- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 9/11/17 at 2:56 pm to cwill
quote:
Message
Youtube demonitizes Dave Rubin's channel by cwill
Before the internet...how was content distributed? Did Gad Saad, Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin or Joe Rogan or the like exist on any scale? I like all of those guy's content but I think 10 years ago none of them would have any type of platform
Nothing pre-internet really matters at all. What if the paper mills had banded together in the pre-internet age and prevented a group from printing anything, based on political ideology? Is that an apt analogy?
Posted on 9/11/17 at 2:59 pm to OMLandshark
Dave Rubin is terrible and would be a terrible journalist. He's a nice guy who smiles and nods and never challenges his guests on anything. Probably why he gets swept up in these things; advertisers aren't going to see much daylight between Lauren Southern talking up ethnonationalism uninterrupted to the camera and talking up ethnonationalism uninterrupted to a quasi-interlocutor.
This post was edited on 9/11/17 at 3:02 pm
Posted on 9/11/17 at 3:09 pm to Iosh
quote:
advertisers aren't going to see much daylight between Lauren Southern talking up ethnonationalism uninterrupted to the camera and talking up ethnonationalism uninterrupted to a quasi-interlocutor.
What do you mean by this?
Posted on 9/11/17 at 3:49 pm to uway
quote:
Nothing pre-internet really matters at all. What if the paper mills had banded together in the pre-internet age and prevented a group from printing anything, based on political ideology? Is that an apt analogy?
Possibly...there definitely was a gate-keeper pre-internet...post internet until now there's been no one minding the gate, which has many positive attributes with some negatives.
Posted on 9/11/17 at 3:51 pm to Iosh
quote:
Rogan would've turned out basically the same, he was already semi-famous as a comedian. He'd just have a radio show instead of a podcast.
I don't think he'd be anywhere as big as he is...he couldn't cover or talk about certain topics with the language used if he was on the radio.
Posted on 9/11/17 at 5:02 pm to cwill
oh 100%. i mean i've only been listening to him since 2013 and he's changed a ton since then
his show prior to that was completely different than his 2013 version
he'd be a comedian, sometimes tv show host, and a UFC announcer
his show prior to that was completely different than his 2013 version
he'd be a comedian, sometimes tv show host, and a UFC announcer
Posted on 9/11/17 at 5:03 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
What do you mean by this?
Rubin's giving people like Lauren Southern an unchallenged platform to behave in the ways that got them in trouble, so he's guilty/liable for the same crimes
This post was edited on 9/11/17 at 5:04 pm
Posted on 9/12/17 at 10:41 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
when you censor Milo? OK. or Paul Joseph Watson? OK. when you censor Jordan Peterson or Gad Saad? you're getting into scary territory by trying to delete science you disagree with. when you censor Dave Rubin, you're engaging in nothing more than acting as an agent of the thought police
It's not censorship though. I love Dave, but he's not entitled to advertiser's money or YouTube's money, nor is he entitled to a place on that platform in the first place.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 10:44 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
It's not censorship though. I love Dave, but he's not entitled to advertiser's money or YouTube's money, nor is he entitled to a place on that platform in the first place.
Do you really want advertisers telling you what are appropriate and inappropriate messages? These clowns will gladly sponsor the World Cup with everything monstrous FIFA has done, but not Dave Rubin? Please. It's the only reason O'Reilly is off the air. Capitalism isn't the answer to everything, especially when it comes to journalism.
This post was edited on 9/12/17 at 10:46 am
Posted on 9/12/17 at 10:47 am to OMLandshark
quote:Let's hear your alternative.
Do you really want advertisers telling you what is appropriate and inappropriate messages? These clowns will gladly sponsor the World Cup with everything monstrous FIFA has done, but not Dave Rubin? Please. Capitalism isn't the answer to everything, especially when it comes to journalism.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 10:48 am to Iosh
quote:
Let's hear your alternative.
What YouTube has, since its existence until now apparently, presented itself as?
Posted on 9/12/17 at 10:54 am to Y.A. Tittle
A corporation free to make advertising deals with other corporations on any mutually agreed terms?
Posted on 9/12/17 at 10:57 am to Iosh
quote:
A corporation free to make advertising deals with other corporations on any mutually agreed terms?
Of course. Now they have decided to basically completely change their "product." We will see how that works out for them, I guess.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 10:58 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
I love Dave, but he's not entitled to advertiser's money or YouTube's money, nor is he entitled to a place on that platform in the first place.
who is entitled to youtube's money? surely the creators that drive the traffic and views? without them, what good is youtube?
maybe entitled isn't the proper word, but rubin drives traffic to youtube which makes youtube money.
i just found out recently that youtube takes 30% from superchats. that sounds like a large number to me.
This post was edited on 9/12/17 at 11:01 am
Posted on 9/12/17 at 11:05 am to Iosh
quote:
Let's hear your alternative.
I don't know, advertise on something that reaches a wide audience. No one gave a single shite until the PewDiePie bullshite hit piece. It was fine how it was.
That took so much thinking.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 11:07 am to OMLandshark
YouTube will fall by the wayside and something else will take its place.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 11:10 am to OMLandshark
quote:This doesn't sound like an alternative to capitalism.
I don't know, advertise on something that reaches a wide audience.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 11:10 am to OMLandshark
quote:
No one gave a single shite until the PewDiePie bullshite hit piece. It was fine how it was.
This is what I totally don't understand. Before all this crap, I just assumed the ads were randomly generated based on whether the videos were monetized or not. I never once associated an ad with a particular channel. I would assume most people felt that way and still do feel that way. This is all over some virtue signalling bullshite by youtube, the corporations and also by the dying old media trying to stop the bleeding.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 11:12 am to JasonMason
quote:
This is all over some virtue signalling bullshite by youtube, the corporations and also by the dying old media trying to stop the bleeding.
And YouTube's response is basically to change their entire business model to now mirror that of the "old media."
I'm telling you, they opened pandora's box on this shite and there's no putting it back in - for them at least.
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News