"We underestimated influencers in 2016. How do we neutralize them?"
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (95)
sorted by:
This is a really bad take.
This is the US government going after independent creators.
Agreed. Lauren Chen was just some innocent Christian lady that was as mundane as it really came.
Apparently they weren't independent at all, were they?
Where the fuck do you expect their money to come from? Perfectly symmetrical sources spread out evenly across the world?
It would have to be from the audience for them to be independent. Once you have a big benefactor or investor, you're not longer independent.
My only problem is with calling them independent. They're not independent.
You're an idiot. I'll let other people tell you why since you clearly can't figure it out for yourself.
I didn't want it to be me, but he's being so thick I had to step up.
So why did you take money from glowies?
First, why are you taking what the DoJ says on face value? How many "Muh Russia!" hoaxes have we had now?
Are you seriously expecting youtubers to backtrack all of the finances of everyone they ever work with?
Building off 2, how would anyone short of a massive multinational corporation with an army of attorneys and accountants even do that? But, hey, it's a basic rule so I'm sure you'll be happy to provide us with a full list of the steps you've personally taken for every financial interaction you've had for, say, the last decade.
And, even if this is 100% a Russian Propaganda operation to warp the minds of poor innocent Americans (which I don't), and even if we accept that all of those youtubers could and should have been reasonably expected to perform a full audit of Tenant's books (which I don't), there's been multiple reports of Kamala paying influencers to shill for her campaign. So what's the issue here? Show me the legal statue which says "It is a crime for you to receive money from a Russian". Oh, wait, the DoJ doesn't charge the youtubers with anything! It charges a couple Russians with money laundering and violating the Foreign Agents Registration act.
It's 100% obvious what is going on here. The DoJ cooked up something (maybe legitimate, maybe entirely faked) to slander and try to shut down well-known online personalities because they're not 100% parroting the line that Washington wants them to take. And if you seriously don't expect the same thing to happen to Dank, the Lotus Eaters and every other online personality soon, you are hopelessly naive.
Anyway, I'll wait for your full list of steps for an average person to cheaply and easily perform a full audit on the books of every company they ever do business with, since it's an easy and basic rule.
Edit: It's also worth noting that THIS is what the DoJ is spending time on, when some of the main oil fields in the US are literally getting raided by Cuban and Venezuelan gangsters. Yeah, I get it, different people work on different things, but when a major story is "more Russian Propaganda! Be afraid of those evil right-wingers!" when oil fields are being robbed and sabotaged and no major outlet talks about it should also make it pretty clear what's going on here.
Video content creators who talk about anything not approved by the establishment don't get ad revenue from their content. Youtube will still play the ads on their videos, but keep all the ad revenue. The only way those content creators can make any money off of making content is through advertisers that sponsor the videos, where the content creator will shill for the service or product in video. It's extremely common for guntubers, homesteaders, and anyone to the right of Stalin.
All a government would have to do is "sponsor" a video for a content creator, lie about where the money comes from, and bam, you magically have "foreign influence", and the content creator unknowingly becomes a "foreign agent". There would be no realistic way for a content creator to vet where the money comes from. Most are usually just happy to pay the bills, as Youtube actively censors their content and prevents it from gaining the traction it otherwise would, due to the "algorithm", just like Google does with wrongthink.
Doesn't this defy the point of being advertiser-friendly? Maybe they have a pool of advertisers that don't GAF.
So, how exactly are you supposed to know if any glowies laundered any money into the company offering to invest in your company? And that's assuming that our government, with its multi-decade track record of being pathological liars to its own citizens, is actually telling the truth for once.
You will not convince me that Matt Christiansen is anything other than a pathologically honest man.
I haven't seen any specific reporting on what Tenet was actually compensating Matt.
But if the lump sump reported in seed money was 10 million. And Pool and Rubin were each promised ~ 5 mil/yr. I saw another report that Chen and her husband were paid around 760k.
Adding these numbers together, there’s very little left to pay Commentators 3 through 6.
TL;DR - Christiansen likely had no cause to be suspicious because they offered him so little compared to Pool & Rubin.
I don't get why you're so hung up on this.
*Tencent laughs in Chinese*
And the stock market in general. Any public company is taking in massive money from people they don't know, and any individual millionaire or billionaire can throw money at them too. Private companies have investors too and, no, you don't always know exactly who everyone is, or where the money is coming from.
If your friend reaches out to you with a good deal, says they have investors on board, everything looks good, and you're not being asked to change your opinions or content...you take the deal.
In this Tenet situation, especially the littler guys. As the above person mentioned, if you want to pass blame on the creators (which I think is absolutely asinine), only Tim Pool and Benny Johnson were probably making enough for it to be "suspicious." But, again, I'm not condemning them either. This is an attack by the DOJ. It probably all did pass initial scrutiny, and it certainly didn't look like any Russians and fedbois were involved.
They were targeted and smeared by one of the most powerful organizations on the planet.
I sent the man a check, and he sent back a handwritten thank you note. There aren't many like him.