Slashdot Mirror


PewDiePie Calls Out the 'Old-School Media' For Spiteful Dishonesty

New submitter Shane_Optima writes: After losing his Youtube Red show and his contract with Disney, the owner of the most subscribed channel on Youtube, Felix Arvid Ulf Kjellberg (aka "PewDiePie"), has released a video response to the Wall Street Journal and other mainstream news outlets, who have labeled his comedy videos variously as racist, fascist or anti-semitic. In it, he accuses the mainstream media of deliberately fabricating and misrepresenting the evidence used against him because they are afraid of independent content producers such as himself. In the video, PewDiePie discusses the recent actions of the Wall Street Journal, whose reporters sent nine cherry-picked and edited videos to Disney, which led directly to Disney's decision to terminate their relationship with him. These video clips and others used to "prove" PewDiePie's guilt have been edited (he claims) to remove all context, to the extent of using a pose of him pointing at something as a Nazi salute and using a clip where other players are creating swastikas in a game and editing out the part where he is asking them to stop. The most-cited video in the controversy involves seeing if he can use the site Fiverr to hire someone to create a video containing an over-the-top message for a mere $5. After a couple of laughing males unfurl a sign saying "Death to All Jews," he recoils with widened eyes and sits, apparently dumbfounded, for another thirty seconds before the video ends, without him uttering another word.

PewDiePie's video comes several days after a Tumblr post where he attempted to clarify that the videos were intended to be comedy showing "how crazy the modern world is." He has not yet used the phrase "fake news" in his response to the controversy, but given the current trends surrounding that phrase, it isn't surprising that his supporters are resorting to it frequently. Is this all just another unfortunate instance of collateral damage in the war against far-right political movements, is it a campaign of malicious retaliation by old media that is terrified of new media (as Felix claims), or was J.K. Rowling correct when she called out PewDiePie as a Death Eater? Err, I mean, ...as a fascist?

Update: Apparently, canceling his Youtube Red series was deemed an insufficient response. Youtube has now removed the mirror of PewDiePie's "Death to All Jews" video because it "violates Youtube's policy on hate speech." The original posting of the video had already been marked private by PewDiePie shortly after the controversy erupted. A quick check of Vimeo and Daily Motion came up empty, so you're on your own if you wish to find out for yourself what the controversy was all about.

28 of 920 comments (clear)

  1. This Perfectly Illustrates The Craziness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone with any sense of intellectual integrity can clearly see that it was all satire. They can also see through the dishonesty of the media. This is just a taste of what the media has been doing politically. Regardless of how you feel about the current POTUS, these tactics are exactly the same tactics used against him from the MSM.

    Follow the dollars. This stuff generates clicks. It gets people to read their stories. They do it because they get money for it. Hopefully at some point soon this type of "journalism" dies down.

  2. Re:Death To All Jews by epyT-R · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I detest the guy for other reasons. I think he's a twat. However, do you truly believe that he's a neo nazi? Does anyone? Probably not. His firing was one of virtue signaling, nothing more. I think virtue signaling is far more harmful to society than some moron's stupid jokes.

  3. Why trust in the media is at an all time low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That was the first PewDiePie I've watched, and it's interesting to see the media do to him what they've done to Trump, Farage, Wilders, Le Pen, Orban, etc. The media no longer report the truth, they report their own narrative. They fabricate evidence in an effort to influence people's views.

    The media used to be able to control the narrative, but having lost control they're redoubling their efforts to control what people think, which means more attacks against people they disagree with and more fabrications. This is having the opposite effect, and is only serving to turn more people away from the mainstream media.

    Traditional media knows it's in trouble but appears to be so out of touch with the public that it doesn't know what to do about it, so the attacks, the lies and the fabrications continue. The sooner the media collapses, the better.

  4. Being a satirist means acting like a dick. by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But a very carefully targeted one. The people who get ridiculed have to really deserve the dickish treatment. You can take a cheap shot, but you can never punch down.

    Now I've seen the infamous video and I totally get it. It's a good point, but it totally fails as satire because he ended up screwing with, and then harming the guys in the video, who almost certainly have no idea the significance of what they're doing. How many Jews are in India? About five thousand individuals out of a billion. Zoroastrians are almost 30 times more common in the US as Jews are in India, particularly rural India.

