PewDiePie ATTACKED BY MEDIA? - Dude Soup Podcast #110

Dude Soup: PewDiePie ATTACKED BY MEDIA? - Dude Soup Podcast #110

Dude Soup is sponsored by Audible! Get a free audiobook with a 30 day free trial at http://www.audible.com/dudesoup.  


Oh boy. We gotta tackle this PewDiePie business. If you're all real nice and don't call us libtards we'll also play another round of Hard Nettin' with you! Promise.


SOURCES:
[Tumblr] just to clear some things up…: http://pewdie.tumblr.com/post/157160889655/just-to-clear-some-things-up#notes
[YouTube]
My Response:


[Twitter] Pewdiepie WSJ Contact Tweet: https://twitter.com/pewdiepie/status/832655236498022401
[WSJ]
Disney Severs Ties With YouTube Star PewDiePie After Anti-Semitic Posts: https://www.wsj.com/articles/disney-severs-ties-with-youtube-star-pewdiepie-after-anti-semitic-posts-1487034533
[Variety]
Playing the Pawn in PewDiePie’s Blame Game: http://variety.com/2017/digital/opinion/playing-the-pawn-in-pewdiepies-blame-game-1201990190/

Want more Dude Soup? Check out the Post Show: http://funhaus.roosterteeth.com/show/fan-show

Follow us on Twitter: 
>http://twitter.com/adamkovic
http://twitter.com/brucegreene
http://twitter.com/jameswillems
http://twitter.com/sirlarr
http://twitter.com/elysewillems

Tshirts n stuff: https://store.roosterteeth.com/

Binge Mode

More Dude Soup

See All Dude Soup Videos

Other Videos You'll Like

Comments (113)

  • Stunner900 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold The Political Frog

    1 month ago

    The most ironic part of  Disney severing ties with Felix over Anti-semetic accusations. Is that the founder of The Disney company, Walt Disney is accused of being an anti-semite

  • OakleySteve FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 month ago

    It's fun watching this because you hear Lawrence slowly dying, getting worse by the minute. I feel for him cause I'm dying of the flu too.

  • NaRu7o FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Hokage

    1 month ago

    I think it's not accurate to say that "people like reading the #1 person get taken down." I feel like it's better worded as "people want to know why the #1 is being taken down" when something is happening. Sure, there will be those who want to see him knocked a peg or two off the top but I feel like the majority of readers or people that are interested in it want to know what happened to cause it. I personally don't care for pewdiepie either way. I haven't watched his content, but I don't condemn it either. Simply hearing about it and the events that have taken place has made me want to know exactly what caused this series of events since most of what we know is based on speculation and sparse information. It's very important to make the distinction between what is desired and what is interesting when it comes to news since I fall into the latter category and I would assume that most of your viewers would as well. Great discussion though

  • ComradeCleaner FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I've watched a lot of commentary on the whole pewdiegate or whatever they're calling this holographic dumpster fire. It is true that PewDiePie did make some jokes in poor taste. Even still I can see this backfiring on the legacy media. With 10 million views a days PewDiePie's reach dwarfs any news provider on the planet (with the possible exception of the BBC). With a platform that large why would he need or want to go to the WSJ to comment? That's where (in my opinion) the legacy media continues to get things wrong. They're still operating under the assumption that they're the gatekeepers and to get information out you have to go through them. With the social media age that just isn't the case. You want information out there you go straight to the people. No middle man. No misconstruing statements. No clickbait. Just information. Pure and uncut. Welcome to the 21st century. 

  • AnwerTCL FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Last time pewdiepie was on the news was for WB paying him for ad and not disclose it and the media attacked him with all kind of clikcbait and he didn't do anything wrong that time on his response video it show you his view of the media and that they attack him just because he is the biggest name and that will generate buzz= views = money and didn't care about truth
    In this case they put a video with the article which was 100% deceptive and cheap tactic and many outlet called him Nazi in the title just for click and made what was intended as a joke an anti-Semitic even Lawrence called it that. 

    And now when people searched one of the journalists Twitter account the found some jokes about colors so does he have the moral ground to attack someone else on inappropriate jokes.
    After knowing that I can understand why pewdiepie upset with the media and think the attack him personally
    Which is expected to happen that media goes for the biggest not for the truth just because the clicks the will not do the same thing for a channel like funhaus which tell a lot of inappropriate jokes because it will not generate something for them so you can't say their intention was 100% pure and still they talk about another man intention when he made a joke, which you can never know.


    This is not spotlight kind of journalism this is looking for buzz journalism.


    Ps: I don't think this case can be compared to Kramer because Kramer used the n word when he was angry not in a joke.

  • beastdude FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Rock god in training

    2 months ago

    I vote for Gadget.

