stressed that yeah, not a rug and her head actually
(02:09):
bounced. They even mentioned watching the
video like multiple times how terrifying it looked.
And here's where it gets, like, really interesting.
They connected that specific kind of head impact to a serious
point about, well, fights. OK.
The claim made was that that kind of fall, hitting your head
hard on the ground after being knocked out, is often why people
die in street fights. Not the punches themselves.
(02:31):
Not necessarily, according to this discussion.
It's the impact with the hard surface afterward.
That's that's a surprising detail, isn't it, about a common
danger? It really is kind of
counterintuitive. You'd assume the blows the main
risk. So why should you care about
this specific bit from the source?
Well, understanding this sort ofunexpected mechanism, it gives
(02:53):
you a different perspective maybe on the real dangers
involved. Yeah, those hidden dangers.
A stark reminder, really, how secondary impacts could be
fatal. So, moving from peculiar objects
and physical mishaps, the conversation took a pretty big
turn into fame, sudden fame and the music industry focusing on
Oliver Anthony. This is quite the story the way
(03:13):
it was recounted. Oliver Anthony goes from, well,
poverty, basically. Selling farm equipment.
Right. Yeah, to suddenly being this
massive YouTube star after just one song just exploded online.
His rise was incredible, meteoric and when he started
getting these multi $1,000,000 offers from big labels.
The strong advice discussed was basically don't sign anything
(03:37):
with anybody. Plain and simple.
The message being, you know, they're trying to steal money
from you. The whole framing was about
independence, right? Recognizing your own value.
Exactly. If you wrote that song the
monster hit, the point was you've got the talent to write a
dozen more. You don't need the old
gatekeepers, the labels taking ahuge cut.
You've got to reach the creativity yourself.
But then came this really dramatic, difficult turn, as
(03:59):
they reported it in the discussion.
OK, after he starts making millions his wife divorces him
and the claim made was she wanted, well, everything.
More than half even future earnings.
And the justification was. Because she was with him when he
was broke. This whole crisis was described
in the conversation as him beinglike tortured, feeling like he
(04:20):
wanted to die. Wow, that's heavy framed as
incredibly painful and public. Very.
And the creative response to this, which they discussed with
a lot of emphasis. He wrote a song about the
divorce. Basically a diss track they
called it. Yeah, they highlighted a
specific lyric from it, too. The judge says 5050, but the
math don't seem right. To a scorned woman, the reaction
(04:44):
described to hearing this song was pretty strong.
They called it soulful, like a throwback.
And the craziest diss track of all time.
That, too, suggesting it would hit home for anyone who's gone
through a rough divorce. It's definitely a very raw, very
public way to process that kind of pain through art.
And they contrasted his story with another artist.
Lisa Loeb remembers that. Oh yeah, early 90s hit outside
(05:07):
the label system initially, right?
Exactly. The point was that she too kind
of had the upper hand, as they put it when the labels
eventually came knocking, because she already proven her
success independently so. This Oliver Anthony story next
to Lisa Loeb's It raises this important question, doesn't it
seems like it was implied in thediscussion, which is in this age
where artists can get enormous reach directly, like through
(05:31):
YouTube, is the traditional music industry model.
You know, the deals, the gatekeepers, the big cuts.
Is it becoming obsolete for really talented artists who can
find their audience directly? It certainly seems like the
landscape is shifting drastically.
No, the conversation wasn't justabout public figures and
industry stuff. It also got into some very
(05:52):
candid talk about personal habits and notably some highly
sensitive social topics. Right.
And we need to be really clear here.
We're reporting on these neutrally based only on what was
discussed in the source material.
No endorsement. Absolutely crucial.
So the discussion included mentions of personal challenges
like taking Seroquel for sleep. Yeah, that's a medication often
prescribed off label for sleep. Doug Stanhope's use came up.
(06:14):
Followed by a strong cautionary note right about taking other
people's meds. Exactly.
The specific point was about dosage and tolerance issues,
especially with something prescribed to someone like
Stanhope, who they described as having built up, you know, a
tolerance. They also touched briefly on
Stanhope's personality, some touring stories, Ukraine,
(06:36):
filming in a smoking room in Latvia, just painting a picture
of his style. Then the conversation moved into
those sensitive social areas. And again, just to reiterate, we
are presenting the claims and perspectives from the source
material impartially, OK. One segment, as discussed,
involved the Iranian female boxer who won Olympic gold.