    Now he's totally right that the media is stupid, block-headed and hypocritical, and has neither the ability nor inclination to understand him. But that doesn't change the fact he attempted satire and failed. That makes him, at least in this incident, just a dick.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  5. Horse shit by s.petry · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Context is everything and lacking context your statement is a lie. The guy made a couple satires based on claims of him being a , not a normal staple on his channel. The allegation was that since some white racist like him he must be racist. That beauty should sound familiar right? By the way, some Muslim extremist likes your post, so you have to be a homophobic anti-Semite.

    The "take offense at everything" generation has ensured that the overwhelming majority of comedians will not perform on a Campuses. But hey, enjoy Amy Schumer shows ever week because a white chick insulting men and pretending to be a slut is comedy everyone can enjoy for an eternity right?

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  6. Re:Professional attention whore strikes again by Shane_Optima · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I'm the submitter. I don't care if he stomps kittens in his spare time, and I doubt I've seen three of his videos before today. The dishonesty and cynicism here shown by allegedly reputable mainstream media outlets here is astonishing.

    He may well be a troll. Entirely possible. But the videos I've thus far seen were not of a trollish cast, and the "Death to All Jews" one in particular is not remotely anti-semitic. If you genuinely believe it to be so, you may be from an actual intellectual, emotional or perceptual disorder of some sort.

    This latest response is perfectly timed, just as the flames were dying down he fans them and gets another round of attention.

    If this is the current state of the media, if this is the sort of hyperbole we're going to be subjected to for the next four years, if this is the new McCarthyism, then these are flames that need flaming, be it by trolls or non-trolls.

    On a personal note here: it's not like I really fear some totalitarianism of the left, either. I don't think they can win this war... not in America, anyway. But I do rather fear the consequences of proving Trump right, of validating the echo chambers of tens of millions of people who were right-leaning fence sitters until they saw the proof stack up that the mainstream media really is full of hysterical, baldfaced lies.

    Has it always been *this* bad? Fuck me, I'd better stop before I start saying "woke".

  7. Why? by sgage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is fucking 'PewDiePie' even showing up on Slashdot? Again. There was an article about him just a couple of days ago. Nobody. Fucking. Cares about this asshole. Can we please give it a rest?

  8. Re:Death To All Jews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not really. Gawker was trashy clickbait, and they had no right to oust a gay person or publish private sex tapes. I'm as leftist as you can get, and can acknowledge that.

    Doesn't make Breitbart any better. It's basically borderline racist, right-wing Gawker.

  9. Not about the free market by Shane_Optima · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Submitter here. And the gloves are off, FYI.

    This is a bizarre little trick, apparently some weird leftover piece of Cold War propaganda, that any time a topic has anything to do with the free market you can point that out and a significant minority of people will believe you've just "won" the discussion and will mod you up, even if you're rambling irrelevant drivel. (It works on Reddit, too.)

    Congratulations, Disney and Youtube are legally free to do as they choose. No, the first amendment doesn't constrain them. Are we done with the kindergarten version of Civics now?

    There appears to be widespread *lying* about the nature of the videos in question, characterizations that are so brazen as to be actual lies by mainstream media organizations like the Wall Street Journal, Wired, The Independent, etc. This is on top of the WSJ actually going out of their way to get PewDiePie "fired" by mining and editing his content and then sending it directly (from my understanding) to Disney.

    I think that alone is all worth talking about. If dishonest and manipulative newspapers don't interest you at all, well there's the door. Bye.

    But there's even more: to the extent that companies like Youtube and Disney are being pressured by asshats writing letters and threatening boycotts, I'd even go so far as to say it's worth discussing trying to pressure them in the opposite direction. Not because I'm a huge PewDiePie fan (I'm not; I've watched only a few of his videos), but because the internet is being dominated by a small group of companies and it's worth a little effort to push back now, while we still can, and inform them that free speech for their platform (not just our constitution) is what we actually want.

    Just listen to this smug shit coming out of the WSJ and put that in the context of the thousands of Youtubers trying to figure out Youtube's uncodified content policy so their videos won't be de-monetized. Put that in the contest of the millions of Youtube users who just want their favorite hosts to be able to speak their mind uncensored. The WSJ doesn't care about all of that. They only care about media giants being able to dictate acceptable content with an iron fist.

