Somewhere in the realm of 100% chance of this being the case.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Talk about double standards (Wall Street Journal vs. PewDiePie)
- Thread starter Raylan
- Start date
- Status
Somewhere in the realm of 100% chance of this being the case.
Um so ... they never said he was a Nazi. You guys are making a lot of shit up here.
It's shrewd editorialising. Offloading the responsibility of having an opinion to a third party site so you can fall back and say "I didn't say it, I just brought it up" whenever it comes back to you.
Apoleptica
Banned
Nobody said that picture was real or even mentioned it. It's the point he made with it... Way to jump to conclusions. Maybe you should watch the video again.
Spiral Insanity
Banned
Context. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLNSiFrS3n4
Pewdiepie went on fiver and to show how ridiculous that service was, he paid for a sign that said 'Death to all jews, subscribe to keemstar', trying to frame keemstar into having ordered the sign. That was the joke.
Context.
If they wrote a damn article about the video, they should have at least covered it thoroughly and provided all the details, it's really not that complicated.
Prithee Be Careful
Industry Professional
Not the point I was making. The point is that the sign being offensive to some people doesn't qualify it as form of harassment. If it did, anyone who printed and thereby offended another would be guilty of harassment, which would be ridiculous. The point being, even by legal or common sense definition, his behaviour does not qualify as harassment.
Which invalidates the point the above person tried to make.
ScientificPizza
Banned
That's still an incredibly insensitive joke regardless of context
Spring-Loaded
Member
What about the eight other incidents?
This is like an enormous red light that you haven't actually read the article in question.
You wrote more than just what I quoted, and included context. But see what happens when I quote just this. It looks awful, and it makes you look ridiculous. And yet, I didn't edit your post at all. I simply quoted a part of what you wrote.
That's basically what the WSJ did. Yeah, it was taken out of context. But he could have reacted differently, in a way that couldn't have been taken out of context, or portrayed as offensive. He could have reacted however he wanted, but he chose to dress up as Hitler. Why did he feel the need to do that? Why did he have those people write "Death to All Jews" on that sign?
Choices have consequences. I wish he would take this opportunity to teach that to his audience, and bring something positive out of this, rather than be combative AND give attention to some really shady people in the process. Why not take the high road?
If you believe that advocating for violence based on someone's race or religion isn't harassment, then either give me a word that does adequately describe it.
Hate speech? Persecution? Bigotry? Prejudice?
Otherwise you're clearly being obtuse and disingenuous for the sake of endlessly moving goalposts.
when you pay someone to write anti-semitic comments on a poster and then broadcast said "joke" to 5 million people, you have responsibility for any hurt feelings that may have occurred. can you say no one was offended by this?
C O N T E X T
D
Deleted member 10571
Unconfirmed Member
I was just commenting on your comparison of "WSJ should be held to the same standards when showing the PDP video", which I think is just not true, due to what I said earlier in your quote. Not on your definition of "harassment", which is debatable, but not my point.
Many people are far more disgusted by the idea of being called racist than actual racism.
again. vox didn't compare him to himmler. vox reported that neo-nazi sites were making comparisons of him to himmler. the only reason this adds fuel to pie's alt-right fire is because he's an idiot.
this is from vox
see the quotation marks? and the text preceding the quote directly attributing it to a neo-nazi website?
and here's the neo-nazi website
where you can see where the quote comes from
Misrepresenting Vox to his viewers in order to justify his hardened stance. Figures.
ScientificPizza
Banned
Yeah
It's insane that people are willing to defend Pewdiepie on this stuff
Like what won't people defend?
He paid someone to hold a sign containing hate speech for entertainment and likes/clicks
I really don't know what else can be said. Are you just practicing for debate class or something?
Sickboy007
Member
PDP has been subtly flirting with racists for months now, actual nazis caught wind of this subtext in some of his videos months ago, way before the WSJ run this story.
Tranqueris
Banned
2 weeks later when Sargon's subscription count rises to 2-3 times what it was before...
"Hey man.. like.. we don't know that PDP was responsible for infecting more people with that bigoted garbage. Like.. Sargon's sub count could have risen because of a dozen other reasons that I'm not gonna bring up because I don't know what they are."
