At least, some of the recent controversies.

  • DJDarren@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    167
    ·
    1 year ago

    Big shout out to them leaving the links to LTT merch in the description. Venal fucks.

    • clobubba@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      66
      ·
      1 year ago

      They probably have some internal application where they literally do fill-in-the-blanks on the description and timestamps and the rest is a template.

      • Aasikki@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        54
        ·
        1 year ago

        They definitely have a default description set. Bitching about that kind of small detail is pointless when there are plenty of more serious things to talk about.

          • Chariotwheel@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            45
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, people keep making excuses for them.

            “There isn’t enough time, they have to eat and drink and sleep”

            Then delay the video until it’s done. That’s part of the core issues that kicked this whole episode off. Them rushing out videos without care.

            • Aasikki@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not trying to make excuses for them, I just think that picking on a low hanging fruit like the description which is more or less exactly the same for every video, feels a bit cheap to me. There are plenty of examples of them being in the wrong with far worse impact than that.

            • anlumo@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              On YouTube, creators don’t earn anything unless a new video is released frequently. They have to sustain a huge corporation based on that. I think that it’s a bad decision to go for that income structure in the first place, but there they are.

              • QHC@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                1 year ago

                They don’t “have” to do anything. LMG chose to hire dozens and then hundreds of people in an effort to grow as fast as possible. Linus could have prioritized accuracy or quality over quantity, but that would have made less money, so he didn’t.

              • GhostMagician@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                1 year ago

                They chose to financially put themselves in a situation where they are forced to release content at that frequency because they chose to expand operations and drastically increase expenses compared to other channels. It’s their decisions that created the work cycle that is needed in pursuit of exponential growth over a more financially sustainable model that affords the luxury for a less hectic release schedule.

                It’s getting old seeing people keep making they have to do it this way when it is the situation they created for themselves.

              • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                It’s possible to release videos frequently while not rushing the production for each video. They’ll just need more editors and writers to spread the load. e.g. instead of working on 3 teams working on 3 videos in parallel and rushing them to finish in 3 days, they can have 6 teams working on 6 videos in 6 days to achieve similar output (releasing 1 video per day) without overworking the team while keeping the attention of detail high. GN even mentioned it in their video. LTT has over 100 full time employees already, so they definitely have the resource to scale up their production team.

        • QHC@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          31
          ·
          1 year ago

          How about the multiple merch plugs in the video itself or that the video was monetized, in direct contrast to the original video from GN not being monetized?

        • DJDarren@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          1 year ago

          Perhaps, but I see it as indicative of the problem in general. A slapdash attitude where they don’t pause for a second to consider what they’re actually doing, which, you’d think they might try and do under a 20 minute video where they grovel and scrape and beg forgiveness.

        • happyhippo@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not a small detail and it’s not pointless to point it out.

          When you messed up so big, you wanna make sure your “we got this, folks” video is impeccable.

      • Chozo@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        1 year ago

        100% this. Whoever is in charge of uploads is almost definitely using a macro to auto-fill every description. If you look, the description credits the intro/outro music which weren’t even used in this video at all.

        Most YT channels do this, very few big channels actually put anything besides their own links in descriptions.

      • Fuck Yankies@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        EDIT: did not know about the allegations from the former employee and it just saddens me. I was only aware of the cooling block and it’s auctioning when I wrote this.

        This thread you made is cringe. Grow tf up and try to have some understanding for once in a while.

        Big corporations will always pull fake apologies and complain that consumers are beligerent little hotheads who’s opinion doesn’t matter in the long run. You’re proving their point right now.

        But if say LTT actually does pull out of this amicably and their words are followed by prompt action that remedies the situation, we can in turn look at Intel, AMD, Nvidia and the likes and say “see? That’s how it’s done”.

        As tech jesus himself said in his expose video is that we all make mistakes.

        Do not attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity, and the way LMG has been working has been stupid.

        Don’t give the bastards an inch, I understand. But let us be clear about who the bastards are and I still don’t think LMG has gone over to the side of evil.

        Now they’re stepping back, taking the time to make amens (I hope they really give that company they shafted a much needed boost for instance, as a bare minimum) and we should be here for that.