    Does that violate the first amendment? Again, no. Is this capitalism at work? Again, yes. You're such a good, smart little anti-Communist for reminding us of these things!

    But us talking about it and getting a bit pissed about it and wondering aloud if there's any way to pull the brake on this shitshow before it gets any worse is also capitalism at work. If that's a conversation that doesn't interest you--there's the door. Vote with your feet, citizen.

    1. Re:Not about the free market by Shane_Optima · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If someone is so stupid as to not understand that making jokes about killing Jews

      He didn't make a joke about killing Jews. He made a dark joke about the fact that there's a real fucking website where you can pay $5 and someone else will happily wish death upon all Jews halfway around the world. It's surreal and unsettling and symbolic of all kinds of stuff that that's the world we live in. But the joke (and the wider point) doesn't work at all if the written message isn't an offensive one.

      If you honestly thought that Jews dying was the punchline of that joke, you are an android and your sense of humor simulation circuits are malfunctioning. You're like someone who thinks any work of fiction written in the first person must be espousing author's own thoughts and feelings.

    2. Re:Not about the free market by Shane_Optima · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I understand the distinction you are trying to make

      I don't think you do. I really, really don't think you do, because you just continued from the same stale script that PopeRatzo was using.

      Not everyone can build everything from the ground up. The perennial example is that Comcast is widely surveyed as one of the worst companies in the nation at customer service, but no one can afford to start their own competitor. PDP can roll his own video service and carry with him a decent chunk of his fans, but damn near no one else could. The inertia involved with platforms like Youtube is incredible.

      This is not a Free Speech issue.

      Yes it is. Free speech was not born with the First Amendment. It exists outside of it. Claiming that one is pro-free speech while supporting a company that engages in draconian censorship (not merely "supports their right to", but actually supports and patronizes and defends the companies) is akin to claiming to be against racism whilst patronizing and vocally defending a private golf club that doesn't allow black people to enter. Just because they're not the government doesn't magically make it not racism. Ditto censorship and internet media giants.

      This is another very old argument that has persisted and achieved some sort of status as wisdom, despite it being utter bollocks. People who truly believe in free speech do not believe that it is perfectly OK if major communication platforms do an end run around it by dint of their being private corporations. Many will say that needs to stay legal (they're not for making it illegal for Youtube to censor whomever they choose), but they don't think it's ok any more than an anti-racist thinks racist private golf courses are ok.

      but no one is owed a Youtube channel or Disney sponsorship.

      No offense (but I'm too worn out to properly soften this so it might be offensive anyway, sorry), but I haven't the slightest fucking clue how you could read my entire post and think that this was a sensible thing to say. It means nothing. It's a very, very tired Cold War era argument that has long outlived its usefulness and migrated outside of the context where it makes sense.

      No one, *no one* is saying they are owed anything. I believe PewDiePie himself said a disclaimer to that effect in his response video.

      Maybe it needs to be explicitly said that Youtube, WSJ, etc. are not "owed" anything from us, including but not limited to silent acquiescence?

    3. Re:Not about the free market by Ramze · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Subby, the mere fact that there was anything to mine to give as evidence is admission of poor taste. PDP, even when streaming live, has the ability to censor his broadcast. He can turn off the screen view and flip to his face cam, he can end a game, he can even just straight up hit the power button on the PC or yank the ethernet cable out if he had to. If he bothers to edit his video before uploading it, I'm sure he could snip out those controversial aspects as well. Instead, he rolled the dice and lost.

      Ultimately, he's responsible for what gets posted, and he chose poorly -- regardless of what his views are or whether he's as evil as the mean media wants to portray him -- he had Nazi jokes, imagery, slogans, and clips in his videos! You can say that's just his sense of humor and he doesn't mean it -- sure. I agree that it's a character assassination, but that's NOT why he was let go. Disney would have ended its relationship at the slightest whiff of indecency, much less a scandal. It has ended business relationships before over MUCH less. Google/Youtube is just reacting to its advertisers. When advertisers say they don't want their brand to be associated with show X, and enough are concerned, show X gets the ax. At least with Youtube, PDP has a chance to try again at a later date to work with them, and he still has his regular channels, just not the same advertising levels. Disney won't touch him again.... ever.

      This is a particularly economics-only reason for Youtube. They don't even like for people to curse on their broadcasts and have been tightening the screws on anything not G, PG, or very mild PG-13 material for their adsense programs.... which has ticked off a lot of foul-mouthed youtubers (many of which I love dearly... especially because they are foul-mouthed!).

