Go to ground.news/saint to stay informed through diverse sources and geta clear view of the world around you. Save 50% off the Ground News Vantage Plan there are at least 3 videos you should ideally watch before this one, I have linked them all in the description. looking forward to a drama free comment section ❤ support links: 💰 PATREON @ www.patreon.com/jacksaint 🔴 RUclips @ ruclips.net/channel/UCdQKvqmHKe_8fv4Rwe7ag9Qjoin 👛 TIPS @ ko-fi.com/lackingsaint Credit to Skutchdraws for the thumbnail bsky.app/profile/skutchdraws.bsky.social Second Channel: www.youtube.com/@officalwordfromjack Bluesky 🦋 lackingsaint.bsky.social Instagram 📷 instagram.com/lackingsaint
People trying to claim money isn’t coercive are just factually wrong. Anyone who has been broke can tell you, yes, we’d absolutely let someone torture us for money if it was that or being homeless. Jake clearly says he was having financial issues and needed the money, that is not true consent.
and as bad as extreme game shows are, even those contestants are not subjected to conditions as bad as those weddle was. where was the health and safety advocate? the on-site medic? the fire safety staff?
@ Yeah, like…I do think a lot of extreme game shows are in a way predatory on their own, and that is worth discussing, but not having health staff on any professional grade set is basically inhumane. Like I get it’s RUclips not TV, but dude, you are a millionaire, hire fucking consultants and staff.
If money wasnt coercive then there wouldn't be as many SW as there are. Because remember kids, it's not consent even if you buy it, especially if that person has no other better choice.
I appreciate you and I am leaving a comment, but I had to tap out. I don't know who like any of these people are and I think that's something I should seek to preserve.
I wish I could make this decision too, but alas, it's 3am, I need to finish making a poster about Greek mythology by like 4.30 and need something to keep me awake
As you rightfully should be. Companies have been using that excuse against whistleblowers for decades upon decades, and it’s almost always just an attempt at character assassination. You shouldn’t disregard it completely, but it definitely deserves a metric ton of scrutiny.
Like I think Dogpack can be an untrustworthy source on many claims…and Mr Beast can have done some of that wrongdoing. Like I don’t care if Mr Beast didn’t intend for those things to happen, if the result is real suffering, he has to be held accountable, that is the responsibility you take on as a CEO and face of a company. And it seems some of the claims in that Dogpack video have been corroborated.
@@alexbennet4195ok but there is a lot of actual irrefutable evidence in those videos (faking signatures is the one that pops to mind) so you can’t just call the whole video into question
The “Mr Beast is not bad but is the best person ever because he gives people money” narrative that had the internet in a chokehold for years was so strong I felt like I was living in a skit parodying the US it’s been that comical.
I've heard so many people say about celebrities "you can't call them bad because they donate to charity." So did Al Capone. So did Pablo Escobar. So did Prince Andrew. Philanthropy (with very few exceptions) exists to make rich people look good, not serve the public. For most, its about subverting critique, converting money into PR points, justifying unequal wealth, or covering up scandal. People are still drinking the Kool Aid, though.
niche reference, but as someone who didn't care about the beast and only heard from hearsay--during the entire time that narrative was going on, I couldn't stop picturing Mr. Beast as Magnus McGilded from Ace Attorney... lol
yeah which implies he was not paying Jake a living wag???? I gueess he could be arguing that it might be a previous to employment existing severe financial situation but we don't know if it is or not
@@rollingvice The difference is your boss isn't known for being charitable and giving away money to people. It just reinforces the idea that mrbeast only does charity for the money. He could have at any time helped Jake's financial situation without bribing him to do inhumane challenges
The dude criticized the use of a video recorded without consent, yet the video opens with a recording of DogPack getting fired that dogpack did not know he had, and likely did not consent to him sharing??
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl the audio was a bit too clear tbh for a leak recording, and even if it was recorded by one of the parties themselves its still really odd
"people probably clicked off after 13 seconds and missed the clarification that it was AI" followed immediately with "it's peoples own fault for not checking the bottom of the description" is a wild shot chaser combo tbh
"why did Jake take the money" why did Mr. beast offer it? Literally why is everyone ignoring Mr. Beast willingly and obviously for PR reasons offered Jake money? If taking the money is bad what is offering it then?