(06:57):
And the claim made in the conversation, citing what they
described as a medical report from an amateur boxing
organization, was that she was identified as biologically male.
Due to internal testes and an XYchromosome condition, that was
the claim presented, correct? Reporting this as discussed in
the source. Got it.
They also included a segment on Greta Thunberg.
Right. Observations were made about her
(07:17):
journey by sailboat, mentioning it included stops potentially
related to places like Iran and Gaza.
And the host perspective, as reported, was somewhat critical.
Critical of how media and causesuse young people as faces.
Yeah, they noted how global issues like Russia, Ukraine, the
Palestine conflict supposedly shifted focus away from climate
(07:38):
change. And there was that critical
observation about people's reactions depending on who's
involved in a conflict. Yeah, quoting the sentiment.
Let me see where they were from first.
Again, presenting this is discussion from the source with
strict impartiality. OK, another significant part was
about charity fundraising transparency, specifically the
LA Fire Fund. The claim presented was that
this fund raised $100 million. The discussion was about where
(08:01):
that money supposedly went. Stating it was distributed under
the advisement of the Annenberg Foundation.
Correct and claims were presented citing IRS Form 990
data for Annenberg, suggesting asignificant chunk went to admin
costs. Contrasting it with Doctors
Without Borders, who they claim spent almost 90% on actual
programs. Right and specific in Pacific
(08:21):
Palisades were listed as gettinggrants.
Cahill, Israel. Shabad Palisades Charter High
School, again cited in the source as examples discussed.
It's really important for you, the listener, to understand
we're relaying these points as they were presented in the
source video. We haven't verified these
details ourselves. Exactly.
The conversation also briefly touched on other controversial
(08:43):
bits, Kurt Metzger style with conspiracy topics or stories
around the Diddy trial with Ray J Suj Knight, Kid Cootie.
Just examples of the range really, not dwelling on them or
endorsing anything, right? Shifting gears now, the
conversation also dipped into lighter stuff.
Sometimes very strange territorythough.
(09:04):
Quirky observations about humansand animals.
Like the animal stories that oneabout the coyote stealing a
chicken. And the description was that the
observers were super impressed by his leap over the fence.
Yeah, and the bizarre talk aboutchicken brooding behavior, how
hens stop laying, even pick their feathers.
And they explained how to break it.
Putting the hand in a small pen,forcing her to stand on a post
sounded quite specific. And then that wild story about
(09:27):
the big mastiff dog tearing opena wire wall killing 9 chickens.
But the humor and how it was framed in the source.
The idea that a coyote somehow honey dicked the mastiff into
it. Like convinced him eating
chickens was fun. Pretty much.
The conversation also wandered into some odd physical
(09:48):
observations, particularly aboutdogs.
Oh right, the continuation of the discussion about dog mating
when they get stuck together. And the surprising question
posed was whether it looks pleasant to watch.
OK, and they brought up the sad bulldog video anecdote too.
Framed humorously is the dog getting cucked by another dog?
Yeah. And of course, the infamous,
often mentioned VHS tape story The Lady and the German Shepherd
(10:11):
that came up again. Followed by evaluating the nice
tits in that incredibly challenging context.
Yikes, some more random facts and opinions sprinkled into
right. Yeah, the description of a
Pittsburgh salad is basically fries with some lettuce.
That sounds about right, actually.
The opinion that Stephen King doesn't seem to like cool
things. Plus the fact he got hit by a
bus. And the discussion about room
(10:33):
temperature, girls liking it warmer.
That assertion was made, yeah. There were also some really
relatable struggles discussed. Like Joe deciding to stop
drinking alcohol. Right.
Talking about feeling better forit, but openly admitting the
temptation. Predicting you'll be back.
And that idea that hangovers arejust paying for tomorrow?
(10:55):
Pretty common feeling, yeah. And that historical bit about
the Popeye movie set in Malta? Supposedly used for cocaine
smuggling via film cams. That's the anecdote shared.