  • Shmittles FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Seems to me like Pewdiepie just made a mistake, and didn’t intend for things to go this way, but now it’s too late. A lot of business is more about perception of what’s going on than the actual substance of things. The story is out there, and it requires consequences. So even though most people should know it was a mistake, without any actual ill will, apologies and disassociation have to happen. Any attempt to shuffle it under the rug would be way worse for everyone involved.


    Honestly, this just seems like Disney's own fault. They intentionally associated themselves with one of the biggest icons of internet culture, but still wanted to maintain a family-friendly image. Internet culture isn’t family friendly. Even though this incident was a mistake, something like this was BOUND to happen sooner or later, and Disney either didn’t understand that or considered this inevitability an acceptable “loss” in the face of all the profits they’d make in the mean time.

  • turnt_undertoe FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I know it's just because she's using the mic at her desk that's already set up, but it always makes me a little sad to see Elyse all tucked away in the back like that... confused

  • DoshJavis FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I think that while Pewdiepie doesn't have an obligation to be sensitive to particular issues, it certainly wouldn't hurt to keep it in mind.  I genuinely do not believe that he's anti-semitic/ racist at all.  BUT, he should be aware of the current political climate.  I think he should keep in mind how prevalent racism and bigotry have become in recent months, and I agree that jokes like these run the risk of normalizing antisemitism. 


    That being said, I do think that the media has been cherrypicking small examples of pewdiepie making dark jokes and trying to paint him as a racist as a result.  There's better ways to start a conversation about offensive humor than by declaring someone a racist.


    So the moral of the story is Pewds, try and be more careful with your jokes


    Media/ liberals, just because someone makes crude jokes doesn't necessarily mean that they support nazism


    Weird Russian dudes, you do you. Praise Gadget, comrades

  • AussieTooth

    2 months ago

    WSJ definetely needed this story.... just typing "Wall Street Journal" or "WSJ" Google suggests it be followed by "Pewdiepie" just a quick look on the scope of how much views they are getting from this.

  • AussieTooth

    2 months ago

    Most people don't actually access to the internet actually. its less than half of the population that actually has access to it IIRC.

  • AussieTooth

    2 months ago

    did, did you guys watch the pewdiepie video? or was this recorder before he responded?

    • Obsolete13 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      they mentioned his response so i would say after

  • bethbubbles FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I think to get the whole picture you'd need to look at his audience demographics. I'm under the impression that his audience is made up of a lot of young people, like around the age 14 and at that age kids can be impressionable, and might grow up thinking that saying stuff like "Death to all Jews!" is a funny and acceptable thing to say beyond the realm of Youtube, which as we know as rational adults, isn't a particularly funny and acceptable thing to say.


    It's true that even though he said he was just "pushing buttons", yet the other stuff he did was like getting people to subscribe to Jacksepticeye just highlights a problem in society as a whole - that jokes about genocide and stuff is something that can and should be laughed at. I don't agree with that at all, especially when the holocaust is in living memory. Not that Auschwitz survivors are going to be logging in and watching PewDiePie everyday, but say that 14 year old does and then goes out and is joking with his mates about killing jews, and those kids joke with their friends and etc. etc. and it comes back to people like David Duke getting justification for their disgusting views.


    But then that territory gets dangerous again because it's coming into the realm of "Well shouldn't parents be educating their kids/limiting the content their kids have access to?" which I don't think anyone has the right answer to. The difference is like, we know for example that Nicki Minaj's Anaconda video is made for adults, and is not content aimed at kids, so if those kids watch that and it affects their world view, it's fair to say that Nicki shouldn't shoulder the responsibility because there are warnings that say that her content is not for kids. PewDiePie doesn't have those kinds of warnings/labels, so when kids' world views are affected by his "jokes", where does the responsibility lie?


    I don't know, and I don't think anyone here or at Funhaus really knows, but I think it would be interesting to look at. 


    tl;dr kids can be stupid and impressionable, and when innapropriate content is aimed at them the responsibility of the effects of that innapropriate content might lie with PewDiePie but they also might not

    • kslazarus FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      Just curious...  who gets to decide what is inappropriate?  Who determines when something that has been deemed inappropriate content has had an effect on stupid and impressionable kids?

    • bethbubbles FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      Psychologists and people with an understanding of how children's minds work, who can see that when kids are exposed to so much of a specific topic that it effects their ideals growing up. I don't know why suggesting that anti-Semitic content, which this was, is inappropriate for kids who don't know right from wrong yet makes someone naive and/or stupid, but okay.

      Because I now I have to clarify this, I'm not saying Pewdie is anti-Semitic, but what he did was.