        If you’re just here to whine, fine. But don’t think you’re adding to the conversation or saying anything meaningful, because you are in fact just trolling.

        Again, try and have some understanding. It’s very important for us to do that, because secterianism and feudes will in the end hurt the community, and also the consumer, because we have to stay on top of this.

        • prole@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          49
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ooohhh fanboys doing (presumably) unpaid PR work in the comments!

          Does this mean lemmy has “made it”?

  • Scary le Poo@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    126
    ·
    1 year ago

    So I just watched the entire team apologize for Linus and then Linus proceeded to attempt to gaslight everyone watching.

    Fuck this guy.

    • flora_explora@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, I feel now it is out that he is a narcissist and it just feels so obvious. He is gaslighting everyone and people try to clean up after him, that’s just symptomatic. He won’t change, he will maybe get managed better by the people around him to reduce the damage. But there isn’t anything else to hope for.

  • Animortis@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    106
    ·
    1 year ago

    From the majority of the team, this is a pretty good and textbook PR mea culpa. “Here’s how we screwed up, here’s how we’re fixing it.”

    The pushing the merch was tone-deaf and the defensive whining from Linus was NOT on-point, though. I appreciate it ended with “how I’m going to fix it,” but he should keep the defensive shit to himself.

    • erwan@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      It would be better if the CEO could learn to read a prompter so it looks like he’s not reading one.

      This is pretty annoying to watch with his eyes looking above the camera and going left and right constantly.

        • meteokr@community.adiquaints.moe
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          1 year ago

          To be fair to them, they aren’t hosts. Its glaringly obvious they are not in-front-of-camera people. It does feel like its done on purpose to appeal emotionally.

    • vegetarian_pacemaker@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Glad to see this video, even with some of the drawbacks mentioned in the comments. I think everyone needs a path to redemption and LMG should get a chance. I think that this “reflection” should be more regular. LMG is no longer a small company and like it or not, they need to regularly be ahead of these situations. I really hope that they will take a week ever month or two to review any new screw ups and remedy them. Process will not solve everything, ensuring a company culture that has key values will triump process. It takes time however. I wish them the best.

      • fckgwrhqq2yxrkt@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        I run a small company, at what size do I need to start worrying about treating people respectfully? My belief is companies shouldn’t get a pass, no matter the size. Why are we ok with it happening at all at this point? It’s not 1960 anymore.

        • vegetarian_pacemaker@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I was referring to what was stated in the video. The issues with poor benchmarking and the billetlabs issue (email sent to the wrong recipient). I am not sure why you think any of it implied that it is ok to treat people without respect if the organisation is below a certain size. I was referring to ensuring that a company culture of being humble, responsible and accountable via a monthly or bi monthly review. It could have potentially caught the issue with billetlabs and even several issues with the benchmarking. This is perhaps easier done in a small company but needs to be nurtured and reinforced in a bigger one. I hope my position is more clear.

  • thingsiplay@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    1 year ago

    @Chozo The end of the video:

    But Dbrand did offer

    … is basically advertisement for the brand, packed into “a joke”. Why would they mention it otherwise?

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    1 year ago

    I agree that it’s good they’re acknowledging the problems but that video felt like an interrogation. So corporate and weird.

        • CleoTheWizard@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          31
          ·
          1 year ago

          Believe it or not, I think he has a point and isn’t at all a hypocrite. He’d show you how to pirate and torrent stuff (and has before) while also telling you he doesn’t recommend stealing. What he was saying is that the content isn’t meant to be free. The ads pay for the content. So not watching ads means the producer doesn’t get paid. Its a soft form of piracy but he wasn’t telling you what to do about that. He just said “Be aware you’re not giving people anything for their content”. I don’t know why thats controversial, he’s not even suggesting its illegal or even immoral. I never understood the arguments here but I also dont visit twitter

          • NightOwl@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            1 year ago

            Piracy I associate as an illegal act that carries penalties of fines and imprisonment. Like real piracy…

            As blocking is legal and something even the FBI recommends. This is more a website shortcoming than an act of piracy. Which if blocking ads is piracy then at that point the word just becomes diluted, and at that point who even cares.