Yeah, it's clear the conversation just meandered
through this huge landscape of topics.
Connecting the mundane with the extreme, the personal with the
public. And Speaking of extreme in
public, the source spent a good chunk of time focused on the
(11:16):
power and just the sheer scale of live performance and crowds.
Right. The energy of big crowds was
definitely a recurring theme they seemed fascinated by.
They described watching that video of the Michigan football
team walking into the hostile Ohio State stadium, really
emphasizing the intensity. But the real focus seemed to be
iconic concert entrances, the massive crowds at historical
(11:38):
shows. Yeah, they talked about Sandman,
Metallica's entrance at VirginiaTech, and then the description
of Metallica in Moscow, 1991. Citing that huge crowd size,
right? Like 1.6 million, maybe even 2
million. Just immense.
Billy Joel in the USSR was mentioned.
Led Zeppelin, the jump around thing at Wisconsin Games, Ariana
(12:00):
Grande and Manchester. What's fascinating here, what
they seem to be getting at, is trying to convey that sheer
scale and energy. Describing the crowd like a
living Organism. You know, a single entity
responding. They talked about watching the
video intro for corn at Woodstock 99, too.
Yeah, mentioning they didn't initially like the band, but
being completely struck by the lead singer's face.
(12:21):
As he walked out and just took in that enormous crowd.
Saying the look was like it breaks yourself.
Just overwhelmed by the scale. They put it in the context of
their whole rock rap era. And finally, describing watching
size entrance, the Korean guy. Gangnam Style.
Yeah. Popping out of the floor onto a
stage. Huge crowd described as millions
of people. They said it shook the whole
(12:41):
place like in the visual to something out of Squid Game.
O What does all this focus on spectacles and crowds suggest?
Why do these moments resonate sostrongly for performers and
audiences? Seems like the source material
implies it taps into something, well, fundamental about us, our
need for these collective intense experiences.
Whether it's sports rivalries orhuge concerts.
(13:03):
It goes beyond just watching, right?
It's being part of something so enormous, so overwhelming.
It becomes this single shared feeling.
Yeah, the power of collective human energy all focused in one
place. So we've covered quite a bit
today, journeyed through bizarreobjects, physical dangers, the
drama of fame, the changing music.
Navigated some sensitive discussions as they were
(13:25):
presented. Observed quirky human and animal
stuff. And finally got immersed in the
sheer scale and energy of massive live performances, all
distilled directly from that source material you provided.
We've seen snapshots of fames, consequences, privacy concerns,
how people find patterns in odd places, moments of raw human
connection, all through that conversational lens.
(13:47):
What stands out to you the most from this particular deep dive
into that conversation? Well, here's a final provocative
thought, something for you to Mull over.
Building on some threads in there, OK, considering the
discussions about online privacyinvasion, even mentioning VPN's,
the sheer volume of information we're hit with and those
observations about the potentially stage nature of some
(14:08):
media. Like the Techno Viking video or
questions about public appearances?
Exactly how much of the world weerceive, esecially through
screens, is genuinely unfilteredreality, and how much is just,
well, a carefully constructed sectacle or narrative.
Something to think about next time you're scrolling or
watching something.
Welcome to the Joe Rogan recap. Glad to be diving in.
Today, we're plunging into a well, a mountain of source
material from a recent conversation, specifically
episode hashtag 2333, the Protect Our Parks series.
Right, quite a wide-ranging 1. Exactly.
Our mission here really is to cut through all the noise,
unpack the most intriguing insights, maybe the surprising
(00:23):
details, those moments that really stick out just for you
think. Of it like filtering, yeah.
Yeah. Finding the really compelling
Nuggets in that long stream of talk.
We've got quite a range, I mean everything from unusual objects
and physical mishaps. To deep dives into the music
industry. Some pretty sensitive social
commentary which we need to handle carefully.
(00:43):
Just reporting what was said. Right, And even some strange
observations about people and animals.
OK, let's unpack this. Absolutely.
You sent us a lot to cover here,pulling some discussions that,
yeah, touched on some truly wildand unexpected connections and.
We also have to start right there in the room where it
happened. You know, there were those
specific visual things they mentioned.
