Quote from: Mordo on February 17, 2017, 08:51:27 AMSo by this rationale, professional comedians should be hounded out by the media every single time they dare to make a mildly off colour joke about jews?"mildly off colour joke about jews""kill all jews"The apologists ITT are just as bad as the journalists making it seem like he's a Nazi. Neither side seems aware that you can criticize the dumbass joke and the half-assed apology while not conflating him with Hitler Youth.
So by this rationale, professional comedians should be hounded out by the media every single time they dare to make a mildly off colour joke about jews?
Someone want to tell me who this guy is? And why the hell he's even in the news?Preferably more concisely than me watching an 11 minute video.
Quote from: Alternative Facts on February 17, 2017, 11:42:39 AMSomeone want to tell me who this guy is? And why the hell he's even in the news?Preferably more concisely than me watching an 11 minute video.#1 most subscribed youtuber with 53 million subscribersthis is his most popular videoYouTubehe made a few anti-semitic jokes lately and is catching fire over it
Should I make a wild assumption that a large portion of his subscriber base is under the age of 16?
Roughly that age group, he started making videos playing games and acting stupid. But he's moved onto less video games and more just shit posting videos. Quote from: Alternative Facts on February 17, 2017, 11:58:31 AMShould I make a wild assumption that a large portion of his subscriber base is under the age of 16?
So yeah, I'll go ahead and make the assumption that a sizeable portion of his viewing base are middle and high school students (Though I can imagine quite a few under 10, but that gets into too many factors). So he made some anti-semitic comments/jokes, the media took him to task, Disney dropped him, etc?
He's been doing it for almost half a year now.
The media took his videos out of context and showed them to Disney, pushing them into dropping him.
PDP doesn't really give a shit about that but does give a shit about the character assassination that's going with it.
Quote from: BiglyTurkey on February 17, 2017, 09:33:55 AMQuote from: Mordo on February 17, 2017, 08:51:27 AMSo by this rationale, professional comedians should be hounded out by the media every single time they dare to make a mildly off colour joke about jews?"mildly off colour joke about jews""kill all jews"The apologists ITT are just as bad as the journalists making it seem like he's a Nazi. Neither side seems aware that you can criticize the dumbass joke and the half-assed apology while not conflating him with Hitler Youth.Except you're not really criticizing the joke, are you? You're justifying his character assassination, or at least tacitly hand-waving it off like it's not a big deal.
Does that make it okay for him to make anti-semitic jokes? Should the audience primarily viewing his videos (Teens and younger) be factored in when leveling criticism - especially when dealing with companies like Disney and Google who tend to avoid controversial figures and children?
Emailing Disney (Or Youtube for that matter) and asking for comment when a well known dude they're affiliated with is making questionable jokes and commentary hardly seems like "Pushing them to drop him."Was there any petitions circulated? Were media pundits lambasting Disney? I'd like to see some proof that they were pushed into dropping him because of one media outlet (At least one confirmed) emailing them
Is the guy that unaware of how public relations work? I can set him up with any disgraced Congressman for a run down.(Kidding.)
i've heard that due to repeated nazi references and anti-semitic jokes pdp has been used as some kind of icon by legit neo nazi sites, at the very least he could denounce those
Yes, it's VERY much okay for him to make these jokes. It's HIS channel and he can do whatever he wants on it,
The problem we're all stating is that he's being called a REAL Nazi/Fascist/Racist because of these writers. FORTUNATELY, the only person falling for the bullshit is J.K. Rowling.
Quote from: whomst u speakin to, thot on February 17, 2017, 01:01:20 PMi've heard that due to repeated nazi references and anti-semitic jokes pdp has been used as some kind of icon by legit neo nazi sites, at the very least he could denounce thoseHe has. That was in the little bit of the video I bothered to watch.
All I've said is that the joke was fucking stupid and his apology was hardly one at all.
So the journalists are at fault for covering what amounts to a human/public interest story?Frankly, I still don't see the big issue here, because it clearly isn't the loss of endorsements/affiliations.Do you despise the reporters who covered the story? Do you despise how they reported it?