            • Chozo@kbin.socialOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Which if blocking ads is piracy then at that point the word just becomes diluted, and at that point who even cares.

              Isn’t “taking something without paying” what piracy is? With YouTube, the “payment” is your time spent watching an ad. If you bypass that “payment”, are you not effectively pirating the content?

              It doesn’t seem that diluted to me. I actually agree with Linus’s take that adblocking is piracy. It’s just a much more socially and legally-acceptable form of piracy.

              If anything, I feel like adblocking on YouTube does even more direct damage to content creators than pirating blockbuster movies does to movie studios, honestly. If ten thousand people pirate a new Marvel movie, Disney’s not going to hurt too bad from that. But if ten thousand people adblock a YouTuber, that can significantly hurt their income by damaging their ad impression ranking. Advertisers on YouTube set their rates based on the engagement they get from a channel, and drops in engagement will typically result in drops in CPM.

              It’s the reason I pay for YouTube Premium, myself. I use YouTube pretty much all day long, and I want the creators whose content I spend my day watching to get paid for their work. And if not for YTP, I would 100% be adblocking YouTube, otherwise.

              • klubsanwich@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                1 year ago

                If I tune into an NFL game using an OTA antenna, then turn off my TV during commercials and turn it back on for the game, would that be piracy?

                • the_third@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  There is no back channel to measure that so the impact to the content producer is way less direct.

              • NightOwl@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s a whole lot of words for what in the end is not piracy with no laws being broken. There’s a difference between a moral argument and law breaking.

                • lloram239@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Lots of piracy is also not breaking the law. Copyright violations are illegal, but that involves making copies, which you don’t do when you stream a movie from a pirate site. It’s the site provider that is breaking the law, not the viewer at the other end.

                  In the end it doesn’t matter if you call it freeloading, piracy or whatever. You can twist the definitions of those words any way you want. What matters is that the content provider isn’t getting paid.

              • ditty@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s not illegal to look away from a billboard or to close my eyes during a trailer at the movies, which seems more akin to using an adblocker in a browser.

                • Chozo@kbin.socialOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  “Not acknowledging” and “directly interfering with” something are two different things.

              • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                No, taking something without paying is theft. Piracy has many definitions, but none of them that simple.

                -Robbery or other serious acts of violence committed at sea.
                -The hijacking of an airplane.
                -Copyright or patent infringement.
                -The illegal interception or use of radio or television signals.
                -An instance of piracy.
                -In geology, that process whereby, because of a higher natural gradient, and therefore more efficient eroding power, one stream cuts back a divide and taps off the head-waters or a tributary of another stream. The captured stream usually turns a sharp angle into its new course and leaves a wind-gap where it formerly flowed. Also called stream-piracy.
                -Robbery upon the sea; robbery by pirates; the practice of robbing on the high seas.
                -Literary theft; any unauthorized appropriation of the mental or artistic conceptions or productions of another; specifically, an infringement of the law of copyright.

          • meteokr@community.adiquaints.moe
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            1 year ago

            Possibly a hot take, but as I understand it, content creators of his size should be viewed that the viewer is the product, content creator is the seller, and the sponsor/advertiser is the buyer. It’s the content creators job to sell our eye balls and brain space. However, just as a fish resists being captured by a fisher, I resist being sold. Adblocking is my resistance as a product. So producers of said product need to work harder to get enough of their product to be profitable. Should their be a drought, or if my tools are not maintained properly, then is it stealing if my crops die? Did my wheat fields steal from me when they didn’t grow enough for me to be a profitable farmer? I am the product being sold, I don’t “owe” them anything for harvesting me. It’s up to THEM to make my eyes and data worth harvesting to be sold to advertisers.

            • CleoTheWizard@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I see what you mean but I don’t agree. The deal being made here is obvious and you’re signing up to give them data in exchange for watching a video. You’re also signing up to view their ads. You have an option not to be the product at all. You already have the wheat, but you’re giving the middleman less than what was arranged, not just producing less.

              And if you view it as okay to not give them what they’re asking for while getting the content anyways, that’s chill. Just recognize that you’re paying less for the content than they’re asking. This is even more enforced by YouTube and news papers who charge for ad free experiences.

