You must log in or register to comment.
30 minutes of this video is an interview… that touches on different aspects of the beast operation beyond the scope of the first.
The YT account only has two videos (the two about beast).
I don’t believe he himself (the creator) was an influencer.
He turned off monetization on the video.
Thanks for the preface, but all this reply does is stir the pot without adding anything of value to the convo.
To be honest, they seem to be taking a very media literate approach (impressively so, they definitely learned some stuff about YouTube and how to do this kind of thing) to this whole thing, so I kind of get the “farming for views” stance.
But I get it since that means they are actually getting traction instead of just being a thing that drama YouTube talks about for a week and gets swept under the rug. The video notes he’s a very powerful figure in a relatively small town, so they need media pressure on their side.
People have to be able to question the motive of content without being accused of “stirring the pot”. Personally I really appreciated that the comment you replied to was posted, as it led you to reply to it, so that I could get more context and information.
Ya know what? Fair.
I do think that’s a reasonable take, but the person I replied to seemed unwilling to engage with the content in question but still wanted to chime in casting random uninformed doubts. Doesn’t add much of anything. If they had cited parts of the video that made them question it I wouldnt have said anything, because honestly I ALSO asked myself those questions.