      Youtube wants fresh, kid-friendly shows they can push advertisements towards as if it were really cheap TV. They bend the rules now and then and are OK with bending the rules bigtime in return for potentially big bucks, and they figured out they backed the wrong horse with PDP.

      Don't rail against Youtube and Disney for doing what all entertainment businesses do when a star gets embroiled in controversy.... and you would as well if it were your money on the line. Want to go after crooked journalists that twist stories to put a spin on things that doesn't fit reality? Best of luck to ya in starting your own newspaper/news network. You'll find quickly that the money is in scandals, so that's what the public gets.

      At the end of the day, the story is true enough -- he had Nazi material on his show, and for many -- that's enough for them to not want to be associated with it... regardless of what he meant by it or whether he found it funny rather than taking it seriously.

      I've never been a fan of PDP, but I respect the business he's built around doing what he loves and wish him well -- I'm sure with his $7 Million he made last year and millions before that that he's perfectly capable of making his own streaming service -- question is... will anyone pay for ads on it to support him.... especially if he keeps up with the Nazi jokes.

    4. Re:Not about the free market by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We are going to play the my-user-id-is-lower-than-yours-so-I-am-right game? Ok, I'm in.

      The problem is that he is right. And it's not even about nazi jokes. And, for the record, until a week ago all I know about that guy was that he is one of the "big" YouTubers. I neither knew nor cared just what he showed on his channel, all I knew is that I spend a lot of time watching YouTube and that I haven't seen a single one of his videos, so our interests apparently don't overlap too much.

      Sadly that guy has now become the topic of channels I DO watch. Which in turn meant that I got way more information about the whole shit than I wanted. So what does go on here?

      Apparently that guy made some "funny" videos. YMMV and it sure ain't hitting my particular style of comedy, but it seems that he's making some rather crude and not-too-PC comedy. At least that's what I got so far. And he's had his run-in with various "traditional" news media before who in turn don't report too favorably about him.

      What caused the whole shit now was some webpage where you can pay people so they do what you want them to do and they make videos about it. According to him, all he wanted to do is show people just what kind of crap people will do for just 5 bucks. Was it tasteless? You bet. But what it also was is a commentary on our overly materialistic society where people will do anything for a quick and easy buck. That much he proved.

      What happened next was the WSJ doing a montage of some of his earlier works by cutting it in such a way to make him appear like he was actually a Nazi. I took the time to actually watch the footage they took the snippets from, and what I can say is that they were taken WAY out of context. By the logic they applied they could turn Bruno Ganz into a Nazi because he played Hitler in The Downfall.

      There is something very, very wrong going on here, and by that I don't mean that guy paying those other two guys to present that "death to all jews" banner. This is being taken way, WAY out of proportion, and I'd really like to know why. What did that guy do that made the WSJ so afraid that they go out of their way, even throwing their journalistic integrity into the gutter, just to destroy him?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Not about the free market by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      PDP can roll his own video service and carry with him a decent chunk of his fans, but damn near no one else could. The inertia involved with platforms like Youtube is incredible.

      The problem with this argument is that it's anti-free-speech. You are saying that once a service becomes popular, once the inertia sets in, that service must be forced to publish and force to silence its criticism.

      If you are going to make that argument, why not also require PDP to host material from other channels on his own? After all, his channel is the most popular, his subscribers represent the biggest "platform" with massive inertia that makes it hard for new channels to gain viewers?

      People who truly believe in free speech do not believe that it is perfectly OK if major communication platforms do an end run around it by dint of their being private corporations.

      How far does this extend? You have to define "major", and there in lies the problem. And what about things like filters? Most search engines filter things like spam sites and pornography by default, to provide a better user experience. People wouldn't use Google at work if it was full of spam and porn. So is it okay to host content but just filter it from searches and make sure basically no-one sees it, because the video is just a 9 hours of the goatscx guy?

      It's also worth pointing out that PDP hasn't actually been kicked off YouTube, he has just lost some of his sponsorship and syndication deals. Are you suggesting that YouTube Red and Disney should be forced to continue paying him?

