YouTubers aren't imploding, rather they're growing so large that mainstream journalists think they can get clicks writing smear pieces about them.
Reasons YouTubers keep imploding, from a YouTuber
231–240 of 317 posts
Re: Reasons YouTubers keep imploding, from a YouTuber
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." I really don't think what he did was "honest" i.e. not meant to be provocative. As many sibling comments have pointed out, if you're making a living as a public personality, you kinda have to accept a higher level of scrutiny simply in order to avoid media hit jobs.
And on the other side, if you're someone who gets raised to a public personality for your liveliness and lack of filter, you're likely to step over the line eventually. One of the best points I've seen was that Youtubers have a lot in common with talk radio hosts. When Howard Stern said something offensive, it was a bit rich to act surprised. He was paid to be shocking, he did better the harder he pushed on the edge…
Howard Stern is an excellent example, particularly because you won't find him on most heavily-regulated media.
Re: Reasons YouTubers keep imploding, from a YouTuber
#233Went into the article expecting it to be silly, but there were actually a ton of interesting insights, especially about how no one knows how to manage these celebrities. Also, slowbeef is being humble; he literally invented the LP and curated the scene forever ago. His Metal Gear 2 annotated playthrough (from the mid-00s at the latest, I'm remembering HTML tables) was absolutely hysterical (at least to my teenage sel…
Nice to hear the background context, I got the impression from reading that he has a much, much deeper historical wealth of experiences to draw on. Checked him out on Twitter and quite an interesting fellow. I also agree how salient this article hits points that are not specific necessarily to YouTube, but to the fickle beast of Entertainment as we know it. Fame is exceptionally passing in Music, TV, etc, and it stan…
I highly recommend his policenauts play through for anyone who reads this site. He talks a lot about the romhacking process (the game had no English version until he helped patch it in)
Re: Reasons YouTubers keep imploding, from a YouTuber
#234It's worth nothing that this article was posted a month ago: since then, there was another incident along the same lines where popular YouTuber JonTron imploded for the same reasons as described in the article. Jim Sterling has the most objective take on the sequence of events: http://www.thejimquisition.com/youtubers-say-the-darndest-th...
It seems like the definition of "imploded" in the context of JonTron and Pewdiepie is "lost an insignificant and negligible amount of subscribers".
Re: Reasons YouTubers keep imploding, from a YouTuber
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him." I really don't think what he did was "honest" i.e. not meant to be provocative. As many sibling comments have pointed out, if you're making a living as a public personality, you kinda have to accept a higher level of scrutiny simply in order to avoid media hit jobs.
If public outrage can do this, public outrage at media hit jobs can fix them
The public outrage at what you perceive to be a "media hit job" is unlikely to come.
What you're witnessing is mainstream (pretty much) America rejecting something they're now aware of that's too outside the norm. PDP can keep making content, but there's not really a likely scenario where he gets paid by Disney to do it.
Re: Reasons YouTubers keep imploding, from a YouTuber
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be clear, you are laying out the premise that by reacting to racism at all, I am revealing I secretly believe it is more right than anti-racism. Does that sound about right? Why are you so eager to police anti-racism, then? By the same logic, if racism is right you'll be fine.
Does that sound about right? No, not quite. It's the way in which you react, which is to silence the opposition. If you believed your ideas would win reasonable minds on their merits, and you believed the minds in question were reasonable, and you yourself were a rational person, you wouldn't feel such a strong need to shut down the dissemination of other ideas. Have I gone wrong somewhere in my reasoning? Why are yo…
I've already made it quite clear that I think not all the minds in question are reasonable, but you keep asking this question, like you really want to get something in it out there. Since it's not likely, then, that you are engaging in good faith, I have to go digging for the bad faith and it is not far beneath the surface.
In the end these discussions come down a fundamental moral question, outside all reasoning and apologia: "Is racism inherently bad?" I posit that it is and no matter how you or I react to racism, no matter how many minds are swayed to or against it, it is still wrong. From the position that racism is inherently bad, my arguing against racism is not evidence that my position is weak; my belief that left unchecked racism could fester in us and cause great harm is not evidence that anti-racism is irrational and racism is rational; I'm simply arguing against something that is fundamentally wrong. You may as well ask me why I argue the sky is blue when someone tells me it is green. "Well, if you have to argue the sky is blue, how sure are you that it really is blue? The green-sky people will come around". It's strange someone would ask me why I argue the sky is blue -- you'll have to forgive me for assuming they also think it's green but are too shy to admit it.
Engaging in good faith, then, does this answer your question or would you like to ask it again?
Re: Reasons YouTubers keep imploding, from a YouTuber
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who are you to police what we do or don't need in online gaming? Why is your definition of tactless behavior more valid than mine? All of this just seems like recreational outrage from the outside looking in.
People are allowed to form an opinion on things. They are even allowed to publish that opinion online. That's not "policing."
Sure. The question gets fuzzier when you publish on something like the WSJ that has a reach of millions.
Example: If an anti-vaxxer published their opinion in a private blog, you'd probably be OK with their speech (as misguided as it is). If the same person started promoting their "opinion" using a national newspaper, you'd be a lot more upset.
Moreover, it's documented that the WAJ article authors went after PDP's livelihood directly (they contacted youtube and Disney, PDP's sponsor) with their allegations and were successful when Disney dropped PDP and Youtube cancelled PDP's new show!
Re: Reasons YouTubers keep imploding, from a YouTuber
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
I regularly watch YouTube (I'm 27). I usually watch videos about woodworking, blacksmithing, machining, engineering, astronomy, math, chemistry, farming, and off-the-grid living. I find all of those valuable in that I learn something new nearly every time I watch one of those videos. That said, I also watch video game montages when I want a good laugh and some mindless entertainment. Here are some of my favorite chan…
I cannot recommend Matthias' channel enough! He is absolutely amazing. I love the organic points in his videos where he messes something up and then fixes it and concludes "good enough". A true demonstration of the hacker mindset! I believe he was a computer programmer full time before his YT channel and website took off. Watching him work makes me want to become a woodworker. Maybe someday I'll have the appropriate…
I've recently started watching woodworking videos on YouTube. I read somewhere that Matthias was one of the early employees of RIM (Blackberry) and as it turns out, he has a bunch of those patents in his name: https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=pts&hl=en&q=ininvent....
Re: Reasons YouTubers keep imploding, from a YouTuber
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are allowed to form an opinion on things. They are even allowed to publish that opinion online. That's not "policing."
Your opinions have consequences. They can affect other people in real ways. In this case, the imprecise, incredibly untrustworthy outrage of thousands of people -- fueled by a sensationalist media hit job -- almost ruined someone's career. You're welcome to your opinion. But you also have to take responsibility for it.
> almost ruined someone's career.
Yeah, and people saying "Death to Jews" managed to murder six million of them. Yet apparently you think that is funny and beyond reproach, while taking issue with it is a serious problem.
Re: Reasons YouTubers keep imploding, from a YouTuber
#240Probably a lot of PewDiePie's appeal is his uncensoredness. It's just unfiltered non-sense for the most part. Some people can't deal with it. But a lot of people want it. Personally, I think that's why I love Dave Chappelle so much. He seems to be able to get away with a lot as well. Few things relaxes me like someone making jokes with no filters.
Don't mistake uncensored for unfiltered - Dave Chappelle probably writes and tells a joke a hundred times before you ever hear it, and it gets filtered through a LOT during that time.
He certainly does practice a lot. He still talks about bombing on stage in his newest standup. One of my favorite bits is how he talks about Michael Richards imploding on stage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kth0UOU5a_M