"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:
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.
But, you're not doing everything the same...your content is the same, but you're bringing it to a different platform, which benefits that platform.
Take your game, for example. And this was actually happening all the time when Epic Game Store was trying to get in on the market. Say your game gets some level of fame before your 1.0 release. You're independent, doing your thing. Now say Epic reaches out, and says they want your game exclusively on their platform for X time, but you retain all control. You're doing the exact same thing, you're not beholden to anyone, but you're now giving Epic value by being on their platform, and drawing people who were interested in your game there.
Now, I'm not even saying you should take that hypothetical deal, and I'm personally no fan of Epic, but it's not inherently sleezy (unless you've made promises to other platforms, which was part of the controversy around Epic), it's above board, and it may very well be an excellent deal for you. Again, you don't have to change anything, and you get more money. It's why so many people did jump at that.
That's essentially what Tenet was doing; they wanted names with some draw to provide some exclusive content, but did not themselves have any editorial control over said content. Take Tim Pool; they had him license a show he was already producing to their network. Everything was the same but the channel.
No. Again, completely missing the point. I'm not saying "take the deal," I'm saying it's alright and understandable to take the deal.
Yeah.
The organization is not foreign. The investors were not Russian on paper, but may have been Russian citizens, perhaps either planted or allowed by US feds. Again, though, nowhere is it alleged any content was changed, or any creator was doing the bidding of Russia.
Even if the allegations are completely true, it still doesn't make the creators the bad guys, and the DOJ, media, and bots still end up looking awful.
You keep saying how this is a government trap...but then blaming the victims. Weird as fuck. And, look, it's not a "technicality" if you get to produce whatever you want, and are just paid to do so on a particular channel. That's pretty dang exonerating.
Are you being intentionally dense, or...?