By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Pewdiepie responds to Warner Bros scandal

Barkley on 13 July 2016
Veknoid_Outcast said:
Barkley said:

His old videos all state in the description if they are sponsored, his videos that are sponsored since the FTC guidelines for youtube were created are disclosed very clearly. It's very easy to know when he has or hasn't been paid for making a video.

Also his videos ARE entertainment, in no possible way could PewDiePie's videos be described as "critique".

But if they are entertainment, and his viewers accept them as entertainment, why would WB approach him in the first place? In this lawsuit PewDiePie and others are listed as social media "influencers." WB targetted PDP et al. because they have the power to influence an audience and impact sales.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the videos were not allowed to include negative opinions about the game or Warner Bros., or show any bugs and glitches. And they also needed to include "a strong verbal call-to-action to click the link in the description box for the viewer to go to the [game's] website to learn more about the [game], to learn how they can register, and to learn how to play the game." 

Wouldn't you call that something that falls outside "entertainment"?

1.It's a paid promotion, advertising and exposure. He wasn't required to give opinions.

2. You'll be very unlikely to find pre-launch footage of any game with bugs and glitches, all games companies or on that like a hawk, and the bug and glitch free footage prelaunch is also used by REAL Video Games Media sites.

Publishers always tell media outlets "This is the footage you can use, you can use X amount of minutes from it." This is standard business practice.



Around the Network
Arlo on 13 July 2016

I don't care if you lie or you're honest or whatever. I just care that he took money to write a strictly positive review. It's about his own journalistic integrity, which is junk. Be upfront about it all you want, that doesn't mean you're still not a tool.



http://www.youtube.com/ArloStuff

Dadrik on 13 July 2016
Barkley said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:

But if they are entertainment, and his viewers accept them as entertainment, why would WB approach him in the first place? In this lawsuit PewDiePie and others are listed as social media "influencers." WB targetted PDP et al. because they have the power to influence an audience and impact sales.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the videos were not allowed to include negative opinions about the game or Warner Bros., or show any bugs and glitches. And they also needed to include "a strong verbal call-to-action to click the link in the description box for the viewer to go to the [game's] website to learn more about the [game], to learn how they can register, and to learn how to play the game." 

Wouldn't you call that something that falls outside "entertainment"?

1.It's a paid promotion, advertising and exposure. He wasn't required to give opinions.

2. You'll be very unlikely to find pre-launch footage of any game with bugs and glitches, all games companies or on that like a hawk, and the bug and glitch free footage prelaunch is also used by REAL Video Games Media sites.

But it's Pewdiepie, he just screams at his camera, is not even funny, and get more views than all my favourite Youtubers who don't make everybody laugh either, can you imagine ?



Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you are necessarily right.

Dadrik on 13 July 2016
Arlo said:
I don't care if you lie or you're honest or whatever. I just care that he took money to write a strictly positive review. It's about his own journalistic integrity, which is junk. Be upfront about it all you want, that doesn't mean you're still not a tool.

Is he a journalist, a reviewer, or anything like that ?



Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you are necessarily right.

Barkley on 13 July 2016
Arlo said:
I don't care if you lie or you're honest or whatever. I just care that he took money to write a strictly positive review. It's about his own journalistic integrity, which is junk. Be upfront about it all you want, that doesn't mean you're still not a tool.

No he did not? He does not make reviews, he made a video the same as all of his other videos and the only thing he said about the game was "I had a lot of fun." Literally it.



Around the Network
SWORDF1SH on 13 July 2016
Veknoid_Outcast said:

But if they are entertainment, and his viewers accept them as entertainment, why would WB approach him in the first place? In this lawsuit PewDiePie and others are listed as social media "influencers." WB targetted PDP et al. because they have the power to influence an audience and impact sales.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the videos were not allowed to include negative opinions about the game or Warner Bros., or show any bugs and glitches. And they also needed to include "a strong verbal call-to-action to click the link in the description box for the viewer to go to the [game's] website to learn more about the [game], to learn how they can register, and to learn how to play the game." 

Wouldn't you call that something that falls outside "entertainment"?

I partially agree with you but have you watched the sponsored video yet? It's not as bad as you're making it out to be. 



Dadrik on 13 July 2016
RolStoppable said:
From what I am reading in this thread, I gather that quite a few people in here would respect a professional shill who posts on a video game forum as long as said shill had a note on his profile saying that he is indeed a shill. Such a person would be considered to have credibility.

Not the case, this is just silly.

The only annoying thing is that everyone jumped on him claiming he was dishonest, a liar, etc...
Which was wrong. And now said people are nitpicking.

Is it a respectable practice ? Nah. Aaaand that's pretty much all there is to it.
Nothing criminal, nothing hidden from the public. He did a thing, some people think it's not respectable, some people don't care since he didn't praise the game.



Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you are necessarily right.

Dadrik on 13 July 2016

In the end, nobody watch the actual video they are all talking about. He didn't praise the game, didn't put a finger on any negative or positive thing regarding the game, and he said in the end "I had fun".



Just because you have an opinion doesn't mean you are necessarily right.

pokoko on 13 July 2016

I'm still very, very angry that Justin Timberlake once said "I'm lovin' it" about McDonalds when it turns out that he was paid to say that!!

I will never trust Justin nor McDonalds ever again.



Barkley on 13 July 2016
RolStoppable said:
From what I am reading in this thread, I gather that quite a few people in here would respect a professional shill who posts on a video game forum as long as said shill had a note on his profile saying that he is indeed a shill. Such a person would be considered to have credibility.

Have you even seen the video he made on the game? He was paid to come and make a video of a game pre-launch. That doesn't make you a shill.

Saying "OMFG THIS IS AMAZING", "YOU GUYS HAVE GOT TO CHECK THIS OUT.", "I'VE NEVER HAD SO MUCH FUN WITH A GAME."   "THIS IS GOING TO BE ONE OF THE GREATEST GAMES THIDS YEAR."   "WOW THIS ABSOLUTELY INCREDIBLE." - after being paid is being a shill.

Sitting in front of a camera and playing a game while not giving any critique is not being a shill.