In the past five years, Joe Budden and his team have carved out a dominant space in digital media through The Joe Budden Podcast (JBP). After a public breakup with his former co-hosts Rory and Mal over profit splits, Budden chose independence — a move that granted him full creative freedom. His disdain for exploitative contracts and what he calls “culture vultures” resonates deeply with his audience.
Despite lacking corporate backing, The Joe Budden Podcast is thriving. According to The New York Times, it’s on pace to generate nearly $20 million by the end of the fiscal year — an extraordinary accomplishment for a Black-owned, independent media entity. Outside of tenured moguls like Byron Allen and Tyler Perry, few minority-owned outlets have reached such success.
Autonomy as a Superpower
Budden’s stubborn commitment to independence has become his greatest advantage. Fans see his platform as the antithesis of corporate media — a raw, organic space where topics are explored authentically. While JBP offers free episodes on YouTube, its Patreon subscription service averages over 25 million visitors per month. With 70,000+ subscribers paying between $5 and $50 monthly, the show has achieved financial stability that not only insulates it from “cancel culture” but also enables talent acquisition.
One of those recruits is Marc Lamont Hill, arguably the most credentialed personality to join the JBP team—a testament to both its financial health and cultural relevance.
The Scholar Joins the Podfather
Hill’s credentials are impeccable. A graduate of Temple University with a B.S. in Education and Spanish, he went on to earn both a master’s and Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania. His academic career spans faculty positions at Temple, Columbia, Morehouse, and the City University of New York Graduate Center.
Outside academia, Hill built his reputation as a political commentator on Fox News, The Huffington Post, BET, and CNN. However, his 2018 departure from CNN over comments perceived as antisemitic tarnished his mainstream standing. Since then, he’s appeared across various outlets but struggled to find a consistent media home — until JBP.
Hill’s addition to the podcast seemed strategic: he brought intellectual credibility to a show rooted in street sensibilities, bridging political discourse and pop culture. But his presence has also revealed fault lines between the scholar and the street.
The Clash: Street vs. Scholar
Hill’s intellectual style often contrasts sharply with that of co-host Trevor “Queenzflip” Robinson, whose background and humor are deeply grounded in urban culture. Queenzflip’s comedic timing and lived experiences add levity and relatability to the show, appealing to JBP’s core audience.
Yet, when Hill and Queenzflip clash, the dynamic becomes a case study in class and communication within Black America. Their exchanges highlight the tensions between the Black bourgeoisie and working-class perspectives — both valid, but often worlds apart.
A recent Patreon-exclusive episode brought this tension to a boiling point. The two sparred over the definition of a “team player.” Hill argued that Queenzflip’s behavior showed inconsistencies, citing insecurities and ego. Queenzflip fired back, accusing Hill of over-intellectualizing conversations and using elaborate analogies to validate his intellect. The argument escalated until Budden himself intervened to mediate.
The clip quickly went viral, igniting broader debates about the role —and reception — of Black intellectuals in modern media.
The Ripple Effect: Criticism from the Establishment
The fallout extended beyond the podcast. Members of the Native Land Podcast (NLP) — hosted by Angela Rye, Andrew Gillum, and Tiffany Cross — criticized Hill’s participation in the JBP, arguing that his intellectual contributions were misplaced on a platform known primarily for entertainment.
NLP, a show centered on political and socioeconomic issues in the Black community, implied that Hill’s talents belonged in more “serious” spaces like CNN or MSNBC. Rye even stated that Hill “is welcome to come home anytime he wishes,” suggesting JBP lacked the empathy and rigor of traditional Black media institutions.
The critique exposed a familiar rift: the belief that intellect is only valid when sanctioned by legacy institutions.
Joe Budden’s Rebuttal
Budden didn’t take the criticism lightly. His response was both defensive and illuminating. He accused elite Black media figures of hypocrisy—pointing out how the community often preaches unity during adversity but fractures when it comes to economic collaboration.
He reminded listeners that Hill found a home at JBP after those very institutions dismissed him. Budden argued that his platform not only provided Hill with compensation but also offered access to an audience that mainstream outlets rarely engage. In essence, Budden reframed the partnership as a triumph of ownership and opportunity—two principles long championed but rarely practiced within Black media.
Beyond the Beef: What’s Really at Stake
Budden’s rebuttal sparked a deeper conversation about the future of Black intellectualism in 2025. His defense revealed a paradox within the community: a demand for both independence and institutional validation.
What does it mean to be a Black intellectual in the digital age? Marc Lamont Hill’s inclusion on JBP represents a collision of worlds —the academic and the authentic, the polished and the raw. For decades, Black intellect was confined to classrooms, conferences, and think tanks —spaces often detached from the communities they studied. Budden’s podcast disrupts that paradigm by democratizing discourse. No producers. No censors. Just voices — flawed, passionate, and real — negotiating ideas in real time.
The Double Standard of Black Credibility
The tension surrounding Hill’s presence also exposes a deeper issue: the policing of Black credibility. When Hill speaks on CNN, it’s considered “analysis.” When he speaks on JBP, it’s dismissed as “out of place.” The difference isn’t substance — it’s setting.
Black intellectual labor remains undervalued unless tethered to institutional approval. That reality mirrors how society often views professionalism itself — through a lens of respectability politics rather than authenticity.
The Future of Black Thought
In truth, Hill’s decision to join JBP might be one of the boldest moves of his career. It signals a shift: that the future of intellectualism may no longer reside in ivory towers or newsroom studios but in the digital commons — podcasts, social platforms, and cultural conversations that reach the people directly.
If Du Bois or Baldwin lived today, they might very well be debating on Twitter Spaces, not at a symposium. The dialogue between Hill and Queenzflip isn’t dysfunction — it’s evolution. It reflects a community attempting to reconcile its intellectual heritage with its cultural pulse.
Conclusion: The Democratization of Intellect
Whether or not Hill “belongs” on The Joe Budden Podcast is beside the point. His very presence challenges the gatekeeping of thought within Black media. Budden, perhaps unintentionally, has built a space where intellect and authenticity coexist — where scholars and storytellers can share a stage.
The “war” between Black intellectuals and JBP isn’t about elitism — it’s about evolution. It’s the story of a new generation redefining what it means to be credible, informed, and unapologetically Black in media.
Because in this era, you don’t need a newsroom, a university, or a network to be valid. You just need a mic, an audience, and the courage to be heard.