Yeah, the stuffed animal, that little mech head thing on the
(01:04):
table, like a robot head toy. But the one that really grabbed
attention and they spent some time on it was the Aztec death
whistle. Yes, the death whistle, that
thing that makes that chilling screaming sound.
And the discussion brought up this truly bizarre claim made in
the conversation that when someone can blew this whistle on
(01:26):
a past podcast about a month later the pandemic started
specifically mentioning LA locking down.
Wow, OK, so presented as this strange, almost like
conspiratorial link people were making.
Exactly. It just highlights how sometimes
you know these long talks, people look for patterns, for
connections. Even in the most unlikely
(01:47):
places. Right, linking things that seem
totally unrelated. It does.
And Speaking of strange things and physical impacts, they also
talked about that pretty jarringanecdote about comedian Heather
McDonald falling on stage. Yes, and it wasn't just a simple
trip, was it? The detail they really
emphasized was hitting her head directly on hardwood.
They stressed that yeah, not a rug and her head actually
(02:09):
bounced. They even mentioned watching the
video like multiple times how terrifying it looked.
And here's where it gets, like, really interesting.
They connected that specific kind of head impact to a serious
point about, well, fights. OK.
The claim made was that that kind of fall, hitting your head
hard on the ground after being knocked out, is often why people
die in street fights. Not the punches themselves.
(02:31):
Not necessarily, according to this discussion.
It's the impact with the hard surface afterward.
That's that's a surprising detail, isn't it, about a common
danger? It really is kind of
counterintuitive. You'd assume the blows the main
risk. So why should you care about
this specific bit from the source?
Well, understanding this sort ofunexpected mechanism, it gives
(02:53):
you a different perspective maybe on the real dangers
involved. Yeah, those hidden dangers.
A stark reminder, really, how secondary impacts could be
fatal. So, moving from peculiar objects
and physical mishaps, the conversation took a pretty big
turn into fame, sudden fame and the music industry focusing on
Oliver Anthony. This is quite the story the way
(03:13):
it was recounted. Oliver Anthony goes from, well,
poverty, basically. Selling farm equipment.
Right. Yeah, to suddenly being this
massive YouTube star after just one song just exploded online.
His rise was incredible, meteoric and when he started
getting these multi $1,000,000 offers from big labels.
The strong advice discussed was basically don't sign anything
(03:37):
with anybody. Plain and simple.
The message being, you know, they're trying to steal money
from you. The whole framing was about
independence, right? Recognizing your own value.
Exactly. If you wrote that song the
monster hit, the point was you've got the talent to write a
dozen more. You don't need the old
gatekeepers, the labels taking ahuge cut.
You've got to reach the creativity yourself.
But then came this really dramatic, difficult turn, as
(03:59):
they reported it in the discussion.
OK, after he starts making millions his wife divorces him
and the claim made was she wanted, well, everything.
More than half even future earnings.
And the justification was. Because she was with him when he
was broke. This whole crisis was described
in the conversation as him beinglike tortured, feeling like he
(04:20):
wanted to die. Wow, that's heavy framed as
incredibly painful and public. Very.
And the creative response to this, which they discussed with
a lot of emphasis. He wrote a song about the
divorce. Basically a diss track they
called it. Yeah, they highlighted a
specific lyric from it, too. The judge says 5050, but the
math don't seem right. To a scorned woman, the reaction
(04:44):
described to hearing this song was pretty strong.
They called it soulful, like a throwback.
And the craziest diss track of all time.
That, too, suggesting it would hit home for anyone who's gone
through a rough divorce. It's definitely a very raw, very
public way to process that kind of pain through art.
And they contrasted his story with another artist.
Lisa Loeb remembers that. Oh yeah, early 90s hit outside
(05:07):
the label system initially, right?
Exactly. The point was that she too kind
of had the upper hand, as they put it when the labels
eventually came knocking, because she already proven her
success independently so. This Oliver Anthony story next
to Lisa Loeb's It raises this important question, doesn't it
seems like it was implied in thediscussion, which is in this age
where artists can get enormous reach directly, like through
(05:31):
YouTube, is the traditional music industry model.