@@Marchers46 because people need money to live. Food, water, shelter, clothes, etc. all cost money. Especially when Beast is offering life changing amounts of money.
regardless of anything else, mr beast IS bad, and it's very goofy to me to see people constantly flip-flopping over whether they can say that or not based on the current youtube drama of the week.
@@thecatlurking this is not a new thing, people don't like being othered, especially if it's a moral stance, think about how many people were comfortable with things like human sacrifice, enslavement, forced religious and cultural conversations, racism and homophobia a whole, that we feel comfortable denouncing.
@@Killazaa The facade is still there, its the motion to remove or downplay responsibility that the world has been doing. This is the same playbook used in politics, business, and legal issues. There is no difference between this situation and past ones, its all just chasing the money and denying responsibility.
@@kaibaiarrio1299 yeah, the only thing even close to them caring about people is them is worrying about their image (because of its impact on profits), and in that case it's usually a pathetic "apology" after the fact and perhaps lip service toward doing better in the future with no substantive changes. For them to fix things usually requires a court order (which might be part of why so many companies settle out of court, come to think of it… huh.)
@@jannecapelle_artHis whole point was more of the guy thought the person who he hired working there alone made him qualified and he didn't think to do background checks as he was very young at the time.
I started questioning the whole Soggy video because of what happened with Coffeezilla. He wasn't able to get in contact with Mr. Beast's employees to figure things out yet Soggy literally had lots of contacts, even got a freaking audio recording on Dogpack getting fired. This made me question it yet not enough for me to confirm it was wrong. Then this video pops up and it reveals that all the stuff Soggy said was lies. Then the interview with Oompaville had its last questions made exclusively about the crypto stuff Coffeezilla was investigating and he lied through his teeth throughout the questions. This just made me realize how Mr. Beast is literally doing everything to reduce the damage done to his reputation.
I questioned Soggy right away. A charity Mr Beast didn't pay but was in his video about giving people eye surgery. The charity couldn't get a hold of him for 8 months. The charity claim was stepped around in Soggy's video with the employee lying about it. They only paid because the charity did a video about it that went viral.
I thought Oompa and Coffee would be acquainted enough for at least Oompa to steer clear of the drama. I guess, on that side of RUclips at least, clout and drama is more important than actual morals and convictions.
Anti-intellectualism, both illiteracy and media illiteracy and simping for giant corpoations (in the form of massive YTers) are on the rise; Don't wanna be an alarmist but at the very least the internet has gotten worse in the last 8 years
the candy bar part made me spit out my coffee when he claimed that "uh actually the mr beast bar is healthier if you only eat half" like..... the candy bars are that size bc mr beast wouldn't make as much money on half sized bars, the label splits it up into two serving sizes bc otherwise his candy bar is clearly less healthy gram for gram. I worry for soggy if he really believes any of his own arguments
@ youve been responding to comments about shit like people finding him smug or the technical usage of a word/term. you gotta have some sense of self awareness if youre gonna leave this many comments nitpicking the smallest shit
I just want to say thank you for hiring artists to draw awesome, original thumbnails. Most creators have already accepted that AI I just the future and it's so hard to watch. So thank you, it actually means more than you know.
This! It has been really hard for me to take "educational" youtubers seriously when they would overuse AI generated clips instead of filming some relevant footages, or just themselves talking to us like human beings.
I hate the "he had a weird vibe" so much. What does that even mean? That he's neurodivergent? That he's awkward? or that he's lowkey abusive? or maybe he himself wasn't vibing with the team and it's them who have a weird vibe, who knows?
Yeah, thought the same. 'Weird vides' is such an easy way to point at and put sus on people who might just be neurodivergent, or awkward, or shy, or have social anxiety... Not saying this is the case bc I don't know the guy, it's just a nothing burguer argument that can be easily weaponised against certain people that don't fit our idea of 'good vibes'
The problem is that the guy is basically sponsored by MrBeast. Like he's getting insider knowledge, being able to interview the employees who ain't gonna say publicly that MrBeast has done anything wrong. Then the whole "Soggy called" thing(Either it was planned or the chef and employees knew him in advance). This whole thing is just stupid. Why do people simp millionaires and celebrities so much? It's like people you are fan of can never do anything wrong.