  • bradenhuber FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Nope, I need you guys to go back and re-record this to all laugh at Adam's amazing joke at 16:03

  • HOMBREoscuro FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    will you guys ever do The Know again? I miss clap mondays:(

  • peckpogydah FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Peckpogydah

    2 months ago

    I just don't get why he is so popular.

    • AussieTooth

      2 months ago

      he was one of the first people to record himself doing playthroughs of videogames and having the camera on his face, im pretty sure you can guess how popular that is now, and he was way ahead of the people who do it now... at the time it was mostly bloggers.

  • Shaydykillar

    2 months ago

    On a lighter note on the Pewdiepie/Disney situation, to quote something Bruce said once upon a demo disk episode, it was their "Disiness plan" to drop Pewdiepie.

  • melyssaaaaa FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    i'm pretty sure pdp isn't anti-semitic, but it felt like he submitted/paid for that statement just to continue to push the buttons he's always been allowed to press without question. of course no reporter or journalist is going to delve into all of his videos to find something positive about him - wsj made him look very bad, but he'll survive.


    like it's been mentioned countless times, while no one should limit him or the type of content he makes, he should be much smarter about the things he says because, whether he likes it or not, he's one of the most famous people on the internet. he wrote that statement because he doesn't give a shit about offending people within his fan base (although that's highly unlikely, since 99.9% of his fans adore him) and he usually gets away with it.


    he kinda got boned by losing his show, but another MCN will pick him up if he wants that to be his next route. he apologized in his video because he probably felt like he had to, but mostly to defend himself on trying to be a "rookie comedian" (although i don't even think he should classify himself as a comedian in the first place - probably an entertainer more than anything). i don't think he feels bad about what he wrote/paid for at all - he's just pissed he got in trouble for it

  • themarchgirl FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I'm going to get downvoted for this (comments section was brigaded probably) but I think it's worth pointing out that actions have consequences, and Youtube videos are not created in a vacuum. 


    First off, Pewdiepie is a grown man. He got himself into this. He's also presumably a millionaire so he's probably fine.


    Secondly, this stuff is exactly his kind of humour, his videos are filled with stuff like slurs and rape jokes because that's what his content is. I don't approve of it or like it - all he seems to do is scream at things - but I'm not particularly interested in watching it and he doesn't get any of my money so whatever. I do think it's shit that his audience is so young and they don't have the maturity to realise that (hopefully) he's not being serious, unlike content such as Funhaus' where the tone and context makes it pretty obvious that you're joking, as well as being received by a mostly older audience. With constant screaming it's harder to tell. Anyway, my point is that this isn't the first time and won't be the last time that he does something like this, so I'm not sure why people are so insistent on painting him as some lovely man when his content is so.....odious? Isn't that why you people like him?


    Finally, if you want to keep arguing that ~obviously~ no antisemitism was implied in the delightful message he chose, then the best way you can paint this is still pretty horrendous. Pewdiepie decided it would be hilarious if he showed everyone exactly what crazy stuff these two really impoverished men would do for some cash. Aren't poor people hilarious? 


    Also Pewdiepie is being endorsed and supported by a lot of white supremacists following this so well done everyone for being on their side!! Good job!!

    • AggroPants FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      You are so out of touch and hypocritical.

      "Secondly, this stuff is exactly his kind of humour, his videos are filled with stuff like slurs and rape jokes because that's what his content is. I don't approve of it or like it."

      Yet you watch Funhaus which is full of Off Colour Jokes and borderline misogyny, Don't get me wrong though i do really like Funhaus, but you can't sit here and take the moral high ground saying his jokes are "Horrendous" and yet continue to watch Funhaus. 

  • kslazarus FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Thanks to FH for a great discussion.  I don't follow Pewd and think his handling of this has been shoddy... but WSJ didn't report news here, they created a sensationalized story complete with clickbait headline and accompanying "attack ad" video.  In an effort to avoid being one of the many walls of text...

    Pewd...  own your shit.  

    WSJ...  shame on you.

    FH... keep up the great work.

  • Noonins FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    The media have to make money and putting 'anti semetic' in their headline will ensure more clicks. It's must easier for them categorise it and slap a label on it rather than actually delve into what it is. Clickbait is the devil. Pisses me off. As with anything like this in two weeks most people will have forgotten about it and moved on and they'll be another bandwagon for everyone to jump on to. 


    The guy should be able to create whatever content he wants and make whatever jokes he wants (freedom of speech and all that) but at the same time he should be aware there will be consequences and backlash to his actions. Personally i find offensive humour funny, but i can understand why people get offended by certain things. Although in my opinion people seem to get "triggered" far too easily. It doesn't help that, like Funhaus said, the joke didn't really land, it was a shitty joke, i didn't particularly find it funny. But it all comes down to context in which the jokes being made.


