Here is the inaugural post of this potentially long-overdue thread.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrNm...ature=youtu.be
Care to defend one of your favorite new media personalities on this topic, Druff?
Printable View
Here is the inaugural post of this potentially long-overdue thread.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrNm...ature=youtu.be
Care to defend one of your favorite new media personalities on this topic, Druff?
I didn't watch this 16 minute video of some Brit yakking on for 16 minutes about climate change.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
But in my skipping around, I noticed that the guy wasn't able to differentiate between Crowder himself and his various lackeys that he hires to work on his website.
That's not to say that Crowder isn't somewhat responsible for material appearing on his own site, but the guy should have mentioned that Crowder himself didn't write these articles.
I should explain the structure of Crowder's show and website, for those who might be curious.
Steven Crowder is a political comedian, and I really like him. He's funny and entertaining, yet at the same time, is actually good at explaining serious issues. I like him a lot better now than when he first came on the scene, as he has grown up some (he's now almost 30), and his problem of coming off as too juvenile has mostly gone away.
But the point is that Crowder is an ENTERTAINER. He's not a politician. He's not a serious political analyst. He is a conservative guy who has built a fairly successful career around political humor. While he's a religious Christian, that rarely comes out in his show, and most of his analysis is secular, save for the occasional anti-abortion segment. He's also not alt-right or fanatically conservative, and in fact was never a big fan of Donald Trump.
There are two truly talented people on Crowder's staff. One is Crowder himself, and the other is "Not Gay Jared", who serves as both sidekick and show engineer/producer. Jared reminds me a lot of SrslySirius. He's done for Crowder what Srsly has done for Doug Polk. It's really useful to have someone like that on your team if you're producing web video content. Jared is only okay as a sidekick (not bad, but not nearly as talented as Crowder), but he's great in his production and engineering roles.
Everyone else working for Crowder is fairly generic, including this Courtney chick who wrote this article that the dude in the above video is ranting about.
Crowder's main asset is his Monday-Thursday web show. He has ongoing conservative news/opinion content on his website, but this is just mostly clickbait to draw new viewers over to Crowder's web show. That's why Crowder himself puts little effort into it, and why he has his various fairly low-paid lackeys (such as Courtney) write this stuff. To be honest, I don't even read the Crowder website, because those articles aren't very good, and are mostly what I would categorize as conservative clickbait.
Anyway, if you're going to criticize Crowder, you need to focus on the video content he puts out, and not on the lame clickbait he has people write to draw people over to his website.
If Crowder pays a "low-paid lackey" to generate deceptive or badly sourced click-bait articles with a particular political spin, as the employer, he is responsible if he doesn't fire or otherwise punish that person and temoce the article. You'd say the same about the management of a poker room who didn't fire or discipline a floor person who was repeatedly making bad rulings to favor his/her friends in the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffI didn't watch this 16 minute video of some Brit yakking on for 16 minutes about climate change.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
But in my skipping around, I noticed that the guy wasn't able to differentiate between Crowder himself and his various lackeys that he hires to work on his website.
That's not to say that Crowder isn't somewhat responsible for material appearing on his own site, but the guy should have mentioned that Crowder himself didn't write these articles.
I should explain the structure of Crowder's show and website, for those who might be curious.
Steven Crowder is a political comedian, and I really like him. He's funny and entertaining, yet at the same time, is actually good at explaining serious issues. I like him a lot better now than when he first came on the scene, as he has grown up some (he's now almost 30), and his problem of coming off as too juvenile has mostly gone away.
But the point is that Crowder is an ENTERTAINER. He's not a politician. He's not a serious political analyst. He is a conservative guy who has built a fairly successful career around political humor. While he's a religious Christian, that rarely comes out in his show, and most of his analysis is secular, save for the occasional anti-abortion segment. He's also not alt-right or fanatically conservative, and in fact was never a big fan of Donald Trump.
There are two truly talented people on Crowder's staff. One is Crowder himself, and the other is "Not Gay Jared", who serves as both sidekick and show engineer/producer. Jared reminds me a lot of SrslySirius. He's done for Crowder what Srsly has done for Doug Polk. It's really useful to have someone like that on your team if you're producing web video content. Jared is only okay as a sidekick (not bad, but not nearly as talented as Crowder), but he's great in his production and engineering roles.
Everyone else working for Crowder is fairly generic, including this Courtney chick who wrote this article that the dude in the above video is ranting about.
Crowder's main asset is his Monday-Thursday web show. He has ongoing conservative news/opinion content on his website, but this is just mostly clickbait to draw new viewers over to Crowder's web show. That's why Crowder himself puts little effort into it, and why he has his various fairly low-paid lackeys (such as Courtney) write this stuff. To be honest, I don't even read the Crowder website, because those articles aren't very good, and are mostly what I would categorize as conservative clickbait.