Quote from: DAS B00T x2 on February 17, 2017, 02:11:39 PMQuote from: whomst u speakin to, thot on February 17, 2017, 01:01:20 PMi've heard that due to repeated nazi references and anti-semitic jokes pdp has been used as some kind of icon by legit neo nazi sites, at the very least he could denounce thoseHe has. That was in the little bit of the video I bothered to watch.oh well then good i guessbut yeah that's kinda what people mean when they say all the joking normalizes legitimate ideologies i personally think an apology was all that was necessary, distasteful as his jokes are they still dont make him comparable to real nazis
Like, hmm, dude, why d'ya think all those neo-nazis started latching onto them?
The whole point of his video was how the media cherry-picks and characterizes him, not "I SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO WISH DEATH ON THE JEWS WITH NO REPERCUSSIONS REEE"
Quote from: Alternative Facts on February 17, 2017, 02:33:51 PMSo the journalists are at fault for covering what amounts to a human/public interest story?Frankly, I still don't see the big issue here, because it clearly isn't the loss of endorsements/affiliations.Do you despise the reporters who covered the story? Do you despise how they reported it?The issue people have is that these journalists when out of their way to cherry pick his distasteful jokes, take then out of context, make false claims about them, and then report him to Disney and Youtube, which has had a significant consequence.
In this case, PewDiePie is clearly mad at the Wall Street Journal for lighting this tinderbox, but ultimately it was Disney and Google’s decision to end their relationships with him. I do not think WSJ set out to “assassinate” PewDiePie, and it’s normal to contact the subjects of a story with pertinent information to give them a chance to respond before publication, which is what they did with Disney. It is a story when the most popular YouTuber in the world, one with millions of young fans, uses anti-Semitic humor, however few examples there may be, regardless of the ultimate intent of the joke. WSJ pressed Disney on what their response was to these instances, and Disney deemed it appropriate to end their relationship with him as a result.If anything, it seems as if PewDiePie should be raging against Disney and Google who are the corporations directly responsible for the decision-making regarding these deals, and did not stand by him as a partner. But those companies would be too dangerous for PewDiePie to take on, as it could continue to backfire on him (Google could wipe his channel entirely, in theory), while attacking the media instead is an easy target.
I would imagine that both Disney and Youtube understood who they were affiliated with and what kind of content he created, but it's only now that this story has blown up so much that they've dropped him/canceled his series.
Dropping him because of false or hyperbolic claims that are obvious libel, and are trying to capitalize on sensationalism. That to me is in no way responsible journalism.
Quote from: Cindy on February 17, 2017, 05:10:49 PMLike, hmm, dude, why d'ya think all those neo-nazis started latching onto them? Those Neo-Nazis are still fringe groups no one takes seriously you stupid shit. Quote from: Cindy on February 17, 2017, 05:09:53 PMThe whole point of his video was how the media cherry-picks and characterizes him, not "I SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO WISH DEATH ON THE JEWS WITH NO REPERCUSSIONS REEE"Good thing he's not actually wishing death on the Jews and that's not what we're complaining about. But way to go on looking like an idiot again.