              • meteokr@community.adiquaints.moe
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The deal being made here is obvious and you’re signing up to give them data in exchange for watching a video. You’re also signing up to view their ads.

                I don’t buy this rhetoric. By your view, then if I don’t watch an ad, then I don’t get the content. Yet on YouTube I get the content inspite of declining to view the ad. Some websites do not let me see the content, unless I see their ads. That’s fine, I just go to a different site or spend my time doing something else. This rhetoric is to help businesses make money, which is fine, but I have no interest in furthering their narrative. If websites block me from using ad block, then it is entirely within their right to deny me access to their content. *

                If you are not paying for a good or service, you are the product. That is my claim. The ad is not the price paid, it is the medium someone is using to collect my market value. Were I to walk to a store, and tell them I wanted something in exchange for seeing their billboard on the highway I’d be laughed out the building.

                *Yes there are ways around this, but I think that is outside the scope of this discussion on ads.

                • CleoTheWizard@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I want to be clear still, piracy isn’t a problem or wrong necessarily. I’m not pushing a corporate narrative by saying this, I’m more concerned about creators and other sites that use ads for revenue such as newspapers. So if you want to “pay” a site without money, don’t pirate their content. That’s all. That’s similar to what Linus has said.

                  But I think this is somewhat similar to asking you for a ticket at the door for a movie. If the “ticket” is watching the ad and they’re asking you to buy the ticket (with premium) or get it from ads, bypassing the doorman would mean it’s piracy. Doesn’t even matter if the doorman doesn’t try to stop you. Doesn’t matter if they don’t pull you out of the movie.

                  You being the product is irrelevant to the piracy thing. But it is relevant to the moral thing

              • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                If I DuckDuckGo something and a video pops up and I watch it, I made no affirmative assent to giving them any data. Even if I go to YouTube.com, I made no agreement. Only if I make an account do I make any sort of contractual agreement with Google. If they only want to show their videos to those who agree to their policies, that’s their perogative. That they haven’t done so suggests that they know and allow people who haven’t done so to watch anyway.

                • CleoTheWizard@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Purchasing and pirating don’t have contractural agreements. You don’t have to have a ToS to pirate something.

                  If DuckDuckGo does block the ad in their browser, they’ve done the work for you. And if they do not but instead Google decides to serve it to you without ads in a browser, it’s not piracy to not have ads.

                  As long as the intended revenue of the content you’re viewing is being blocked, you’re pretty much pirating it. Doesn’t mean it’s wrong, it’s just a definitional thing.

          • snaggen@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            I do not block ads. I however use Privacy Badger to block tracking cookies, which means that I don’t see ads. I will see all ads that are not tracking me, which seems to be none. Is protecting my privacy also piracy?

            • CleoTheWizard@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              It is, yes. It’s a separate conversation of if it should be illegal or immoral to keep your privacy this way. But as long as you are violating the intended method of revenue for the content you’re viewing, that’s piracy to me.

              I think most people hear piracy and think it’s immoral or illegal, but there are very valid reasons to pirate content such as game and movie preservation.

              • Boozilla@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yup, illegal does not mean immoral or unethical. It just means some rich or powerful person doesn’t like what you’re doing. There’s a lot of overlap, of course. Many illegal acts are also immoral or unethical. But it’s not a 100% overlapping Venn diagram. Also YT is kind of evil, so it’s piracy against an evil corporation as much as the content creator. The smarter content creators have sponsors and embedded ads and don’t rely on YT for anything.

              • snaggen@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                The implicit contract is to show an ad for a service, but they are actually violating the contract by attaching other things to the ads. They then use the ads to steal information that they then sell without my consent. So, if anything we are discussing honor amongst thieves.

                • CleoTheWizard@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s not like you see the ads that have trackers, they get blocked. So it’s still part of the agreement sort of. And you’re also aware that it’s revenue for them. People assume it’s a moral argument, it’s not. You can pirate from absolutely evil people, but it’s still piracy. That’s why I don’t view it as worth arguing over for the most part. I WANT people to realize that it’s piracy but that they’re actually doing something ethical.

