>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
So why did he remove it? He seemed to have a pretty solid case against the WSJ. He seemed to have expooped them.
Gavin Thompson
It was a different video.
Christopher Gonzalez
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.
Wyatt Gomez
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
Brody Sanders
There was a part 2, you Dutch whore.
Camden Perry
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.
Ethan Hill
itt: kike defenders
Jeremiah Brown
I see. I would have thought only the uploader would be able to receive revenue from the video.
Lincoln Perez
There was a part 2 He is a shill and acts like youtube and all the international corporations are victims and got harrased by the evil WSJ
In fact youtube worked together with (((them))) to legitimize the censorship they will be doing for the EU and still act like a victim.
Thomas Murphy
He released a part two, then took it down. Also yes, he's the ultimate YouTube jew
Xavier Moore
link me the EU anti-racism facebook/google info? Heard about it, never found anything solid.
Pewdiepie also has a Pepe computer aka /OURFUCKINGGUY/ confirmed
Colton Peterson
based ethan he is one of my favourite internet jews
Camden Rogers
It's on the german news right now. 3sat They talk about the german gouverment and the EU suing google youtube etc if they don't remove "fake news" or rightwing content I have some sources in german, bit never really looked for/found english sources sry.
Christian Ross
I don't care about YouTube politics and neither should anyone else
Tyler Parker
Thanks, man!
Jason Phillips
>has the integrity to admit he was wrong
So he's still better than WSJ
Alexander Rogers
former nuclear codes crash and burn
Samuel Edwards
Am I too far gone into conspiracy-territory to think this whole ad-debacle is an attack on right-wing youtubers?
A few others have pointed this out: Sites with censorship, "odd" rules and all that jazz often lean left; see: Reddit and Twitter. It's obvious these places are shilled and people who are against the liberal groupthink are suppressed or even outright removed.
Then we have places without all this censorship and -surprise, surprise- they lean right. See: Sup Forums, Youtube, comments on news articles (even though they get removed). Hell, even Facebook comments are somewhat free-speech-ish.
Could it be that (((they))) are seeing this aswell and are wanting to kill these outlets? I mean, they already branded Sup Forums as an evil place full of degenerates etc. Are they now trying to kill, or atleast reduce, right-wing youtubers?
Lucas Cook
If I ever needed proof that all that's left in Sup Forums are under aged NEETS this thread is it.