Quote from: Aether on February 17, 2017, 03:53:54 PMQuote from: Alternative Facts on February 17, 2017, 02:33:51 PMSo the journalists are at fault for covering what amounts to a human/public interest story?Frankly, I still don't see the big issue here, because it clearly isn't the loss of endorsements/affiliations.Do you despise the reporters who covered the story? Do you despise how they reported it?The issue people have is that these journalists when out of their way to cherry pick his distasteful jokes, take then out of context, make false claims about them, and then report him to Disney and Youtube, which has had a significant consequence.Can I get a link to the article that started this? I hear it was the WSJ, but I can't find said piece. Forbes did a write up about it though, saying:QuoteIn this case, PewDiePie is clearly mad at the Wall Street Journal for lighting this tinderbox, but ultimately it was Disney and Google’s decision to end their relationships with him. I do not think WSJ set out to “assassinate” PewDiePie, and it’s normal to contact the subjects of a story with pertinent information to give them a chance to respond before publication, which is what they did with Disney. It is a story when the most popular YouTuber in the world, one with millions of young fans, uses anti-Semitic humor, however few examples there may be, regardless of the ultimate intent of the joke. WSJ pressed Disney on what their response was to these instances, and Disney deemed it appropriate to end their relationship with him as a result.If anything, it seems as if PewDiePie should be raging against Disney and Google who are the corporations directly responsible for the decision-making regarding these deals, and did not stand by him as a partner. But those companies would be too dangerous for PewDiePie to take on, as it could continue to backfire on him (Google could wipe his channel entirely, in theory), while attacking the media instead is an easy target.Based on this summary, I don't see where the supposed bias and bad journalism is coming from - hence why I'd like to see whatever this original story was.QuoteI would imagine that both Disney and Youtube understood who they were affiliated with and what kind of content he created, but it's only now that this story has blown up so much that they've dropped him/canceled his series.Yes and no - PDP was affliated with Maker Studios, which is owned by Disney Consumer Products and Interactive Media - a smaller division within the Disney company. Again, without the original article that started this, I can't say who in the company was reach out to for comment. If it was someone outside of the DCPIM division, I wouldn't be surprised if they hardly knew the story.QuoteDropping him because of false or hyperbolic claims that are obvious libel, and are trying to capitalize on sensationalism. That to me is in no way responsible journalism....But the journalists didn't drop him? Like Forbes said, if he's angry at anyone, it should be the actual companies that cut ties with him.
Quote from: Alternative Facts on February 17, 2017, 05:25:51 PMQuote from: Aether on February 17, 2017, 03:53:54 PMQuote from: Alternative Facts on February 17, 2017, 02:33:51 PMSo the journalists are at fault for covering what amounts to a human/public interest story?Frankly, I still don't see the big issue here, because it clearly isn't the loss of endorsements/affiliations.Do you despise the reporters who covered the story? Do you despise how they reported it?The issue people have is that these journalists when out of their way to cherry pick his distasteful jokes, take then out of context, make false claims about them, and then report him to Disney and Youtube, which has had a significant consequence.Can I get a link to the article that started this? I hear it was the WSJ, but I can't find said piece. Forbes did a write up about it though, saying:QuoteIn this case, PewDiePie is clearly mad at the Wall Street Journal for lighting this tinderbox, but ultimately it was Disney and Google’s decision to end their relationships with him. I do not think WSJ set out to “assassinate” PewDiePie, and it’s normal to contact the subjects of a story with pertinent information to give them a chance to respond before publication, which is what they did with Disney. It is a story when the most popular YouTuber in the world, one with millions of young fans, uses anti-Semitic humor, however few examples there may be, regardless of the ultimate intent of the joke. WSJ pressed Disney on what their response was to these instances, and Disney deemed it appropriate to end their relationship with him as a result.If anything, it seems as if PewDiePie should be raging against Disney and Google who are the corporations directly responsible for the decision-making regarding these deals, and did not stand by him as a partner. But those companies would be too dangerous for PewDiePie to take on, as it could continue to backfire on him (Google could wipe his channel entirely, in theory), while attacking the media instead is an easy target.Based on this summary, I don't see where the supposed bias and bad journalism is coming from - hence why I'd like to see whatever this original story was.QuoteI would imagine that both Disney and Youtube understood who they were affiliated with and what kind of content he created, but it's only now that this story has blown up so much that they've dropped him/canceled his series.Yes and no - PDP was affliated with Maker Studios, which is owned by Disney Consumer Products and Interactive Media - a smaller division within the Disney company. Again, without the original article that started this, I can't say who in the company was reach out to for comment. If it was someone outside of the DCPIM division, I wouldn't be surprised if they hardly knew the story.QuoteDropping him because of false or hyperbolic claims that are obvious libel, and are trying to capitalize on sensationalism. That to me is in no way responsible journalism....But the journalists didn't drop him? Like Forbes said, if he's angry at anyone, it should be the actual companies that cut ties with him.I believe this is the original article that kicked things off publicly. You will have to subcribe to WSJ or make an account to read the full article unfortunately.