    Certain jokes i would make with some friends, i definitely wouldn't with others, but this video is up on youtube, where anyone can see it, whether they've subscribed to him or not. I haven't watched a lot of his content but i had a couple of my friends that do and immediately linked me to this video because of this specific joke about the jews. And with him being the biggest youtuber he's deffo got a target on his back. 


    But coming back to the joke part, it's a fine line between being satirical (so while you're making fun of someones opinions while spouting what they say) and actually coming across as though you believe that. Funhaus do that a lot but you can always tell it's coming from the satirical angle. The problem is not everyone will always pick up on that or use it to legitimise their own views. 


    You gotta be so careful what you say online these days, especially if you represent or are associated with a larger company. It would be really interesting to know what his contract with them says, and how much it restricts what content he can make, if it does at all. But if they haven't properly vetted him before taking him on, its their own fault for just seeing him as a potential cash cow. 


    Hope my ramblings made sense, that's my two pence on the matter. 

    • melkomorgoth FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      "Death to All Jews" isn't a joke. It's cashing in on millennia of anti-Semitism.

    • Noonins FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      What do you mean by cashing in? 

    • TankEngineer FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      This has to be bait

  • Deaththemax FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    The sweets Lawrence is eating, are made in my home town Fleetwood UK!!

  • TankEngineer FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    My opinion on it was the entire joke of the "Death to Jews" was shock humor. Pewdiepie capitalizes off of shock humor like other Youtubers (Filthy Frank, idubbbz, Million Dollar Extreme, etc.) because they know it is EDGY TEENS are a market that they can make videos to. They make incredibly 'edgy' videos or humor that has 9 levels plus of irony. Also similar to what Adam had said, where the content was only meant for this 'playhouse' with a limited community.

  • JoJo13 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Joe

    2 months ago

    I'm not sure if Lawrence or Elyse remember, but I was privileged enough to have a conversation with them about comedic censorship at RTX Sydney. In that conversation we specifically talked about a joke made during the Google Trends panel about Aboriginal Australians. 


    I won't go as far to say the joke wasn't received well by the audience as it still garnered enough chuckles and laughs to keep the show running smoothly (i.e. it wasn't as if it was a showstopper or anything), however you could feel the tension in the room shift and a state of nervousness rise as the audience reacted in a way that indicated that they perhaps weren't sure of whether it was ok or not to laugh at said joke.


    My point in bringing this up is that when I was talking to you guys about this afterwards, the topic of comedic censorship came up and the idea of whether it is ok or not to make certain jokes. Looking back on the conversation now and in light of recent events concerning PewDiePie, I think I still reasonably stand by my point in the idea that jokes are dependent on the climate and context of the situation. I believe that while it is your right to make whatever jokes you want (freedom of speech, etc.), if you want to avoid potential backlash and do not want to deal with the ensuing consequences of any potential joke you make you need to make them dependent on climate and context.


    What is unfortunate for people like PewDiePie is that while he may think he is making jokes in the climate of his audience and the context of ridiculous things on the internet, there's a possibility that he perhaps still doesn't fully understand the scope of his fame and his position in the media world (a world where he is, in a lot of cases, as famous as a celebrity). My point here is that he may forgo the idea that the content he makes can be picked up on such a viral scale and have lasting consequences, which is why he may of been so quick to jump on the defensive when this whole thing blew up. To him, he was just catering to his fans, which is further consolidated by the fact that his fan-base largely supported him during this entire ordeal. 


    Anyway, that's just my perspective, and I may totally be wrong in my speculations.


    P.S. My point of course refers to jokes made in a public forum by well-known people, I'm not sure how valid it is in a scenario where you're just talking to your friends privately. 

  • TJTiMeLorD FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    jesus christ lawrence was a little bitch in this podcast

    • ADG12311990 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Meatbag

      2 months ago

      Sounds like that might be you...

    • TheMuffin18 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Full of nanners

      2 months ago

      I don't mind him being passionate but I absolutely hate when he gets snarky towards the other members. The fucking ad read can hold off for 30 seconds so Elyse can say her piece. It's not going to hurt anything.

  • Veryk FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    If Anthony Jesselnik made PewDiePie's "joke" no one would bat an eye. It's not the joke or the quality of the joke, but rather who made it. And WSJ made the article not to police the internet, but to make money. If WSJ was taking things out of context any response Pewds made might have also have been cherry picked for sensational material. (EDIT) And like you guys mentioned it would not fit the narrative that they were going for so it might not have appeared at all.)


