Support NeoGAF

[Liseda]

Annoying moderate, that's about it. Can't believe I used to subscribe to him years ago.

 

[Dominator]

I don't like his voice so therefore don't watch his videos.

 

[Stumpokapow]

So just because he has a huge platform, it takes away his right to respond to someone attacking him, in this case calling him a White Supremacist apoligist? Just to be clear from what you are saying, Im getting that you think Phillip is in the wrong because he has a much bigger audience and so cant reply to someone attacking him no matter what? Because his fanbase who he cant control would attack that person.
Tell me would you think the same if Phillip responded in the exact same way to a Pro-Nazi racist tweet?

Plz, correct me on anything I may have gotten wrong.

I think people who have control of a mob, even if they didn't ask for it, should be mindful of the consequences of their actions. I think being able to respond to a perceived insult is less important than the consequences of your response. I don't agree with directing a mob towards anyone for any reason.

 

[NandoGip]

Its wrong but I just dont like his face

 

[Jmanunknown]

Yh they seem to be fine with it, they believe just because he has a bigger audience it takes away his right to respond to people hating on him because his fan base might harrass that person. Funny though since people seem to be fine with the whole Patton Oswalt thing but not with this. If someone calls me a white supremacist apoligizer, Im going to respond. The size of your fanbase shouldnt effect your right to respond.

Seriously their is a major difference between calling someone a white supremacist apologist and attacking someones recently deceased spouse. Its ridiculous that you even compared the two situations.

 

[BasicMath]

Why? Why is everyone in this thread seemingly taking it as axiomatic that one must take a side? What's wrong with looking at things from all sides?

Admittedly, I've watched 3 of his videos, so maybe there's one where he says "maybe it's OK to hate black people," etc.? Or is it just things like "maybe if you're protesting you shouldn't be destroying cars, etc."?

Because being neutral is difficult. If you're going to have two sides of an argument you need to filter the bullshit and that's something that most news organizations do not do at the moment. It's alien and something many people have not experienced. In fact, most news organizations do the opposite of filtering out the bullshit. They love to bring in talking heads from Obama/Trump/Republicans/Democrats/Lobbying Groups/Companies/Sponsors/etc.

Oh and from what I've watched, this guy tries to act like a filter. It's not perfect at all but I think the attempt is generally good. Enough to possibly bring out some people out of their beloved bubble.

 

[Head of Vengarl]

Can someone give me a few suggestions for YouTube channels that do what he does, but better? As much as I enjoy Full Frontal and The Daily Show, they aren't exactly objective.

 

[Zero-ELEC]

I used to watch his stuff as a teen. I stopped. I do not regret this.

 

[Jzero]

There's something about him I don't like.

Same, i think it's his voice.

 

[Generalpsyduck]

He's a asshole.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

He's alright. 50/50 on him. ¯\_(&#12484_/¯

 

[Croyles]

You say that as if there's no danger to taking one side or the other without seeing that there's often shades of gray that define an issue. Obamacare is a good example.

The shade of grey that you missed in my statement was the word "always".

If you only go neutral, you succeed at nothing and potentially help normalise terrible things.
I didn't say nor mean that only ever taking a hardline stance is any better, because I in no way believe it is. It is in fact, even worse.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Because being neutral is difficult. If you're going to have two sides of an argument you need to filter the bullshit and that's something that most news organizations do not do at the moment. It's alien and something many people have not experienced. In fact, most news organizations do the opposite of filtering out the bullshit. They love to bring in talking heads from Obama/Trump/Republicans/Democrats/Lobbying Groups/Companies/Sponsors/etc.

Oh and from what I've watched, this guy tries to act like a filter. It's not perfect at all but I think the attempt is generally good. Enough to possibly bring out some people out of their beloved bubble.

Except he doesn't. Like look at the Milo videos, it's all the left is censoring Milo, he dedicates no time as to why he's being protested against. That's not filtering bullshit at all.

He also decides that maybe the media was wrong to say Spencer asked if Jews were people because what he may have meant is that all the Jews in the media aren't people. Again that's not filtering out, that's just rinsing in pedantry in the name of being objective.

 

[cyborg009]

Because the man was just speaking, yeah it was hateful stuff but you lose your moral footing by being physical. Be a better person than the others.

I understand that.

I understand that as well but the guy a freaking Nazi under a different name.