      PDP's freedom of speech is intact. He does not have a right to an audience, or a platform. If he did, I'd be demanding top billing, a Disney contract and a million subscribers too, because it would be my right.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  10. You didn't watch the video, did you? by Xenographic · · Score: 5, Informative

    > He is apparantly suprised that broadcasting a sign with "Death To All Jews" on it would get him fired.

    Actually, he's surprised that his other video about the media taking things out of context would itself be taken out of context to prove that he was some kind of Nazi.

    Even in the original video, in which he was dismayed to find out that someone would actually do those things for a few bucks, he says that he's not proud of this and apologizes to the viewers because he didn't think the people he hired on Fiverr would actually do those things.

    But I bet you didn't actually look at any of that, and now the videos are marked as private. The best I can find now is this discussion by a friend of his.

  11. Stuff That Fucking Matters by Shane_Optima · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is akin to bitching that you don't like Snowden because he wears ugly glasses and has a boring face.

    I'm the submitter. I don't watch PewDiePie videos. I think I watched only two in my entire life before today. This is serious news. He is the biggest name on Youtube (like it or not), and these are some of the biggest names in mainstream news lying about him, engaging in an open campaign to get him fired (WSJ went directly to Disney, from my understanding), and then they casually, lazily, openly discuss about how their motive in all of this was that they want to see online media giants dictate acceptable content with an iron fist instead of this willy-nilly free speech bullshit that makes old media nervous.

    When the hell did Slashdot turn into goddamn TMZ? Who cares who you like or don't like? This. Matters.

    1. Re:Stuff That Fucking Matters by felixrising · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm inclined to agree with you. This is big news when a professional news organisation deliberately misrepresents someones work like that, and in doing so causes direct harm to their work. It's not up for debate whether the work is in bad taste, boring, annoying, or bat shit crazy... it's a beat up and taken totally out of context, and it's harmful. They shouldn't get away with it, it's poor reporting at best, a free speech issue at worst.

  12. Re:Professional attention whore strikes again by lordlod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He may well be a troll. Entirely possible. But the videos I've thus far seen were not of a trollish cast, and the "Death to All Jews" one in particular is not remotely anti-semitic. [trimmed ad hominem attack]

    I didn't say he was anti-semitic, I don't believe that he is. I said that he is an attention whore. The entire reason he asked for THAT phrase to be written was to get a reaction.

    If he was truly horrified by what he and they did, as he claimed in the video, he could have solved the problem by simply not posting the video. Instead he posted it and got waves of free publicity.

    This is part of a campaign:

    • 3 Dec 2016 - Announces he is going to quit (spoiler, he doesn't)
    • 10 Dec 2016 - Tries to get a video with a huge amount of likes
    • 26 Dec 2016 - Tries to get a video with a huge amount of dislikes
    • 6 Jan 2017 - Uses the word n*gger (lameness filtered) absent of any context
    • 11 Jan 2017 - Uploads the Fiverr sign with "death to all jews"
    • 28 Jan 2017 - Tries to get a video with a huge amount of comments
  13. Re: Has he been invited to the white house? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're missing the point. It's not about some vlogger we've never heard of. It's about the mainstream media being caught in a lie. Again. As if we needed more evidence after the disgraceful election coverage.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  14. Reminds me of gamergate ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... in that I never heard of it before and don't give a shit now that I have.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  15. Re:Death To All Jews by _KiTA_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't think of many places where you wouldn't get fired for that sign.

    Infowars? Breitbbart?

    Sarah Silverman once went on Conan dressed up as Hitler, complete with stache and Swastika. That's a bit more than a sign.

    "Ah, but that's different, she was obviously doing it to make a point."

    So was PewDiePie.

  16. Re: Death To All Jews by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Informative

    Belonging to a group does not make you more credible to comment on an argument. Drop the tribalism and identity politics...

    I'm sorry, but were you responding to the parent, or the grandparent, some idiot called x0ra, who wrote:

    I guess you forgot that both Milo Yiannopoulos and Ben Shapiro are respectively of jew descent and practicing jew...

    BTW you do know Ben Shapiro no longer works for Breitbart, right? He quit a year or so ago, when Breitbart started defending senior Trump staff when they assaulted Breitbart's own reporters.

    Here's Shapiro on the alt-right. Amongst the choice quotes are:

    [Bannon] allowed the site to be taken over and used by a bunch of alt-right people who are not fond of Jews, are not fond of minorities.