    If Pewds did look at that bit and then decided to remove it, he might likely have felt like he would be censoring himself to avoid confrontation with social justice warriors and trigger happy sensationalist media outlets. Which would be in direct conflict with his desire to maintain creative control and to not be told what he can and cannot do. (WSJ=Wall street journal SJW=Social justice warriors. Coincidence? Cue conspiracy music)


    Regardless, His counterattack on the media has rallied and polarized his audience. Renewed the acceptance of hating PewDiePie. And has effectively allowed him to gain greater autonomy and become a free agent. Many outlets will be chomping at the bit to sign him on. 


    On the flip side the WSJ credibility has received a blow due to the out of context quotes, Adding to that, PewDiePie's bros are more active than many have anticipated so there may be more things coming. 

    "   Never of heard of this guy, but subbed now. Thanks wsj!  " - the top comment on his response video with 105408 likes (the video itself has 13 million views). If this shows us anything it is that this will have little to no lasting effect on PewDiePie.


    On the other hand WSJ should have made a fair amount of money off of this. So we should be seeing more and more of this kind of "Journalism" aka clickbait headlines, simply because it makes everyone money. (No surprises there) 



    At least that is my interpretation of events.


    TL;DR I was bored and vomited out words no one will read.

    • adamdothunt FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      Conversely, sensationalist, fake News, can be predicted to, and is indicative of, the slow death of traditional media.  


      You see, each time a sensationalist title, or article is published, it devalues the validity of said publisher, and media as a whole; a slow chisel, etching away at trust. While the viewership will indeed spike, the long term consequence will be there, as slow a they may be to manifest. If the business was stable, sensationalist practices aren't necessary, trust is more valuable. 


      There is an economic term - rent seeking behaviour - In which an industry adopts less than ethical practices to remain relevant. A relevance the news has not had since the creation of the internet. The News has, for a long time, been sensationalist (see Cohens - moral panic and folk devils) but sensationalist in the sense it elaborates a perspective. In this case the perspective is almost made up. - Pewdiepie [felix] is presented as an informative "post" base youtuber, in which his joke, are presented out of context, as anything but jokes. The videos music really hammers this point home. Any respectable journalist - all two of them - would scoff at the level of underhandedness employed by the WSJ. - Although I highly doubt any outside the youtube ecosystem will ever see the article for what it really is. 


      The other outlets demonstrate a more common practice: conformative news - an age old tradition. In which every other outlet reported not on felix, but on the WSJ article. As speed is everything now, real journalism, doesn't actually take place, news is simply cyclically reported. 


      You can make the pessimistic point, that fake news will make us stupid, but the far more likely outcome is a sea of sceptics., whom have taken their business elsewhere. 


      on another note -


      In spite of this - I can't help but feel felix baited the media into this article (In order to make a point and for attention). If you just stop and consider his past experiences of miss representation, the logical outcome of his videos should be evident. although I don't believe he expected the article to come from the WSJ. In any regard a smart move on his part, that many have failed to recognise.)



    • marsm1 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

  • Michael0612 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Lawrence rockin that sweet Off Topic shirt *thumbs up*

  • Sirspence777 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I have to say, I always appreciate how well Lawrence explains complex situations that they intend to discuss. It usually makes for a really well balanced discussion.

  • lkjhnsn7 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Pewdiepie has jokingly made antisemitic remarks before. If Disney and YouTube Red are just now paying attention to his content, then I kind of blame Disney and YouTube Red. You shouldn't endorse something if you don't know what it is to begin with.

  • Snitzor FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    FunHaus handled this situation (in my opinion) very well, and really seemed to be rational about it.  They were very respectful and realized that this situation isn't so black and white like most other videos I've seen on this subject.  When FH wants to be mature adults, they can be, and I like that.

  • SteelTiger FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I might be missing something here, but what happened to the set they used to have ? 

    • PrincessRyry FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      It just depends on what days they record the podcast. They've said that, weirdly, even though it's their set they still have to reserve it to record on occasion 

    • MoistDucks FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      they said it at the beginning, pre-recorded podcast are shot like this, live is on the set. reason behind that is that they cant go to the set whenever they want (i think the area or building is shared or off "campus")

    • Natrone FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      The area of their building they record in is a shared space so it makes sense to film pre-recorded content in their office where scheduling conflicts can't happen

  • Robjec FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I've never been disappointed in the comments on a Funhaus video before. Well not on the main site at least. come on guys just because you like pewds densest mean they didn't make a lot of valid points. 

  • shmanel FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I love when Lawrence went down some sort of Kramer-hole starting at ~37min.  Those are some of my favorite bits of these podcasts.

  • Cameyjw FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Cameron

    2 months ago

    Funhaus  play characters where are more often than not sexists and racist, the exact same as Pewdiepie does. Not much else to say, we all know you are joking, everyone knows pewdiepie was joking. Was never subscribed to him till now, because jokes, even if some people take offense, are important. 