    • happyhippo@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Same, I unsubbed back then.

      (Thanks Louis Rossmann for existing, BTW).

      Recent events only confirmed that my choice was right.

      I unsubbed from MKBHD as well a while ago, I’m not at ease with YouTubers becoming corporations (or getting close to).

  • HurlingDurling@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    1 year ago

    I loved LMG and watched their videos for years, but if you are going to put out false or exaggerated data knowingly, or auction off a one of a kind prototype, would pass me off but I might tune in from time to time for the entertainment.

    But if you are called out on this and instead of trying to do the right thing you double down and even straight up lie to try to make a case where you aren’t the bad guy, then I am done with LMG channels as I can not support a company with this clown.

  • Xamrica@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    IMO a good answer and directly adresses my biggest stated problem of “we know stuff goes wrong, but we don’t care about them” (see https://lemmings.world/comment/1218294)

    The thing about Madison: if true it’s very concerning, but for now it’s only one person who told about these problems and I don’t know her enough to trust her like that without proof. In contrast: I trust GN and they showed proof

    But that doesn’t mean you should ignore these accusations and I would like to see an answer from LMG.

    This is MY opinion on this matter. Your opinion may vary!

    • andrew@radiation.party
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Re: Madison, she sprinkled a bunch of non-issues (edit: I don’t mean to downplay the more serious issues she raises! I’m concerned that this would leave room for others to do so) or things that are normal for companies that aren’t super huge- the journal/lined paper debacle for example. Of course the company focused on profit is going to ask you to make do with essentially the same thing. That’s super normal.

      Being asked to manage the OF despite objections isn’t super bad when you are literally hired just to do social media. It’s unpleasant, but most jobs are going to have unpleasant moments. At a similar pay scale, I’ve been required to go into homes where folks had COVID. Coworkers have been shot at. I’ve seen things I really would have preferred not to. No job is perfectly sane in that sense.

      Some of the issues where Madison said “they wanted me to do x and I couldn’t because y” (red footage editing/ram comes to mind) feel like issues where she would be told something, then would vent in her head instead of going “hey, I don’t have enough ram to edit that footage!” - something I’ve encountered a ton with less experienced (in a business sense, not skill) hires.

      The managerial and behavioral issues she brings up are awful but not entirely surprising given the type of folk who stick around there. It indicates a systemic issue and that usually happens due to a lack of oversight and course-correction, or outright malicious management. I’m hopeful that it’s the former.

      Last but not least, she repeatedly states it was her dream job. This is an experience that should hopefully show her to never meet your heroes! Dream jobs usually suck unless you get lucky, because they have lots of rough edges. Hopefully she’s doing something that brings her more joy now.

      • twistedtxb@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        77
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can’t force a woman to manage an OF account against her will, knowing VERY WELL what she’ll be exposed to. That’s fucked up.

          • eendjes@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            64
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because the internet is exceptionally shit against women in particular, and because she clearly stated she didn’t want to do it.

            This is kinda basic stuff.

            • SuperSleuth@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              18
              ·
              1 year ago

              She’s just the manager of the account, not publicly facing on OnlyFans. She was asked to complete a task well within her job description, that is not against her will, she is against the job. A before you say looking at genitalia wasn’t in the job description I urge you to look up what facebook moderation is like.

              • eendjes@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                37
                ·
                1 year ago

                The kind interactions (including pictures and such) you get on OF vastly differs what you will get on other platforms. That’s not in the job description.

                And to your last point, she was a social media manager, not a Facebook moderator. How does that compare? Are you intentionally making bad faith arguments?

                • SuperSleuth@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Are you intentionally making bad faith arguments?

                  No, lets keep this civil my guy.

                  She is a social media manager, onlyfans is social media regardless of the content that is usually posted. As for the reason I brought up Facebook moderation is, what do you think is usually posted there? Minion memes? Photos from trips? Well those moderators are often subjected to beheadings, rape, and other very graphic content. Do you think that was explicitly stated when they got hired?

                  Of course, Facebook isn’t exactly the premier ‘good place to work’, but this is common throughout any industry that takes submissions for the populous. And I am not making any arguments whatsoever on whether or not she should actually have to see “comments from people talking about how they wanted to fuck me and my co workers.”.

