Is YouTube Done? (MOD Warning - See post #193)

[Muston Atthews]

It concerns me you think this matters with regards to the current discussion.

How does it not matter? People are up in arms because someone videotaped a dead person.

 

[Shareefruck]

no....

Are you suggesting that what he did is more reflective of his audience than himself? I think that's absolving him from blame a little too much, personally.

The bigger problem is that people like him are willing to do this than people being willing to watch it-- the latter is probably going to happen with any generation.

 

[Pilky01]

Are you suggesting that what he did is more reflective of his audience than himself? I think that's absolving him from blame a little too much, personally.

The bigger problem is that people like him are willing to do this than people being willing to watch it-- the latter is probably going to happen with any generation.

I think there is absolutely a case to be made that the Paul brothers behaviour is more reflective of their audience than of who they actually are.

Logang, Team Portnoy, Beyhive, Beliebers, this kind of stuff was a lot more innocuous and innocent before the internet turned 'fandom' into an industry.

 

[Shareefruck]

How does it not matter? People are up in arms because someone videotaped a dead person.

It's irrelevant because people are annoyed by his callous attitude towards the situation and promotion and exploitation of the novelty behind it, not the fact that he happened to catch a dead body on camera. This is why your documentary analogy similarly made no sense, because documentaries do not give dead bodies that treatment. If they did, you would see similar disgust.

 

[Shareefruck]

I think there is absolutely a case to be made that the Paul brothers behaviour is more reflective of their audience than of who they actually are.

Logang, Team Portnoy, Beyhive, Beliebers, this kind of stuff was a lot more innocuous and innocent before the internet turned 'fandom' into an industry.

I don't know what any of the things you listed were, but as I implied, if the system is based on views rather than approval, you're always going to have an audience for this stuff (especially when we're talking about immature children), with any generation. If we're throwing a generation under the bus (I'm just making a hypothetical here because I'd rather just place blame on him), I place greater blame on the generation that is willing and able to recklessly exploit and enable it, personally.

 

[Pilky01]

I don't know what any of the things you listed were, but as I implied, if the system is based on views rather than approval, you're always going to have an audience for this stuff (especially when we're talking about immature children), with any generation. I place greater blame on the generation that is willing and able to recklessly exploit and enable it, personally.

Then you could probably stand to look into the issue a bit more.

 

[beowulf]

People deal with tragedy in different ways. from what I watched he/they were extremely shocked about what they saw. The face/body was blurred out, again I don’t see the big deal. The news shows dead bodies on television all the time. Maybe not as close but it’s the same deal and they’re monetied too.

Sad if you don't see how disrespectful that was. This is not the news that is reporting on a bombing, etc. This was a bunch of douches laughing etc.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I don't know what any of the things you listed were, but as I implied, if the system is based on views rather than approval, you're always going to have an audience for this stuff (especially when we're talking about immature children), with any generation. If we're throwing a generation under the bus (I'm just making a hypothetical here because I'd rather just place blame on him), I place greater blame on the generation that is willing and able to recklessly exploit and enable it, personally.

The problem is you are going to have opportunistic people like Logan Paul at any age, and the big problem stems from the system that enables this kind of behavior. Youtube is a pretty awful company at this point and has helped cultivate these kinds of people into internet stars.

 

[beowulf]

Undertaker and "death expert" (not sure what else to call her), Caitlin Doughty has a great take on the Logan Paul situation and how he should have approached it.

 

[Shareefruck]

Then you could probably stand to look into the issue a bit more.

What the... no need to say that contentiously-- It's a discussion. I never intended to come across like I thought I was an authority on the subject. I was claiming ignorance on that point and giving my general thoughts about the subject.

The problem is you are going to have opportunistic people like Logan Paul at any age, and the big problem stems from the system that enables this kind of behavior. Youtube is a pretty awful company at this point and has helped cultivate these kinds of people into internet stars.

Agreed, which is why I added the caveat about not genuinely wanting to make generalizations about the generation responsible. But in response to someone who did, logically, I would lean closer towards placing blame on the makers than the audience. Being receptive to that is unfortunate human nature. Exploiting that is what's abhorrent, to me, personally.

 

[Adam Warlock]

The problem is you are going to have opportunistic people like Logan Paul at any age, and the big problem stems from the system that enables this kind of behavior. Youtube is a pretty awful company at this point and has helped cultivate these kinds of people into internet stars.

