>makes a new video to explain why the previous video was wrong
>ad revenue shekels
>claim the old video was taken down because of this
>video is still up, conveniently everyone that hasn't seen the old video watches it anyway
>more add revenue shekels
Is Ethan the ultimate Jew?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
youtube.com
eurojewcong.org
techcrunch.com
adage.com
gipec.com
twitter.com
shekelbump
So why did he remove it?
He seemed to have a pretty solid case against the WSJ. He seemed to have expooped them.
It was a different video.
There were two videos about the WSJ, he took the second one down, which the "Why we removed our WSJ video" is about.
You're bitching about this guy fact checking and you're being misleading in a more retarded way. Good work, jews are smarter than you.
apparently the video got claimed by someone else, hence no revenue being made by the uploader of the chief keef dancing to the-n-word video
There was a part 2, you Dutch whore.
He removed part 2 because he felt like there was a chance the video was actually claimed and could have still been running ads. I don't yet know what that means.
itt: kike defenders
I see. I would have thought only the uploader would be able to receive revenue from the video.