soggy explained this on a stream. Apparently he tried getting in touch with the chef prior to get him for an actual interview but he declined and that was how he knew of soggy's existence. Also how is soggy sponsored by mrbeast? Because he got a flight ticket paid to middle of nowhere greenville NC? Yeah risking your youtube credibility over a plane ticket to the middle of nowhere for a 15 minute interview section which don't add much to ur video seems logical at all
@JulieWooly-pn6tx ... He is betting on future work with MrBeast and access to his subscribers if he wags his tail the right way. Google quid pro quo ffs. It's not that the tickets were payment It's that it shows he was getting direct access in order to paint a narrative. If he wanted to be neutral he never would have accepted ANYTHING from the subject of an investigation aside from an interview. Soggy explained on a stream? Were you expecting him to admit to being dishonest? To being paid off? The hell are you on about?
"Also how is soggy sponsored by mrbeast? Because he got a flight ticket paid to middle of nowhere greenville NC? " Yes. That's what a sponsorship means. "Yeah risking your youtube credibility over a plane ticket to the middle of nowhere for a 15 minute interview section which don't add much to ur video seems logical at all" Okay? And Soggy chose to put that portion into his video? That's his choice not to leave it out? I would almost certainly think that the interview portion of the view blows up any impression of impartiality soggy might've had, but we're in a video where everyone involved risked their "youtube credibility" for whatever the fuck it was worth.
@@flyerton9958You need to look up the definition of a sponsorship if you genuinely think that's what that word means. Getting info from the other side important if they have things they want to say or show.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl i have seen you from i think 10 comment chains. First of all i agree with you about hearing the other side. and also i do think that soggy was sponsored (by the mrbeast company) although not directly it was an employee of the company that paid for soggy cereal. the funny thing to me is this is a recurring pattern of mrbeast not really showing his involvement with things such as with the hiring of delaware, the questionable art in his wall, and finally his his crypto wallet
Dogpack uses stock footage of a rocket exploding for visual aide: "Cringe, liar, how dare he manipulate you." Mr Beast using CG to show things that never happened: "Based, cool, good content. What an honest guy!"
@@GetDogPunked>1 comment on this channel Why are you defending an entity wearing the skin of a "normal human being" on a channel you don't watch. Instant filter for me seeing someone glaze billionaires
the "a big company wouldn't hire a sex offender" or whatever sounds an awful lot like what drake said in the heart part 6 about how he would never look twice on a minor cause he is way to famous for that and he would be arrested. Which is such a terrible defence
@@Marchers46man I looked at the SO registry in my area, I HOPE NOT. They had teens working in every one of mine, but I know damn well they could have a creepazoid in there considering the numbers.
19:30 kinda frustrating that the word "consent" has become so common in these sorts of situations. Like if we look at where the place it originates, in conversations about sexual assault, we would know that you cannot give consent under coercion, which can include economic coercion.
Uh... I have my doubts that's where the word truly originated, especially since it's a word that's hundreds of years old. Although such topics was likely the originating point for why many of us now put such weight on the word.
@@damien678 they mean this context of "consent" not the word itself. It's like the scientific usage of the word theory vs the casual usage of theory. They are basically different words. If people appropriated the scientific meaning of theory it can be misleading and confusing no?
just because someone provides consent doesn’t mean you can fucking torture them. yes doesn’t mean “do whatever the fuck you want to me and i’ll be fine with it”.
im ngl im only a tenth into this video and the soggy guy using the term “yikes out of ten” to describe mr beast hiring a legitimate criminal and predator kinda makes my blood boil
I'll never stop being disgusted in the ways people are dismissing Jake's trauma. I was severely abused as a young child and one of the main things I went through was being locked in closets, cabinets, toy boxes, etc in complete pitch blackness for hours on end. It's been over two decades, I'm almost 30 years old, and to this day I am completely petrified of the dark and have to sleep with my light on because of it. Our situations have their differences obviously, but I completely understand and sympathize with Jake's trauma and how deeply it's effected him. No one can understand how immensely PTSD effects nearly every aspect of your life unless you've experienced it yourself.
Which one? the one where he could have not have done it? getting paid 10k a day to the point where by the third day he would have already had enough money to pay the bills as he claimed?