          • Juniper@skein.city
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            35
            ·
            1 year ago

            It was expressly against her will as per her own words. And as for why “a woman”, its rather well known women already deal with much more sexual harassment and maltreatment online than men do. Just look at the market of AI generated porn of celebrities and online personalities as proof of this. So forcing a woman, who already has a public presence no less, to manage a platform such as OnlyFans, and constantly see and have to manage sexual objectification and harassment towards her as well as her coworkers, is unacceptable in my opinion.

            • SuperSleuth@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              1 year ago

              She is not publicly facing on OnlyFans she manages the account. So her being a woman has absolutely nothing to do with your last sentence. Of course I won’t debate your personal opinion, but she isn’t being forced. It’s a job within her job description.

              • Juniper@skein.city
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                30
                ·
                1 year ago

                This will be my final reply on the matter as I do not believe you are operating in good faith. But in case you are:

                Firstly, the idea that you “cannot be forced to do something within your job description” is unequivocally false, and a sign of a toxic work environment. She actively requested to not be put in charge of a platform that made her uncomfortable, and the request was denied and she was forced, against her will, to do so. I have never in my life worked at a place where I could not request to be taken off a project or task due to being uncomfortable with it. This is not a point of discussion, this is a categorical fact.

                Secondly, it does not matter that she was not public facing on OnlyFans. She, alongside her coworkers, were active public figures on multiple LMG affiliated channels during her employment. And OnlyFans is a platform known to be near exclusively used for sexual gratification, and it is therefore entirely unsurprising that the LMG OnlyFans account received a large amount of sexual advancements, objectification, and harassment of LMG employees. And due to my prior comment, I fully believe a large majority of what was received would have been targeting the women employed at LMG. Therefore, putting one of the main victims of said harassment and objectification in charge of managing it is wholly and entirely unacceptable behavior by the management at LMG.

                These are not complex concepts, and are not even all that contemporary anymore. And as such I do not feel there is any real discussion to be had on the matter, there are people more intelligent than I that do a better job expressing these things in more empirical detail. I suggest you seek them out if you need more detail than I have provided here.

          • 4am@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            ·
            1 year ago

            Have you seen how men act when they’re horny? Especially on the internet? She probably still gets gross DMs constantly.

            They basically set her up for harassment for life.

            • SuperSleuth@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t know what you mean about harassment for life. She wasn’t publically facing on the OnlyFans. And yes I have seen. You didn’t answer my questions however.

              • Chozo@kbin.socialOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                They probably meant “sexual harassment”. Legally speaking, “sexual abuse” typically refers to sexual assault against a child. Verbal/online interactions would generally fall under “harassment”.

        • andrew@radiation.party
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It should have fallen on her manager to handle, and she should have put her foot down on that.

          Other good ways to improve that particular situation could have been separating her identity from the social media accounts, so that it wouldn’t be clear who exactly was managing them. It paints a target on her back as an attack vector (very dangerous due to her lack of experience) and target of harassment. That’s part of why many big brands do not publicize who exactly is managing their social media accounts.

          At the end of the day, management needed to do better and Madison could have pushed back more. It’s just a job, theoretically one she could replace somewhat seamlessly given her capabilities, and the fatal mistake was idealizing it. That probably compounded all of her grievances.

          • 77slevin@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            It should have fallen on her manager to handle, and she should have put her foot down on that.

            Head of HR is Linus’ wife. Yes, it is that bad. Even telling her manager, would have netted zero result.

          • robotrash@lemmy.robotra.sh
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            She should not have needed to push back more nor should anyone need to “push back more” in their job. That’s victim blaming.

            • andrew@radiation.party
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              No, it’s realistic. If a manager at your workplace asks you to do something you don’t like, you say “I don’t want to do it”, and they insist - you push back. Is it toxic and stupid that they did that? Yes. But companies get away with this shit because people don’t push back.

              Speaking up publicly after-the-fact is great too. It raises awareness and helps give a voice to people whose livelihood is tied up in a company they can’t stand to support due to toxic working conditions. It helps raise awareness to C-suite execs that there may be a managerial issue causing it. It’s a good step that some companies take in stride, and actually turn around to improve things. Time will tell if that’s the case here.