From all accounts I've seen, the journalists catalyzed the process of Disney and YouTube severing ties with him by searching through his content to find the offending material, take it out of context, and send it to Disney and Youtube claiming him to be normalizing Nazism/fascism.
Quote from: Aether on February 17, 2017, 05:47:27 PMQuote from: Alternative Facts on February 17, 2017, 05:25:51 PMQuote from: Aether on February 17, 2017, 03:53:54 PMQuote from: Alternative Facts on February 17, 2017, 02:33:51 PMSo the journalists are at fault for covering what amounts to a human/public interest story?Frankly, I still don't see the big issue here, because it clearly isn't the loss of endorsements/affiliations.Do you despise the reporters who covered the story? Do you despise how they reported it?The issue people have is that these journalists when out of their way to cherry pick his distasteful jokes, take then out of context, make false claims about them, and then report him to Disney and Youtube, which has had a significant consequence.Can I get a link to the article that started this? I hear it was the WSJ, but I can't find said piece. Forbes did a write up about it though, saying:QuoteIn this case, PewDiePie is clearly mad at the Wall Street Journal for lighting this tinderbox, but ultimately it was Disney and Google’s decision to end their relationships with him. I do not think WSJ set out to “assassinate” PewDiePie, and it’s normal to contact the subjects of a story with pertinent information to give them a chance to respond before publication, which is what they did with Disney. It is a story when the most popular YouTuber in the world, one with millions of young fans, uses anti-Semitic humor, however few examples there may be, regardless of the ultimate intent of the joke. WSJ pressed Disney on what their response was to these instances, and Disney deemed it appropriate to end their relationship with him as a result.If anything, it seems as if PewDiePie should be raging against Disney and Google who are the corporations directly responsible for the decision-making regarding these deals, and did not stand by him as a partner. But those companies would be too dangerous for PewDiePie to take on, as it could continue to backfire on him (Google could wipe his channel entirely, in theory), while attacking the media instead is an easy target.Based on this summary, I don't see where the supposed bias and bad journalism is coming from - hence why I'd like to see whatever this original story was.QuoteI would imagine that both Disney and Youtube understood who they were affiliated with and what kind of content he created, but it's only now that this story has blown up so much that they've dropped him/canceled his series.Yes and no - PDP was affliated with Maker Studios, which is owned by Disney Consumer Products and Interactive Media - a smaller division within the Disney company. Again, without the original article that started this, I can't say who in the company was reach out to for comment. If it was someone outside of the DCPIM division, I wouldn't be surprised if they hardly knew the story.QuoteDropping him because of false or hyperbolic claims that are obvious libel, and are trying to capitalize on sensationalism. That to me is in no way responsible journalism....But the journalists didn't drop him? Like Forbes said, if he's angry at anyone, it should be the actual companies that cut ties with him.I believe this is the original article that kicked things off publicly. You will have to subcribe to WSJ or make an account to read the full article unfortunately.I'll give it a read once I'm able to.QuoteFrom all accounts I've seen, the journalists catalyzed the process of Disney and YouTube severing ties with him by searching through his content to find the offending material, take it out of context, and send it to Disney and Youtube claiming him to be normalizing Nazism/fascism.Mind showing me where journalist or the media did this? I'll give the WSJ article a read, but I've yet to see any indication they did anything outside of request comments from Disney about this one incident in particular.
Quote from: Cindy on February 17, 2017, 05:09:53 PM>People fighting tooth and nail to defend what PDP did when he himself apologized for it in the video and acknowledged it was a step too farwewThe whole point of his video was how the media cherry-picks and characterizes him, not "I SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO WISH DEATH ON THE JEWS WITH NO REPERCUSSIONS REEE"It's a joke
>People fighting tooth and nail to defend what PDP did when he himself apologized for it in the video and acknowledged it was a step too farwewThe whole point of his video was how the media cherry-picks and characterizes him, not "I SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO WISH DEATH ON THE JEWS WITH NO REPERCUSSIONS REEE"
Love PewDiePie's response to the media