    So FWIW, one of the two people you mention actually strongly supports the notion that Breitbart is controlled by anti-semites. The other, Yiannopoulos, incidentally, isn't proof of anything: he's attacked his own sexuality before, and he's rejected his jewish roots.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  17. Re:Death To All Jews by tburkhol · · Score: 5, Insightful

    PewDiePie's being about "it's fine to be an antisemitic little shithead"

    I think his point was more that it's trivially easy to make other people act like antisemitic little shitheads. He paid $5, and he got at least two people to make a video that (were it their honest opinion) would rightly earn them wide condemnation. Yet no one's even commenting on those two dudes - they were clearly 'just following orders.' Doing the necessary to pay their bills and probably don't really believe their sign.

    His point was that it takes very little to get people to openly proclaim beliefs they don't hold. Especially on the internet. (I assume those two guys would want more than $5 to hold up their sign outside a synagogue, for example.) Ask yourself how much it would cost to get you to add "Hail Satan," "I'm totally gay for DJT," or "People like PewDiePie deserve to die" to your facebook page. Or to film yourself saying those things to strangers in Times Square. You don't have to be serious about the statements, just to use those exact words so that someone else can use them out of context.

  18. Re:Has he been invited to the white house? by WheezyJoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's a saying in Texas: "All hat and no cattle." And yet, "all hat" keeps winning, even when it's losing. Because the Twitter/Youtube economy is about clicks and views, regardless if you find the content compelling or appalling. Trump got the White House in part because his Tweets got him so much free publicity - news media making his Tweets into front-page stuff while his GOP opponents wasted their time and money trying to go it old-school. Now, people like me who'd never heard or cared about PewDiePie are all reading about him on Wired.com for the first time, amazed at his epic rise and fall as a juvenile asshole, doing on the Internet what would otherwise get him smacked in the face until he learns his lesson and stops... all that really matters is how every click records something about you on a server somewhere, and makes somebody a buck.

    This is fucking ridiculous. We are all getting Played, and the Players are studying all this carefully and perfecting the craft... for pay.

    --
    Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
  19. Re:Professional attention whore strikes again by Shane_Optima · · Score: 5, Funny

    You really need to learn to condense your responses and stop rambling.

    Shut up, twatwaffle.

  20. Re:Death To All Jews by silentcoder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pro Palestine does not equal anti Jew.
    It may equal anti-zionist but then liberals tend to be anti-nationalism period. That includes Jewish Nationalism as much as it does, say, American nationalism.

    Hell, I personally know quite a lot of anti-Israel, pro-palestine Jews who would be terribly offended at the suggestion that by virtue of their ethnicity they are compelled to be in favor of an appartheid regime that denies basic human rights to a vast population, and who actually support either full and equal rights for Palestinians in Israel or a Palestinian state free of Israeli control.

    Did you think all Jewish people today would still believe what their grandparents believed 70 years ago? That an ethnic homeland is a fundamental pre-requisite to freedom ? The liberals have long stopped believing that in general - and Jewish liberals tend to agree. At least, those under 40 do.

    --
    Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  21. Re:Death To All Jews by gsslay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    His point was that it takes very little to get people to openly proclaim beliefs they don't hold.

    And that needed to be proven, because.... ? Or is this just one of those bullshit "social experiments" where Youtubers get to act like assholes because they're holding a camera to record what happens?

    Youtube is a cesspit of wannbes trying to outdo each other in shock value, while avoiding getting banned by Youtube, all for the views. PewDiePie was just another one playing the game, but he got burned. He paid people desperate for money to do something stupid, and then pretends to be shocked that they actually did it. That way he gets to claim he's not really responsible, while being the one who conceived it, paid for it, videoed it, uploaded it and collected the ad revenue.

  22. Re:Death To All Jews by _KiTA_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Quite different points though. Sarah Silverman's point being about the grotesquery of Trump, and PewDiePie's being about "it's fine to be an antisemitic little shithead"

    No, his point for the clip that was taken out of context was:

    * "Youtube Heroes is an Authoritarian nightmare that is going to attract the worst kinds of people."
    * "The media likes to take things out of context to slander people."
    * "Hey, there's a thing over here that I'm pointing at."
    * "This fiverr website is a great example of how surreal the modern world is."

    Depending on which of the clips they took out of context you're talking about, of course.