    • Robjec FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      I don't know if you got the memo but funhaus is satire that mocks sexism and racism, and they talk quite often about how that's a very narrow road to walk without saying something they would regret. Elisa says so in this very video. like did you even watch the podcast? 

  • renoquakesfan FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Could not agree more with Lawrence's comments around the hour mark. Whether or not 

    PewDiePie intended it, small things like this can legitimize viewpoints for certain people. Antisemitism is still a major issue. Recently, there have been tons and tons of bomb threats against Jewish centers and when people do stuff like this (and more prominent people don't do anything at all) it adds a sense of legitimacy to certain people. 

  • TwoFat2Kidnap FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Okay so I love funhaus and all but I quit watching a lot of there videos because they just get into these fights. 


    • Robjec FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      fights? you mean commenting on what happened that week?

    • TwoFat2Kidnap FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 month ago

      I mean elyse and lawrence getting into there little fight.

  • ajpantuso FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    The subject of this podcast pretty accurately conveys the complexity of the interaction between society and politics. Entertainment and media as a whole act as conduits between society and politics. Politicians will attempt to exploit all forms of media to sway society and society hopes to sway politicians with media. The question is what are the goals of the entertainer or journalist? PewDiePie does not affiliate himself with a particular political agenda or audience and neither does WSJ. So let's say that each of their goals is for success as they define it. They are then inclined to produce content that is meaningful to their audience and also profitable for themselves (monetarily or otherwise). However, at the other end of the conduit is politics. WSJ was more aware of the current political atmosphere than PewDiePie. Even if PewDiePie says he takes no political stance he along with a number of youtubers have decided to not self-censor topics which are politically taboo. While that might endear you to people who deeply against censorship it also throws you in with the group of people who feel justified making insensitive jokes. Now you have a perceived political position and the media will challenge you on it because society wills it. WSJ would have no reason to make accusations against PewDiePie unless there was some portion of society who wants to condemn anti-semites (perceived or actual). Does persecuting PewDiePie who is very likely not anti-semetic in any way end anti-semitism? No, but neither did defeating the nazis. The point being that I don't know that there exists an effective way to change the hearts and minds of all society, but you can utilize media and entertainment to change the perception of xenophobic attitudes. So while there is an element of sensational profit-driven media I think that PewDiePie is more a victim of not recognizing that he is part of a much bigger process. 

  • Witedog47 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Taller than Tall

    2 months ago

    Low gravely voice? you mean sexy and seductive?

  • RedRully FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    i thought the joke was hilarious, because i don't have thin skin


    also i think maker leaving pewdiepie is justified but youtube cancelling his youtube red show which was finished and had other youtubers feature and getting rid of his premium advertising is wrong. 

    • RedRully FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      also lawrence please stop being such an asshole, like i usually agree with you and like you but you were unnecessarily being close minded and a dick. sorry just my opinion.

    • Squedex FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      How was he being a "dick". He made good points, hell they all did. Pewdiepie, like it or not, has a responsibility being the biggest YouTuber on the site to just be cautious. I'm not saying limit his humour to non riskay stuff, just make sure it's well executed and funny, like South Park does. He even admitted himself that the jokes weren't funny and poorly done. 


      However, WSJ were also in the wrong for severely taking Pewds' words way out of context, like him watching the nazi stuff in an SS uniform was literally him making a point that anyone could take that and make him look antisemitic and that's exactly what WSJ did!


      Just because someone has a different opinion to you doesn't mean they are an "asshole", instead of defaulting on insulting them, how about engaging and debating them in a mature way. Wanker. ;)

    • HoffyClan FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      Also, WSJ looks kinda sketchy when you take 9 videos out of all that he has done.  It just seemed like shitty reporting on their part.  I don't care for Pewdy, but it does seem that he's trying to be more mature by not blaming YouTube and Disney.


      I just keep thinking that in the end, this will change nothing for him.



      And her name was Brenda.

  • jakeprime FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Hiding racism/antisemitism etc. behind "humor" is disgusting and unforgivable. If you're not commenting ON those issues then you are merely normalizing them. This is the same root problem as Gamergate and the rest of this crap caused by the insecure white male population of the internet. Pewdiepie deserves whatever happens to him from this. Really appreciate the Funhaus crew talking about this!

    • Rook291 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      Yes the phrase "Kill the Jews" is on its face an anti-Semitic phrase, but intent and context are key to understanding the purpose of its use. Pewdiepie is not racist or anti-Semitic nor is he "hiding" any hate. Even if the joke offended you in any way doesn't mean he or any one else should be censored. Freedom of speech should be cherished and any attempt to curb it should be highly scrutinized as the consequences could be disastrous.