ChrisMahoney
Banned
I don't like it when the Wall Street Journal carelessly calls someone a racist and tries to get them fired.
I also loved PewDiePie's video when he shoots Hitler in the balls.
I'm weird?
This writer did a hit piece calling out PDP for "deplorable jokes" and even tried to get him fired. There's nothing hypocritical about this to you? Lol
This is likely why the WSJ started looking into his videos in the first place.
Can you quote to me the WSJ calling him racist?
Prithee Be Careful
Industry Professional
Two things:
1. The joke wasn't about the statements he was comfortable making - he didn't make them - he was trying to find out what other statments people would be comfortable making for five dollars.
2. If you want to find out how far someone will go for money - if you really want to demonstrate just how they will go - surely you plumb for the most inflammatory statement you can find?
I mean: to throw my point open to discredit, what inoffensive statement could have been made that would have hammered home the point in the same way? The less offensive it is, the less you've demonstrated what people will do for five bucks.
See how this works? One is a negation of other.
ScientificPizza
Banned
Oh no Backed into a corner due to his anti semitism he is now being pushed into the arms of the right wing nutjobs.
Why do we keep doing forcing this child to go through this.
WE did this
#reasonswhytrumpwon
if only we had accepted and nurtured his hate speech we could have saved him
ChrisMahoney
Banned
you see this "we" business?
people have up and joined a fucking cult. doesn't matter what pdp does or says now, they'll defend him til they die.
They contacted both PDP and Disney. Disney was the only one that replied back before the article went up. PDP never commented at all. PDP never bothered to defend himself.
Iva Demilcol
Member
He has taken responsibility and apologized in his previous video with regards to the content brought up that was not taken out of context. You call it a tantrum, the next person will call it not bending over to the media. How about less labeling and instead just discussing the content posted, yes?
Why do you deem that as the incorrect way to deal with it? Because he will lose? Because thats what everyone else does? If he wants to fight for his integrity then so be it. Rolling over and waiting for the dust to settle is likely what PDP defines as being unprofessional, and I for one applaud that kind of behavior where you fight for who you are and what you believe in despite being up against the masses (in this case, a large portion of the media). Good luck to him.
Oh yes, because I am CLEARLY talking about his rape jokes here... /s
PDP has 50 million subscribers. "Oh WSJ didn't contact PDP first" is such disingenuous bullshit. The videos were online for the world to see and, guess what, plenty of people did.
What are you defending, then?
The inalienable right to call for the death of all jews?
What are you defending, then?
The inalienable right to call for the death of all jews?
Then do you agree with him promoting Sargon of Akkad, an actual fascist racist PoS?
Button
Banned
people have up and joined a fucking cult. doesn't matter what pdp does or says now, they'll attack him til they die.
ScientificPizza
Banned
The actions of the WSJ reporter do not change what Pewdiepie has done
So vile and hateful anti-semitism can be handwaved away with a kind-of-apology, but poor reporting is where you draw the line?
That says more about you than anything else
Not regardless of context. Because of it. The context goes far beyond Internet memes, Keemstar or Pewdiepie. Genocide which actually happened, which is actually demanded to this very day isn't a laughing matter.
We all know calling someone a racist is worse than being a racist, just as calling someone an anti-semite is worse than getting people to hold up signs calling for the death of all jews.
"Ethics in journalism." Truly the hill worth dying on.
Full ethics in journalism without any sense of irony. Gamergate going strong.
diablos991
Can’t stump the diablos
At least it looks like this WSJ attack attempt isn't costing him subscribers.
He has been net positive every day since the 14th.
He will get my subscription if he keeps fighting back and exposing them.
He has been net positive every day since the 14th.
He will get my subscription if he keeps fighting back and exposing them.
TIL promoting Sargon isn't worth attacking.
Can literally no one give me actual examples--with quotes and/or timestamps--of what they're so incensed about re: lack of context in the WSJ? Thus far I've asked a handful of times and have only gotten a single two second bg clip that was preceded by an extended clip of him defending himself in his own words.
did i say "we" as if the people critiquing PDP have a group that idolizes a central figure who we believe can do no wrong and we attack and discredit all those who criticize him?
hmmm
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked