You zeroed in on the word "illegal" and took them out of context with the rest of the comment. Congratulations.Why do the two top comments talk about this guy's feedback being illegal? No one said anything about legality. Are we only allowed to criticize people for illegal behavior?
The video review seemed fair and accurate, regardless.
"random nobodies" have shown to have more power then shareholders these days. How many thousands of companies have adjusted business practices and politics based on what Twitter loses its mind over?You know a news site is circling the drain when they are manufacturing stories from what some random nobodies say on twitter.
You know a news site is circling the drain when they are manufacturing stories from what some random nobodies say on twitter.
I was referring to the nobodies criticizing the YouTuber.they did not manufacture anything , and to be fair someone with 18 million followers is not a nobody. I couldn't care less about him and have never heard of him but lots of people apparently have.
your post is very unfair to this website and unnecessarily rude .
What's funny is the media picked up on what this guy said and ran with it, so he practically backtrackedBrownlee's video has been criticized by some social media users, with one calling it "distasteful, almost unethical, to say this when you have 18 million subscribers." The poster later added that Brownlee "significantly" influences the market, and that the reviewer just wanted to show he can crush companies.
The entire discussion is about ethics, which are very different than laws (or even Youtube rules). You don't seem to understand the difference.You zeroed in on the word "illegal" and took them out of context with the rest of the comment. Congratulations.
I could break it down, but I'll sum it up as: It is not illegal, so acting like a reviewer broke the rules for giving a negative review is childish and wasteful.
Telling the truth about a product is not illegal.
Good thing there are honest people doing product reviews, to avoid people getting scammed by these companies.
The clickbate title was unfortunate.What's funny is the media picked up on what this guy said and ran with it, so he practically backtrackedFirst of all, let's look at his occupation. He's basically an investor in upstart companies like Humane. My guess is he knows people who lost money because Humane's product was crap and got offended on their behalf.
Anyways, below is what he changed his opinion to later. It's no longer unethical, careless, harmful, and more. It's now focused on the headline (SERIOUSLY you're focusing on the headline of YT videos instead of the news?) and it simply "deserves more rigor" from MKBHD because of his influence. Yet the review was fair and balanced lol. He didn't even quote the headline right in his reply trying to support his lazy opinion:
In the end, MKBHD decided to keep the headline the same. I guess he did believe choosing it had enough rigor. Sorry Daniel Vassallo!!