    • jakeprime FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      Freedom of speech does not mean you don't suffer consequences for saying things. And regardless, he's not losing ANY freedoms... still making millions with millions of followers. 

    • NicholasBaker FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      As a black male, Don't blame everything on the "white male" boogeyman man. and pewdiepie didn't deserve all the shit he got, he made a joke and old media figured it could attack him to make some money. I have no doubt money was the motivation here, it always is.


      I think Stephen Fry's quote works here 

      "It's now very common to hear people say, "I'm rather offended by that",

      as if that gives them certain rights. It's no more than a whine. It has
      no meaning, it has no purpose, it has no reason to be respected as a
      phrase. "I'm offended by that." Well, so fucking what?"

    • Paleyeti FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      Jokes normalize issues the same way video games cause violence. 

    • coralblue_ FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      Forcing people to censor themselves all of the time out of the fear that they'll be labelled a Nazi or an anti-semite etc is what really trivialises these issues because nobody is ever interested in creating a dialogue. Felix was able to create a joke out of one of the worst aspects in human history because of this. It's like trigger warnings. You're not actually interested in maybe informing someone why they offended you, you're only interested in shutting them up and that's why it's become a joke.

    • ImmortalEmpress FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      I agree with you. People say, "look at the context" antisemitism is antisemitism in any context. 

      It really is a trash justification, "it's funny," why is genocide funny to you? Why is this a topic you choose to make light of? What is gained by making light of genocide? "He's pointing out the absurdity" In 2017, you need to point out the absurdity of genocide for comedic effect? The absurdity was just lost on you...


      Although I do agree with others who've said that PewDiePie has always made this content so why pick him up only to drop him if you're afraid of controversy? At best it's a lack of due diligence on Disney's part at worst it looks like they got caught and are now covering their asses.

  • ProtestingPyro FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I feel like fruit crushing is more internet because it's actually ON the internet. Whereas the Gadget cult is documented online, it is more just for the cult to enjoy. However I may be misunderstanding the rules of the 'which is more internet' game.

  • lootsorrow FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    The gadget church is great, but are they nettin' harder? The fruit thing seems to only exist because of internet, but is that true about this cult?

  • sakurastar FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    I really love seeing Funhaus' perspective on current news events in these podcasts. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want every podcast to be of a more serious tone but when they pop up I'm always interested to hear their opinions on it as they always seem to have very well thought out, level headed arguments and look at the different sides of the argument. Many people have already talked about the Pewdiepie situation and a lot seemed to come from an emotional or angry place and were reacting to something they'd seen or heard rather than going through all the informational available and trying to understand why all parties behaved the way they did. I really appreciate that you encourage a civilised discussion about topics like this and you definitely give me a lot of food for thought with perspectives that I might not have considered before. Great podcast as always, shame about the lack of a post show but of course your health comes first, hope you feel better soon Lawrence!

  • Rook291 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Pewdiepie has been making risque content for years and Disney bought into him with this knowledge in mind. Wall Street Journal basically tasked 3 "Journalists" to look through all his videos and take around a dozen out of context jokes and write and article about it. WSJ also contacted Disney to question them about Pewdiepie's "anti-Semitic" comments. Disney has no choice really and has to terminate his contract for fear of being connected with him. Wall Street Journal slandered Pewdiepie's name and cost him millions of dollars in income. Their article was malicious and uncalled for, and Pewdiepie should go to court.

    • Noir7787 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      i agree with you but unfortunately the people who would be making the decision (judges/jury) are made up of people that won't understand nuance and context and he would probably lose the case. I hope I'm wrong and he does go to court. This was definitely slander and illegal, but people won't understand this in society as a whole until we're much older. >.>

  • 8bitdee my views are your own

    2 months ago

    I agree that it was not a personal attack on Felix (or as some of his biggest fans claim, a synchronized smear campaign by all media outlets), it was simply just another celebrity getting in the media's crosshairs. 


    The problem is of course, the lack of context acknowledgment. The article may have been written up with the intent of being neutral, but there is no context acknowledgement from their part. But, as I said it was probably not a personal attack on Felix, but it was definitely set up as a controversy to get clicks. And the problem is that it was not a controversy at all. Regardless of whether he is good at his comedy or not, it was still just a joke. As James said, it was simply a bad bat swing. Oh well. It was the media that took that bad at bat and elevated it into more than just a flat joke in order to stir up controversy and get the clicks.