@DanielJacobs-rz1zl Ah yes, you would definitely stop at $30k (about yearly wage for most people in the US) when you could have up to $1M if you kept going (about 25 years worth of wages if you earn $20 an hour, 40 hours a week). This isn't even mentioning the fact that on top of all the severe effects that solitary confinement can have even in a short period, he was also severely sleep deprived due to them never turning off the lights which can also severely effect mental health almost immediately, AND THEN the whole time he was forced to try and perform to the multiple cameras pointed at him and watching his every move 24/7, even as he struggled to sleep. This man wasn't even sane by the third day.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl Beast isn't going to do you my guy. You've been waging a battle here for him with no promise of a reward, and in the process you're pretending that money is not coercive.
“‘No does not mean no’ actually means you need to exhaust every avenue available to you to the point of harassing workers” somehow makes an already fucked idea to have floating around the office worse.
"glazing mr beast would be career suicide!" (proceeds to perform a long winded character attack on his biggest detractors with information that he was given by his company, alongside downplaying his actions at several points) I feel like there is legitimate criticism to level at dogpack, but holy shit lmao
It's actually insane how he can legitimately act like Weddle getting a pay out from Mr Beast is damages his credibility. Soggy literally got financial support to to make his video from Mr Beast and that isn't? Normally when you hear someone got a bunch of money from someone you assume it biases them in the giver's favor, not something that makes your accusations seem untrustworthy. Normally when a company gives a potential victim a massive amount of money the company immediately looks extremely guilty. The fact that is in the video at all immediately throws away any credibility this person has, but that was obvious from pretty early on. It's actually wild how a video that concedes they had CP shared between employees, had a sex offender working there, did just transfer someone who was accused of SA around rather than firing him, ran illegal lotteries and had dangerous working conditions.
It was so annoying when Sog's video came out and lemmings started to scream that Beast is exonerated. People who claim that Sog's video is good either did not watch it (would not blame them, his style is grating) or have major brain damage. It is just a collection of deflections, manipulations, misdirections, ad hominems and strawmans with a conflict of interest as a cherry on top. Yes, Dogpack made mistakes but his main claims still stand. Sog's video is far worse. At least now people are coming to their senses, it seems.
He literally express multiple times that the intention was only to clear up misinfo he also didn't actually try to excuse much of anything. The criticisms are all in the original vid.
@@TheNotshaunaIt does though why y'all keep trying to paint one employee flying him down to make it easier to interview people as him somehow being paid off? You clearly did not actually watch the vid he's responding to if you actually the vid is concluding that they kicked out the guy immediately they didn't just send him off.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl "the intention was only to clear up misinfo" Then Sog proceeds to misinform people about what Beast did (painting Beast in positive light) and misinform them about Dogpack (painting Dogpack in extremely negative light). Independent journalism, right? "why y'all keep trying to paint one employee flying him down to make it easier to interview people as him somehow being paid off?" Because that's a classic journalistic conflict of interest. Sog can no longer claim that he is independent and unbiased if he receives favors from one of the sides. Getting a paid flight to U.S. to help him make a video is a definitive quid pro quo favor: Soggy gets juicier video (more views, more ads, more $$$$). Beast's team gets best possible coverage. In the video itself Beast's team does in fact get most sympathetic coverage. To the point where it is pure cringe like Soggy literally asking them for more dirt on Dogpack or a woman making a laughable defense of "no means no" (with no pushback from Soggy) or another woman telling a guy that Sog is on the phone (trying to make orchestrated interview more natural). So, the only conclusion a reasonable person can make is that there is a collusion between Beast and Sog. Who knows how deep it actually goes.
The way this Soggy guy handwaived the whole Delaware situation tells me enough about him. Defending hiring a convicted sex offender at a place where he has easy access to children is not something anyone should defend nor downplay, especially in such a dishonest and weaselly way. What a garbage human being.
Especially the ways he immediately slammed Ava as a "degenerate" for less legally actionable child creeping. (Not a defense of either, both those creeps shouldn't be in positions of power in an industry ained at children) Makes you wonder what the difference between the two that would make him go harder on her than the registered sex offender.
Soggy never handwaived this, Jack however manipulately edited this segment as if soggy called it a "yikes out of 10", which he actually said about lunchly, not about the Delaware situation. Soggy extensively talked about how Jimmy hiring delaware was a big mistake and be held accountable, but also talked about how the accusation that this was done knowingly/intentionally made by dogpack and jake weddle was false. Which is completely fair.