You know, the deals, the gatekeepers, the big cuts.
Is it becoming obsolete for really talented artists who can
find their audience directly? It certainly seems like the
landscape is shifting drastically.
No, the conversation wasn't justabout public figures and
industry stuff. It also got into some very
(05:52):
candid talk about personal habits and notably some highly
sensitive social topics. Right.
And we need to be really clear here.
We're reporting on these neutrally based only on what was
discussed in the source material.
No endorsement. Absolutely crucial.
So the discussion included mentions of personal challenges
like taking Seroquel for sleep. Yeah, that's a medication often
prescribed off label for sleep. Doug Stanhope's use came up.
(06:14):
Followed by a strong cautionary note right about taking other
people's meds. Exactly.
The specific point was about dosage and tolerance issues,
especially with something prescribed to someone like
Stanhope, who they described as having built up, you know, a
tolerance. They also touched briefly on
Stanhope's personality, some touring stories, Ukraine,
(06:36):
filming in a smoking room in Latvia, just painting a picture
of his style. Then the conversation moved into
those sensitive social areas. And again, just to reiterate, we
are presenting the claims and perspectives from the source
material impartially, OK. One segment, as discussed,
involved the Iranian female boxer who won Olympic gold.
(06:57):
And the claim made in the conversation, citing what they
described as a medical report from an amateur boxing
organization, was that she was identified as biologically male.
Due to internal testes and an XYchromosome condition, that was
the claim presented, correct? Reporting this as discussed in
the source. Got it.
They also included a segment on Greta Thunberg.
Right. Observations were made about her
(07:17):
journey by sailboat, mentioning it included stops potentially
related to places like Iran and Gaza.
And the host perspective, as reported, was somewhat critical.
Critical of how media and causesuse young people as faces.
Yeah, they noted how global issues like Russia, Ukraine, the
Palestine conflict supposedly shifted focus away from climate
(07:38):
change. And there was that critical
observation about people's reactions depending on who's
involved in a conflict. Yeah, quoting the sentiment.
Let me see where they were from first.
Again, presenting this is discussion from the source with
strict impartiality. OK, another significant part was
about charity fundraising transparency, specifically the
LA Fire Fund. The claim presented was that
this fund raised $100 million. The discussion was about where
(08:01):
that money supposedly went. Stating it was distributed under
the advisement of the Annenberg Foundation.
Correct and claims were presented citing IRS Form 990
data for Annenberg, suggesting asignificant chunk went to admin
costs. Contrasting it with Doctors
Without Borders, who they claim spent almost 90% on actual
programs. Right and specific in Pacific
(08:21):
Palisades were listed as gettinggrants.
Cahill, Israel. Shabad Palisades Charter High
School, again cited in the source as examples discussed.
It's really important for you, the listener, to understand
we're relaying these points as they were presented in the
source video. We haven't verified these
details ourselves. Exactly.
The conversation also briefly touched on other controversial
(08:43):
bits, Kurt Metzger style with conspiracy topics or stories
around the Diddy trial with Ray J Suj Knight, Kid Cootie.
Just examples of the range really, not dwelling on them or
endorsing anything, right? Shifting gears now, the
conversation also dipped into lighter stuff.
Sometimes very strange territorythough.
(09:04):
Quirky observations about humansand animals.
Like the animal stories that oneabout the coyote stealing a
chicken. And the description was that the
observers were super impressed by his leap over the fence.
Yeah, and the bizarre talk aboutchicken brooding behavior, how
hens stop laying, even pick their feathers.
And they explained how to break it.
Putting the hand in a small pen,forcing her to stand on a post
sounded quite specific. And then that wild story about
(09:27):
the big mastiff dog tearing opena wire wall killing 9 chickens.
But the humor and how it was framed in the source.
The idea that a coyote somehow honey dicked the mastiff into
it. Like convinced him eating
chickens was fun. Pretty much.
The conversation also wandered into some odd physical
(09:48):
observations, particularly aboutdogs.
Oh right, the continuation of the discussion about dog mating
when they get stuck together. And the surprising question
posed was whether it looks pleasant to watch.
OK, and they brought up the sad bulldog video anecdote too.
Framed humorously is the dog getting cucked by another dog?
