Ian Carroll had for some time circulated around social media platforms without much fuss, offering rambling monologues on everything from Central Intelligence Agency coups to the collapsed ruins of ancient civilisations. He’d claim that he was “only doing his own research”, and direct viewers to open-source documents that never quite clarified his more bombastic allegations about corporate and global conspiracies. Then, two days ago, Carroll turned up on Joe Rogan’s podcast, calling Jeffrey Epstein the “most prolific trafficker in human history” and accusing the entire mainstream media of conspiring to silence him. Now, overnight, he has managed to position himself as an “expert” on subjects as varied as corrupt banks and alleged government mind control.

This rapid-fire minting of a new expert — backed by no traditional credentials or institutional affiliations — reveals how things work in our increasingly decentralised media landscape. Audience size alone can confer respect, at least within certain circles. In a blink, a friendly invitation onto a massive platform like Rogan’s (15 million Spotify listeners, 16 million YouTube subscribers) can turn a once-unknown voice into someone revered for an “outsider” perspective. Previous blaming of Israel for the 9/11 attacks, as Carroll has done, is no obstacle.

Of course, the mainstream media’s gatekeeping model has never been perfect. CNN or MSNBC seek out a retired general when they need to comment on foreign policy or a credentialed historian to weigh in on election cycles. That model can seem overly closed or stale: the professor cannot always explain complex issues clearly, while the television-trained political analyst might regurgitate a stilted, outdated party line.

Enter Rogan, the stand-up comedian turned martial arts commentator who launched a podcast from his living room in 2009. Over the next decade, The Joe Rogan Experience became a juggernaut, catapulting previously unknown guests into viral stardom. The flip side of this is that the podcast’s guest list now doubles as a sort of digital Wild West. With increasing regularity, mainstream outlets hammer Rogan for having “fake experts” touting unusual theories. Yet every time one of these controversies brews, curiosity about the show spikes, taking viewership even higher.

The trend continues to escalate. Rogan will soon host podcaster Darryl Cooper, who has been accused of Holocaust denial and Nazi sympathising based on his interpretation of the Second World War. This appearance follows a pattern where increasingly controversial voices find mainstream exposure through Rogan’s platform — Cooper and Carroll being just two examples of commentators whose “expertise” is entirely audience-driven.

This pattern extends beyond Rogan. As Right-libertarian political commentator Richard Hanania observed today in reference to Cooper’s forthcoming JRE appearance: “Theo Von talking to Candace Owens. Stephen A Smith defending her. Ian Carroll going on Rogan. Now this. Antisemitism is breaking through to the mainstream.” Hanania argued that this more broadly represents “the general problem of the rise of Low Human Capital. Once stupidity is accepted in the public square, antisemitism is the natural corollary. There’s no version of the universe where you have a Rogan who doesn’t go in this direction.”

A parallel case can be found in Tucker Carlson’s post-Fox evolution. When he was a prime-time presenter with a big network and a decent corporate structure, his guests and themes stayed largely within the realm of mainstream politics, even if they skirted controversy. Once he went independent on X, though, he began featuring increasingly fringe characters. On Fox, his show had a standard format: some sharper populist angles on big news stories, a handful of “respectable” experts, maybe a one-off conversation with a previously unknown commentator. Now, away from those guardrails, he’s welcomed guests such as “gay Obama” truther Larry Sinclair and conspiracy maestro Alex Jones.

Plenty of hosts in this new media environment consider themselves honest brokers. Rogan, for instance, bristles at the notion that he is a Right-wing mouthpiece, pointing to his past endorsements of Left-leaning candidates and progressive views on drug legalisation and same-sex marriage. Critics note that, intentionally or not, he has boosted the profiles of individuals who peddle unproven claims. Rogan can justifiably counter that the old media is guilty of bigger sins, such as stifling debate over the origins of Covid-19 or defaming opponents without robust evidence. Everyone picks the side that resonates with them.

The final result is a messy, exhilarating, often overwhelming conversation. The next time an obscure online personality surfaces on Tucker Carlson’s X show or the JRE, touting new revelations about foreign meddling, cloned leaders, or interstellar visitors, many of us will listen because it’s fun to hear contentious views. In that give-them-what-they-want environment, an obscure name like Carroll can jump straight to the top of video feeds and pass himself off as a venerable, if self-styled, authority. He certainly won’t be the last.

---

Oliver Bateman is a historian and journalist based in Pittsburgh. He blogs, vlogs, and podcasts at his Substack, Oliver Bateman Does the Work

MoustacheClubUS

---