You'd have a point, but we are talking about kids here. These guys made a living exploiting 13 year old girls for being 13 year old girls. You have to remember, at that age fitting in is everything. Being noticed is everything. Being cool is everything. That isn't new to this generation...they just have a different playing field then we all did. Companies have always exploited this age group...but social media has taken it to a whole other level. They have given kids devices and apps that give kids the illusion of being noticed at their finger tips and are making billions off of it. These kids look at these youtube stars like they are gods because the fame they have made for themselves is what these kids want for themselves.

Idiots like the Pauls gain popularity because they mimic the immature behavior that 13 year old girls find attractive in their peers. You know that guy in 7th grade that acted like an ass in school yet some how caught the eye of all the girls? Yeah, that is the Paul brothers. The sick part is these guys are in their 20s. They get the views though which just grows and grows because to a preteen, being famous is a talent worth admiring.

So yes, kids gave guys like the Pauls an audience. But you cant forget that they are largely a product of the corporate world who is targeting kids to make them this way.

 

[x Tame Impala]

How does it not matter? People are up in arms because someone videotaped a dead person.

I think you'll understand more after you turn 20 years old

 

[Pilky01]

You'd have a point, but we are talking about kids here. These guys made a living exploiting 13 year old girls for being 13 year old girls. You have to remember, at that age fitting in is everything. Being noticed is everything. Being cool is everything. That isn't new to this generation...they just have a different playing field then we all did. Companies have always exploited this age group...but social media has taken it to a whole other level. They have given kids devices and apps that give kids the illusion of being noticed at their finger tips and are making billions off of it. These kids look at these youtube stars like they are gods because the fame they have made for themselves is what these kids want for themselves.

Idiots like the Pauls gain popularity because they mimic the immature behavior that 13 year old girls find attractive in their peers. You know that guy in 7th grade that acted like an ass in school yet some how caught the eye of all the girls? Yeah, that is the Paul brothers. The sick part is these guys are in their 20s. They get the views though which just grows and grows because to a preteen, being famous is a talent worth admiring.

So yes, kids gave guys like the Pauls an audience. But you cant forget that they are largely a product of the corporate world who is targeting kids to make them this way.

Reminds me of a conversation on the Ricky Gervais podcast years ago. They were talking about kids responses when they were asked what they wanted to be when they grew up (and this is 10+ years ago, so it isn't even specific to the Paul's demographic) and they were taken aback at how many of them simply replied "famous". They didnt say they wanted to be a pro athlete or a musician or an actor....simply "famous".

 

[Adam Warlock]

Reminds me of a conversation on the Ricky Gervais podcast years ago. They were talking about kids responses when they were asked what they wanted to be when they grew up (and this is 10+ years ago, so it isn't even specific to the Paul's demographic) and they were taken aback at how many of them simply replied "famous". They didnt say they wanted to be a pro athlete or a musician or an actor....simply "famous".

Yup exactly. Now give those same kids things like snap chat and instagram...were followers and likes mimic fame. No real talent or achievements required.

 

[RedWhiteBlackGold]

Dont even see what’s wrong with the video. People are acting like it’s the end of the world on Twitter. Prettt funny

Well as someone who didn't know Logan Paul beforehand, all I can really say is there is common sense into what should be uploaded to the internet. I don't care that he made jokes over "you haven't seen a dead body before" and then laughed, or didn't take off that stupid hat. I can acknowledge that as simply his nerves were shot and that was his way of coping something so real and unexpected around friends...but there must be a time spand in between what he just witnessed and him deciding whether to post it or not.

Poor judgement on his side and the critics are rightfully deserved,

 

[Cor]

The faux outrage is hilarious. People die everyday and no one thinks twice.

This is a good point.

The fact that Logan Paul hasn’t done this to other dead bodies before now is impressive and deserves praise

 

[Shareefruck]

Well as someone who didn't know Logan Paul beforehand, all I can really say is there is common sense into what should be uploaded to the internet. I don't care that he made jokes over "you haven't seen a dead body before" and then laughed, or didn't take off that stupid hat. I can acknowledge that as simply his nerves were shot and that was his way of coping something so real and unexpected around friends...but there must be a time spand in between what he just witnessed and him deciding whether to post it or not.

