PHILIP DEFRANCO IS MAKING HIS OWN NEWS CHANNEL!

[RaikuFA]

Don't really like the guy, he got to the top using manipulative click bait, jump cuts every 2 seconds and I noticed his "outrage" involving child abuse cause him to make videos on it over and over again, basically manipulating it for personal gain.

Are you saying that making sure we don't forget about a guy who abuses his kids for attention on YouTube a bad thing?

 

[TrulyBritish]

Don't really like the guy, he got to the top using manipulative click bait, jump cuts every 2 seconds and I noticed his "outrage" involving child abuse cause him to make videos on it over and over again, basically manipulating it for personal gain.

You know, I've never gotten why it's such a bad thing for someone to do multiple videos on a subject. If new evidence comes up or the subject makes arguments to defend themselves then why should we not expect people in media to cover that?
it reminds me of how people felt Jim Sterling was a bully because he kept covering Digital Homicide games because, you know, they were still selling poorly made games or doing shady business.

 

[MrBoBo]

Don't really like the guy, he got to the top using manipulative click bait, jump cuts every 2 seconds and I noticed his "outrage" involving child abuse cause him to make videos on it over and over again, basically manipulating it for personal gain.

Are you saying that making sure we don't forget about a guy who abuses his kids for attention on YouTube a bad thing?

No. I'm saying he's manipulating it for his own gain as those parents were with big bold lettering "ABUSE!" in the title of his videos to attract the eye not to the problem, but to his bank account.

Did it have a good result? Yea it did. It deserves to exist for that reason.

 

[RaikuFA]

Don't really like the guy, he got to the top using manipulative click bait, jump cuts every 2 seconds and I noticed his "outrage" involving child abuse cause him to make videos on it over and over again, basically manipulating it for personal gain.

Are you saying that making sure we don't forget about a guy who abuses his kids for attention on YouTube a bad thing?

No. I'm saying he's manipulating it for his own gain as those parents were with big bold lettering "ABUSE!" in the title of his videos to attract the eye not to the problem, but to his bank account.

Did it have a good result? Yea it did. It deserves to exist for that reason.

You have to remember, a lot of people these days have a shorter attention span. Doing multiple videos on people abusing children for $$$ reminds them "hey, these lowliest still exist, and nothing is still being done." Is he doing it for clicks? Most likely yes but I'd rather have him do it for that than Keemstar making false pedophilia accusations for clicks. I'don't call it a necessary evil.

 

[RaikuFA]

Don't really like the guy, he got to the top using manipulative click bait, jump cuts every 2 seconds and I noticed his "outrage" involving child abuse cause him to make videos on it over and over again, basically manipulating it for personal gain.

You know, I've never gotten why it's such a bad thing for someone to do multiple videos on a subject. If new evidence comes up or the subject makes arguments to defend themselves then why should we not expect people in media to cover that?
it reminds me of how people felt Jim Sterling was a bully because he kept covering Digital Homicide games because, you know, they were still selling poorly made games or doing shady business.

Or covering Paul Ryan (not that one).

 

[Elijin]

Don't really like the guy, he got to the top using manipulative click bait, jump cuts every 2 seconds and I noticed his "outrage" involving child abuse cause him to make videos on it over and over again, basically manipulating it for personal gain.

Are you saying that making sure we don't forget about a guy who abuses his kids for attention on YouTube a bad thing?

No. I'm saying he's manipulating it for his own gain as those parents were with big bold lettering "ABUSE!" in the title of his videos to attract the eye not to the problem, but to his bank account.

Did it have a good result? Yea it did. It deserves to exist for that reason.

Do you feel like he misrepresented, obscured information or manipulated the facts to create a story?

Are you aware of his content on that channel? This is not a case of following a popular fad and making a few videos about a hot topic, against the grain of the channel. He presents himself as a news channel, and reports news. Had an 'official' news service broke the story and revisited it 1 or 2 times inside a week as it developed, would you be saying they manipulated it for personal gain, or reported on something newsworthy?.

Because it sounds a bit like your core issue is a refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of his platform. ie "it cant be news if its on youtube, that's just a place people make videos for profit"

I'd hardly call him 'on the top' though. He's a big channel for sure, but not a top dog. I can see the issue with clickbait titles, but am prepared to give him a pass for two reasons: Partially that's the format. It's noisy and you need to be heard/grab attention. The second bit is that the stories themselves are never done in such a way. He seems to do his best to present things while typically trying to avoid any heavy bias (obviously this isn't apparent in the child abuse story as it was a personal issue to him). Reminds me of news boy of old, sure he's yelling some attention grabbing things on that corner, but then you get the actual story if you engage.