    The proof is in the article's title and horrible accompanying video. There's a video Felix posted a few months back about this kind of thing. The media does not take into consideration how they're reporting will affect the person's image they're reporting on. I agree with Adam, most people won't read past the first two paragraphs. An article may be neutral and its aim may be to simply present facts and report on them, but that's not how you get clicks. You get clicks by creating a clickbait title that creates controversy and that's the thing people latch on to and end up getting out of the whole thing: "Pewdiepie posted anti-semetic posts." On the video I was talking about, Felix was commenting how people in his life, friends and family, see those titles and think "what the fuck, Felix?" and he has to constantly explain himself to them. Suddenly everyone around him believe he's racist, or sexist, or whatever because those clickbait articles gain traction and passed around everywhere so much that the context is completely lost by the time they reach the average person. That's the issue I have with the way media report things, in that they have no consideration how a person's reputation and personal life gets affected when they go out of their way and accuse and stir up controversy with their titles.


    I don't believe the WSJ was trying to take down Felix like he and other people believe, but a lot of bloggers who call themselves "journalists" may be trying to. Just look at Polygon and how many articles they have posted since then, shitting on Felix and defending themselves from his statements. You guys talk about Felix being akin to Trump with his defensive approach; I say bloggers are even more like Trump in that aspect. There's a Kotaku employee, her name escapes me right now, who took to twitter to post of an article she wrote years ago about how bloggers see youtubers as competitors and the existence of tension between them. She doesn't choose sides on the whole Felix thing, but she does note that this type of attack by bloggers who feel threatened by the rise of youtubers isn't new. 


    At the end of the day what happened is that the media blew it out of proportion. Are his jokes funny? That's subjective. Is Felix anti-sementic? I don't think so, a lot of people who know him don't think so, and I don't think even the people writing these articles and blog posts believe he is; they just see the power in "[insert famous person here] is a racists" clickbait article. 


    Should Felix change and moderate his comedy? Only if he wants to keep certain contracts, because as he acknowledged in his response video, there are some things that just break down business ties and he has no problem with that. His issue is in the way media report on things. Other than that, unless he's an actual anti-semite spewing hate and asking his followers to do the same, he should continue to do his brand of comedy as much as he wants to. Whether or not he's a good comedian to people outside his audience is irrelevant because at the end of the day his audience watch his content specifically for that.



    P.S. you quickly dethroned women crushing fruit with their biceps? Quick, let's get that article rolling about how sexists you are!


  • MeanMisterWalrus FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

     "This tips their hand a little bit". That is an understatement. The key thing to glean from all this is the utterly dishonest way in which the WSJ reported on this (specifically their video). They took a clip of PDP dressed as a Nazi, presented it as evidence of PDP expressing sincere antisemitism, despite the fact that the video that they took it from was about PDP complaining how the media take his videos out of context in order to paint him as an anti-Semite. I repeat; they took a clip, out of context, in order to paint him as an anti-Semite from a video mocking the way in which the media take clips, out of context, in order to paint him as an anti-Semite. How moronically ironic and dishonest is that? It UTTERLY tips their hand. I appreciate the way in which you guys try to be fair and impartial by exploring the grey nuances with the situation (especially the bit about how well the joke itself was executed - which is the only element of the story worth debating or questioning in my eyes) but you should call bullshit where bullshit is due to be called. Sure, whole portions of this issue are complex, however that doesn't mean that all of it is. Some of it is very simple; the WSJ deliberately obfuscated the facts about PDP's content in order to support the narrative that he's an anti-Semite, despite the fact that the joke he made wasn't more or less risque, or worse conveyed, than some examples from cartoons, films, stand-up, TV, and various Funhaus videos in fact. If they had a valid argument, there would be no need to report on it in such a under-handed, malevolent manner. So the way they called out PewDiePie specifically, and then dishonestly extracted out-of-context examples to make their point was frankly bizarre (and I was surprised that you guys didn't really make a bigger deal about this aspect). Thoughts?

    • BABBS FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      2 months ago

      Also, that uniform was a British officer's uniform, which is another huge miss on context.

  • BadgerDog FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Any post show? None during prerecording? 

    • 8bitdee my views are your own

      2 months ago

      Lawdog says at the end that there isn't one this week due to time constraints and him being sick.

  • beedle246 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Do not be Cody Be Haggar

    2 months ago

    James rocking that FUN Wrestling shirt

  • ShoJu FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    Best Prime Minister of Israel joke I've ever heard there at the end James! ;D

  • ZeusWolf45 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    2 months ago

    The media has been on a downward spiral for many years when it comes to reporting things in context and with actual facts in them....as someone who has been through a situation dealing with the media omitting or not even attempting to put any facts in a story that almost ruined my life both perfessionaly and personally I see PDP's reason for being on the defensive side...not okay with the poorly executed "joke" but I do think the media could have worded things in a way to make the point that his actions caused him to lose Disney's business partnership or what ever you want to call it without just lowering them selves to almost smut shaming level....and yes I did mean smut not slut...