Tldr advertisements
this post was submitted on 28 May 2024
20 points (67.2% liked)
Videos
13644 readers
640 users here now
For sharing interesting videos from around the Web!
Rules
-
Videos only
-
Follow the global rules as laid out here while posting and commenting.
-
Link directly to the video source and not for example an embedded video in an article.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Google SLAMS internet. Web pages REELING
google did ruin the internet, but that guy sucks.
Why?
Why does he suck?
He's very earnest about pop topics that many people already have some sort of opinion about, which is very divisive.
Obviously lots of people like him, but as noted above, others do not.
I actually don't like him either, I find his explanations a little long-winded for many of his topics in general, but. I think the way he explains pop topics is very good and digestible for a lot of people.
Also, he definitely feels too professional for youtube, maybe too slick? Like he's trying to sell his idea, regardless of its merit, with such smooth delivery and high production that it's irritating.
Just as an example.
He's fine though. I'm sure he's a nice guy
I don’t like the „too slick for Youtube“ argument as if it wasn‘t a billion dollar platform full of millionaires in your recommended section. Youtubers get flag for spending some money on a nice little studio while we pretend it‘s totally authentic to stick a tiny $1000 mic to a literal cinder brick and hold it while standing in a deliberately badly lighted green screen studio that costs just as much to set up.
That's exactly what I mean.
If you go and look at those millionaire youtube influencers, you'll find the exact same detractions you've read above.
He has a TV background. He's either developed the skills or connections to keep his videos top quality.
Probably both, his YouTube video production quality spiked pretty rapidly after he got that limited series.
I think he argues in bad faith. I saw an interview he had with someone who had a disability where they were both arguing against a specific mobility technology because it could have military applications.
Everything can have military applications.
It sort of reminds me of people who don't care about an arbitrary technology or research (let's call it Z) and start saying "why are you working on Z, shouldn't you be working on a cure for cancer instead"
9 times out of 10 the complainer isn't trying to cure cancer themselves and the researcher doesn't necessarily have the skillset to immediately switch to curing cancer.