Yeah. And of course, the infamous,
often mentioned VHS tape story The Lady and the German Shepherd
(10:11):
that came up again. Followed by evaluating the nice
tits in that incredibly challenging context.
Yikes, some more random facts and opinions sprinkled into
right. Yeah, the description of a
Pittsburgh salad is basically fries with some lettuce.
That sounds about right, actually.
The opinion that Stephen King doesn't seem to like cool
things. Plus the fact he got hit by a
bus. And the discussion about room
(10:33):
temperature, girls liking it warmer.
That assertion was made, yeah. There were also some really
relatable struggles discussed. Like Joe deciding to stop
drinking alcohol. Right.
Talking about feeling better forit, but openly admitting the
temptation. Predicting you'll be back.
And that idea that hangovers arejust paying for tomorrow?
(10:55):
Pretty common feeling, yeah. And that historical bit about
the Popeye movie set in Malta? Supposedly used for cocaine
smuggling via film cams. That's the anecdote shared.
Yeah, it's clear the conversation just meandered
through this huge landscape of topics.
Connecting the mundane with the extreme, the personal with the
public. And Speaking of extreme in
public, the source spent a good chunk of time focused on the
(11:16):
power and just the sheer scale of live performance and crowds.
Right. The energy of big crowds was
definitely a recurring theme they seemed fascinated by.
They described watching that video of the Michigan football
team walking into the hostile Ohio State stadium, really
emphasizing the intensity. But the real focus seemed to be
iconic concert entrances, the massive crowds at historical
(11:38):
shows. Yeah, they talked about Sandman,
Metallica's entrance at VirginiaTech, and then the description
of Metallica in Moscow, 1991. Citing that huge crowd size,
right? Like 1.6 million, maybe even 2
million. Just immense.
Billy Joel in the USSR was mentioned.
Led Zeppelin, the jump around thing at Wisconsin Games, Ariana
(12:00):
Grande and Manchester. What's fascinating here, what
they seem to be getting at, is trying to convey that sheer
scale and energy. Describing the crowd like a
living Organism. You know, a single entity
responding. They talked about watching the
video intro for corn at Woodstock 99, too.
Yeah, mentioning they didn't initially like the band, but
being completely struck by the lead singer's face.
(12:21):
As he walked out and just took in that enormous crowd.
Saying the look was like it breaks yourself.
Just overwhelmed by the scale. They put it in the context of
their whole rock rap era. And finally, describing watching
size entrance, the Korean guy. Gangnam Style.
Yeah. Popping out of the floor onto a
stage. Huge crowd described as millions
of people. They said it shook the whole
(12:41):
place like in the visual to something out of Squid Game.
O What does all this focus on spectacles and crowds suggest?
Why do these moments resonate sostrongly for performers and
audiences? Seems like the source material
implies it taps into something, well, fundamental about us, our
need for these collective intense experiences.
Whether it's sports rivalries orhuge concerts.
(13:03):
It goes beyond just watching, right?
It's being part of something so enormous, so overwhelming.
It becomes this single shared feeling.
Yeah, the power of collective human energy all focused in one
place. So we've covered quite a bit
today, journeyed through bizarreobjects, physical dangers, the
drama of fame, the changing music.
Navigated some sensitive discussions as they were
(13:25):
presented. Observed quirky human and animal
stuff. And finally got immersed in the
sheer scale and energy of massive live performances, all
distilled directly from that source material you provided.
We've seen snapshots of fames, consequences, privacy concerns,
how people find patterns in odd places, moments of raw human
connection, all through that conversational lens.
(13:47):
What stands out to you the most from this particular deep dive
into that conversation? Well, here's a final provocative
thought, something for you to Mull over.
Building on some threads in there, OK, considering the
discussions about online privacyinvasion, even mentioning VPN's,
the sheer volume of information we're hit with and those
observations about the potentially stage nature of some
(14:08):
media. Like the Techno Viking video or
questions about public appearances?
Exactly how much of the world weerceive, esecially through
screens, is genuinely unfilteredreality, and how much is just,
well, a carefully constructed sectacle or narrative.
Something to think about next time you're scrolling or
watching something.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.