      • Mechanize@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        69
        ·
        1 year ago

        I feel that your post is belittling a situation that, as narrated, is straight up mobbing and bullying, only acknowledging it in a small paragraph which I feel boils down to a dismissive “awful but only maybe malicious, probably just lack of oversight”, while the rest of your comment tries to find excuses and normalizing something that is not.

        These:

        I was asked about my sexual history, my boyfriends sexual history, “how I liked to fuck”.

        I was told that certain issues were “sexual tension” and I should just “take the co-worker out on a coffee date to ease it out”

        I was told I was chunky, fat, ugly, stupid. I was called “retarded” I was called a “faggot”

        My work was called “dogs–t” I was called “incompetent”.

        “I think the reason you try to be funny, is because you lack any other skills.” smiled then walked away.

        I watched co-workers get what I had asked for weeks before they did. It took 2 months to get mine.

        Also apparently some managers didn’t like me because I “hadn’t gotten drunk with them before” Which was said in that haha just jokin (but actually I’m serious) tone

        Are nor normal nor acceptable: for anyone who is in a corporation where this is common place: take a step back and understand that it is not healthy for you, bad power dynamics are a real thing and the abuse of them sometimes can feel normal, especially in small businesses that get a sudden explosive growth. And I don’t even want to go into her self harming to get a day off.

        You can say it was probably a single person, but the lack of action by management with phrases like “change your priorities”, “put on your big girl pants” and stuff like that makes it a Company issue, Company which indirectly accept and endorse that kind of treatment: they being so against unionizing sincerely gets a whole other meaning read under this light.

        The notebook case is self evidence of it all: A small thing that normally wouldn’t be anything important, but compounded with the stressful environment got emotionally distressful. The fact that such a small thing has stayed with her so long should tell you that she was really not in an healthy mental state.

        I don’t personally care about the whole LTT fiasco, as an uninterested spectator it’s fun to watch from the outside and then change channel, a blip in the media world that will most likely blow down in a couple of weeks. But reading how these actions are belittled is really distressing. Bullying is not normal, and it should never be accepted. Ever.

        The full thread for whoever missed it: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1691693740254228741.html

        • andrew@radiation.party
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not belittling the situation, toxic workplaces are horrible but they can become so very easily without conscience effort to prevent it. It’s clear that, at the very least, that effort hasn’t been made. I would hope Linus and the rest of upper mgmt don’t intend to normalize sexual harassment, verbal abuse, or threats- rather, they aren’t aware of the extent of it or are feeling upward pressure not to retaliate because they have so many toxic employees.

          I’ve made it pretty clear in my message that I blame the company as a whole, and don’t think it’s one person. It’s a systemic issue. Company culture isn’t what you say, it’s what you tolerate, and they’re struggling to even maintain a decent public face.

          To say I’m not surprised is not downplaying the situation. I’ve worked (and fought for coworkers, subordinates, and gotten several upper managers fired at) a few jobs where the culture was so horrible and hostile that our turnover rate was over 200% yoy. The writing generally is on the wall in these situations, and their writing was all the technical inaccuracies, sloppiness in content, and absolute negativity that has been displayed in some videos.

          What I mean by my earlier message (which might be a hot take) is that the addition of fluff (intentional or otherwise) in otherwise perfectly valid criticism takes away some of the bite and gives fanboys room to speculate about the rest. Nobody should be forced to experience that kind of workplace, but hopefully lessons were learned on the affected party’s end that will help them avoid stepping in another pile of shit like lmg.

      • aebrer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        1 year ago

        At a similar pay scale, I’ve been required to go into homes where folks had COVID. Coworkers have been shot at. I’ve seen things I really would have preferred not to. No job is perfectly sane in that sense.

        American? Because this is not normal up here in Canada.

        • andrew@radiation.party
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          US yes, but in Canada I’m sure there are many jobs where you are required by that job to do or see things you’d really rather not.