Anyway, if you're going to criticize Crowder, you need to focus on the video content he puts out, and not on the lame clickbait he has people write to draw people over to his website.
You're missing the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
This isn't a legal trial.
This is someone criticizing Crowder for an extremely small part of his operation.
It would be like doing a 16-minute bash piece on Howard Stern because his website sucks.
I gotta say
Joe Rogan has some weird friends....this guy being one of them (alex jones being another)
While it may be "an extremely small part of his operation", the bullshit misrepresentation peddled in that article by one of his "low-paid lackeys" mirrors his own climate-change denying obfuscation in one his own videos that was addressed by potholer54 in this entertaining exposition.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffYou're missing the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by MumblesBadly
This isn't a legal trial.
This is someone criticizing Crowder for an extremely small part of his operation.
It would be like doing a 16-minute bash piece on Howard Stern because his website sucks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEylCS6-hBE&feature=youtu.be
Or perhaps Crowder has come clean since then that he was only "joking" about denying man-made climate change. You know. For "entertainment" purposes. If so, can you post the video from his channel in which he does so?
In other words, "Check."
He might regret this 20 years down the line:
More evidence of Crowder spewing right-wing bullshit on the subject of climate change, this time while appearing as the interviewee on a liberal commentary show.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btyU4A5Wxh4&feature=youtu.be
Care to comment, Druff?
Looking forward to this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtqwKaWI22w&feature=youtu.be
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryLaffer
Im sure some would consider you as their "weird friend".
Oh and
:noose
Bob Ross' estate tried to send legal threats to Crowder over this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7PpE15yh58
He and his lawyer gave their official response (start at 20:58):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHaOMqKal1k
Druff, Druff, Druff, Druff, Druff. Just how ignorant are you of history, as well of Islamic doctrine, to not know how Crowder is repeating right-wing propoaganda about Muhammed regarding his attitude towards and treatment ofJews?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
For example, perhaps you don't know that he called for His followers to "protect" the "People of the Book", meaning Jews and Christians, who lived within their political domain? And how the Arab Muslims' policy of religious tolerance during his lifetime, and for at least several century afterwards, made it easier for them to take control of vast swaths of the Eastern Roman Empires's territory in the Middle East?
That's right, dude. The Jews in those territories during that time were generally happy with that turn of events versus the status quo. Because life for Jews wasn't so great under Roman rule after Christianity was made the official state religion during the latter half of the 4th century BCE. Especially because the formal adoption by Christian Church of what is now referred to as the New Testament at the First Council of Nicea about 50 years before them made canonical the notion that the Jews were directly responsible for the death of Jesus. Meaning, per Christian dogma, Jews were "Christ killers". Not a pleasant label to have attach one's heritage when living under those Christians' rule during the more dogmatic periods of offical state religiosity.
And despite how much Islamic political policy called for certain kinds of discrimiation discimination against Jews, it didn't so any worse than against Christians, *and* the Jews in those areas preferred being under Islamic rule versus under Christians for many centuries after Mohammed was donk down. Which is why many Jews aided the Muslims defense of Jerusalem when the Christian crusaders came aknocking in the 11th century. And ended up being slaughtered to a man, woman, and child by the Christians when Jerusalem fell.
Seriously, man! Read some legitimate history about such things before you pass along another bullshit-filled propoganda piece by Crowder. Because then parting shots at Mohammed at the end of this video is *another* example of his right-wing partisan hackery.
Dang todglers toddlers going at it with the head toddgler
I have listened to several Rogan podcasts and he is generally very critical of conspiracy theory nonsense. You saying that he is friends with Alex Jones (which I did not know) definitely makes me curious how Rogan handles all the nonsense that Jones spews. I assume he has done podcasts with Jones, I will have to check these out and see I guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryLaffer
I think his face says it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOH0CJFUHWM
True dat.Quote:
Originally Posted by SrslySiriusI think his face says it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by verminaard
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOH0CJFUHWM
But there *is* a way to watch/listen to Alex Jones that helps to put his commentary into perspective.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVUyQC7AE0Q&feature=youtu.be
Potholer54 was gracious in giving Crowder a pass for canceling on the debate, but Crowder was enough of a chicken putz to only give 24 hour notice beforehand, and only offered unreasonable time slots in the future to do the debate knowing full well that Potholer54 lives in Australia.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpOVlPWD8KE&feature=youtu.be
So, despite Crowder bailing on essentially the last day/"minute", interested parties can watch Potholer answer questions submitted by folks during the period set aside for the debate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NBGhdj4LHA&feature=youtu.be
Why would Crowder agree to this in the first place if he was afraid? He gets challenged to debates all the time by lower-rated Youtubers. Clearly no one would care if he just ignored it.
Why doesn't Potholer agree to one of these "unreasonable time slots" and see what happens?
Sounds like he really just wants to show Crowder is dodging him.
I think Crowder just sees little value in this whole thing, so he's not trying too hard to make it happen.