Poor judgement on his side and the critics are rightfully deserved,

^ I would add that even if we want to give him a pass for reacting inappropriately in the moment (I don't think he deserves the benefit of the doubt about that considering the circumstances before, heading into, and after the event, personally), I think deciding to do the video in the first place just for the novelty of it (and wearing that stupid hat as part of it) probably warrants some criticism as well, not just his decision to post it afterwards.

 

[Deficient Mode]

Are you suggesting that what he did is more reflective of his audience than himself? I think that's absolving him from blame a little too much, personally.

The bigger problem is that people like him are willing to do this than people being willing to watch it-- the latter is probably going to happen with any generation.

That's not what you said at all.

If we're making generalizations anyways, doesn't it make more sense to judge his generation than his audience's?

It is reflective of the person who chose to do something outrageous for attention and views and in a different way of the people who consume his outrageous content. How exactly does it reflect on people who do neither???

 

[EpochLink]

Back in the early days of YouTube, there was a lot of uncensored/uncut/raw material which by today standards will not be suitable. I really miss the 2006-2007 layout of YouTube though, that was by far the best one.

I do get my YouTube fix daily, heck I used to watch alot of Fatman videos for some laughs.

 

[Shareefruck]

That's not what you said at all.

It is reflective of the person who chose to do something outrageous for attention and views and in a different way of the people who consume his outrageous content. How exactly does it reflect on people who do neither???

I don't follow what you're saying. I don't think I said anything about the people who do neither.

• Someone said it reflected poorly on the generation.
• Someone else said to be fair, his audience can't drive yet.
• I didn't understand the logic behind that comment because I figured his generation would be more relevant than his audience's generation when it comes to placing scorn for the action.
• You said no.
• I tried to clarify if you were saying that you think his audience's generation is more relevant than he is.
• If so, I would disagree with that because I think his actions are what should be criticized more-so than the people who consume it. Therefore, if his attitude is what's objectionable, it makes more sense to say his actions are reflective of his generation..... rather than the generation of those who support him with their views..... because they didn't do the objectionable thing.

Was there some miscommunication along the way?

 

[Deficient Mode]

I don't follow what you're saying. I don't think I said anything about the people who do neither.

Someone said it reflected poorly on the generation.
Someone else said to be fair, his audience can't drive yet.
I didn't understand the logic behind that comment because I figured his generation would be more relevant than his audience's generation when it comes to placing blame for the action.
You said no.
I tried to clarify if you were saying that you think his audience's generation is more relevant than he is.
If so, I would disagree with that because I think his actions are what should be criticized more-so than the people who consume it (even though, in reality, not speaking in generalizations, it's a combination of both). Therefore, if his attitude is what's objectionable, it makes more sense to say that it reflects poorly on his generation.

Was there some miscommunication along the way?

I think there was miscommunication along the way.

I don't think it reflects poorly on any generation, but if it reflects poorly on any generation, it should be the one that makes up the bulk of the millions of people who watch his videos rather than any other. Most people Logan Paul's age aren't like Logan Paul.

People love to blame kids but it gets tiresome. The fans of some of these youtubers are really bad but they have plenty of time to grow.

 

[Shareefruck]

I think there was miscommunication along the way.

I don't think it reflects poorly on any generation, but if it reflects poorly on any generation, it should be the one that makes up the bulk of the millions of people who watch his videos rather than any other. Most people Logan Paul's age aren't like Logan Paul.

People love to blame kids but it gets tiresome. The fans of some of these youtubers are really bad but they have plenty of time to grow.

Ahh, I see what you're saying now. You're saying even though he should get the brunt of the blame and his audience should get a smaller piece of the blame, his audience are a bigger sample of their generation than he is of his.

I was not referring to which party's own actions could be more easily generalized. I'm saying that while external factors (like Youtube/his audience) enabled/encouraged him to do it, he ultimately did the thing that was objectionable, so if you're going to finger-wag and (wrongfully) generalize the objectionable thing, do it to the person who actually committed the act, because they're responsible for it.

I felt like generalizing his audience made it seem like his audience was getting the blame for what he did (as if he's just following orders/doing business and they're the real problem), and that's what I reacted to.

 

[x Tame Impala]

People don't change. The only thing that distinguishes one generation from another is the technology between them

 

[Shareefruck]

Aside from technology, culture changes, though, and I think that's what is being talking about.

 

[izlez]

Every generation ever has thought the next generation is worse and going to destroy the world.

Society has constantly progressed in every way forever and will continue to do so