          Ultimately there is some ownership of the situation required- put your foot down and say “no, I’m absolutely not doing that”. If they reprimand you- well, time to look for a company that doesn’t penalize employees for that particular issue.

          Idealizing the employer makes it significantly harder to do that. Hopefully the debacle gave Madison insight/life experience that many people never have the chance to obtain.

          • robotrash@lemmy.robotra.sh
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re in here a lot with a vaguely apologetic (on lmgs behalf) and victim blaming attitude. Do you work there or some shit?

            • andrew@radiation.party
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I don’t think calling LMG a pile of shit is very apologetic nor an indicator that I’m somebody who works there.

              I also don’t think “management needs to do/should have done better” and “I hope she is doing something that brings joy” and “I hope she was able to pull good insight out of a shitty situation” is very victim blamey.

              It’s hard to run a company, and maintain a positive working culture, but there’s no excuse if they continue to allow those kind of working conditions. Make no mistake, LMG sucks for how Madison was allowed to be treated (and most certainly others, see also in other comments I’ve made that it’s a systemic problem).

      • DJDarren@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hold up…LMG has an OF? Why? Is Linus getting his dick out to show the size of their fucking screwdriver?

    • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think this is the most sane opinion here really; and it’s one I share…

      Like, alright, they screwed up; we don’t need to have a riot about it. I’ve followed these guys for a while, they seem genuine, they’re humans, I think they deserve a chance.

      It feels like a lot of people who don’t know “how Linus is” or the history of the company getting upset and grabbing their pitch fork a bit too quickly.

  • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    Other than the Madison Reeves post I just read, I am completely out of the loop on the LTT controversy. That said, I made it about 1/3 of the way through the video before I had to stop it. I know very little about these guys but that video is infuriating.

    • kek_w_lol@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      Short and sweet summary as called out by Gamers Nexus:

      1. Testing methodology sux and results are not sanity checked, thereby misleading consumers.
      2. If errors are caught, they are corrected poorly and acknowledged with asterisks or in description, which does not put enough of a spotlight on it.
      3. Trashing on a small company (billet labs) that makes dope coolers for performing poorly due to improper testing and not retesting because “I don’t wanna spend 500 bucks”
      4. Not returning the prototype which was sent to them by billet labs for testing and AUCTIONING IT OFF (allegedly to a potential competitor) at LTX.
    • boonhet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can watch the Gamers Nexus video on the LMG for context. Steve highlights a lot of errors that they’ve made.

    • Chariotwheel@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      77
      ·
      1 year ago

      Their action was to monetize the apology video, which is especially funny after Gamers Nexus explicitely didn’t monetize their video. They advertised their shop and floatplane and teased a new product. Just incredible.

  • Juniper@skein.city
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    The fact they’re still hiding their testing methodologies behind floatplane makes me dubious of how effective this “housekeeping” week will be. Not that I plan on watching or interacting with anything LMG related going forward until the allegations brought up by Madison are properly handled anyway, in which then my final decision will be made.

    • eric5949@lemmy.cloudaf.site
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Where can I see these allegations from Madison? I must have missed them.

      Edit: I found them, right under this post on my front page lol.

      • Juniper@skein.city
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You can find them on her Twitter here, or you can read them using Thread Reader here.

        Edit: Lol, beat me to the punch with your edit!

  • Animortis@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I know Linus was pushing back REAL hard on getting a fact checker. And it would’ve likely prevented this situation entirely.

    Edit: Other than the pushing of merch… Sigh… This is a pretty good PR mea culpa. At least from the rest of the team. I guess I should finish it. Pretty textbook. “We screwed up, here’s how we’re fixing it.”

    Edit 2: Nevermind. I got to the part with Linus. FFS.

  • plistig@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    What do we do now?

    Just shut the company down. LMG peaked years ago, and went downhill from there. And even back then it was worst amongst the big tech channels.

    • HurlingDurling@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      You don’t have to be that drastic. Sure, I’m done watching their videos but if they truly want to keep their remaining audience, 1. Linus needs to step down from appearing in any vídeos, 2. Put out a statement to both the community and vendors that they are going to do better and list each change being addressed, and 3. Slow down the video release schedule to ensure proper benchmarks and results can be validated and accurately captured.