Nothing says "Fair criticism" like making a video where you callout slightly off wording in accusations and then have a 45 minute ending segment where you call up their ex-boss and ask "hey so like, his vibes were really bad right? Like just garbage vibes?"
@@Marchers46 What? My only point is that soggy is someone who invalidates criticism arguments over small missteps while also having a huge amount of manipulative shit himself, including a large portion of his video dedicated to basically just asking ex-coworkers to tell him what a weird rude freak someone is. dogpack could be the biggest freak on the planet and it wouldn't change a thing about if his arguments are true or not.
@@Enoploteuthidea Considering the fact that DogPack criticized Beast for his poor management, I find it ironic how doing it to him is unfair for some reason.
@@Marchers46 Its not unfair to criticize dogpack's mishandling of information or poor execution on his statements. You'll notice jack agrees with many of soggys points about how dogpack handled his video. But calling someones coworkers and asking for you to gossip about how he had bad vibes is not doing that: its just trying to poison the well and get a smug "wow get a load of this guy. Must be a petty freak" also, theres a world a difference between mishandling things while putting together something yourself, and mishandling things in a way that harms your employees and coworkers. I care a lot less about dogpack's video having lackluster wording than I do about Mr Beast's torture gameshows poisoning people or exposing them to sex pests
I feel like this whole situation, particularly with the Jake Weddle and Beast Games scenarios, a disturbing lack of basic empathy. That awful MrBeast glazing channel that Soggy recommended (Have come across him before, absolute monster) seems to regard SA and mistreatment as some kind of joke, and the "well, he/she/they could just leave" statement seems to only be being used more and more now. It's silly that among all this crazy stuff, this is the one thing that disturbs me the most, but it really is
Youre not fucking wrong though, like the sheer amount of lack of empathy and oh he had free will to leave and I'm like no he needed that money for his own debt being a motivation and you can't tell me there wasn't peer pressure to last and stay.
I hope you’re doing okay! I don’t really know what to say, but I hope you know that most people are on your side. Regardless, your feelings are valid and validated. I’m really sorry that some people only see this as “drama” and not dangerous.
Dude shot himself right out of the gate by using audio of someone who didn't know they were being recorded, then...criticizes dogpack for using audio of someone being recorded without their knowledge. Soggy proved his hypocrisy instantly. Then, the fact that Mr. Beast's employees knew exactly who he was, instead of treating it like an interview with a RUclipsr. You can see the familiarity in their conversation. It's like watching Chris Van Vliet interview wrestlers he's on friendly terms with. The entire dynamic changes.
@@Marchers46 It's called an example. You've heard of that, yes? You use an example to demonstrate your point or more easily convey your meaning. In this case, I used an easily found example to show what it looks like when someone interviews people they're friends with.
@@TimedRevolver I was talking about the first paragraph. Soggy isn’t being hypocritical for showing that interview, because as far as we know it hasn’t been altered in favor of anyone. In comparison, DogPack manipulated someone into answering the questions he wanted to hear.
@@Marchers46 "manipulated someone into answering the questions he wanted to hear" what are you going on about? It's no more unethical to record someone while asking them questions than it is to record someone being fired without their knowledge. Both are shitty, but neither is worse than the other
it's genuinely a bit difficult to watch somebody openly call themselves a brave and oppressed lone hero for defending planet's biggest youtuber/evil billionaire mr. beast 😬 haha
Fr, it's like the millionaire comedian specials on Netflix or even the random minor celebrities that subexist pretty solely off punching down and acting like they are brave for it. They will make an hour long video mocking trans, blacks, latinos, immigrants, whomever else they can think of, then act like the same rich folk that often fund them are actually trying to silence them.
@@LuizAlexPhoenixHey just wanted to let you know that you shouldn’t use “trans” to describe a group of trans people, it feels a bit dehumanising to be described as “a trans”. Anyway I entirely agree with your comment otherwise, best of luck to you!
"hahaha 'no doesnt mean no' is FINE to write into an official company document actually because we dont mean in a RAPE way!!! just in a 'all other unethical practises' kinda way!!! so its fiiine actually dont make such a big deal out of it :)))" yeah....thats really really convincing me to not think mrbeast is a horrible person with a horrible company lmao
why is everyone shocked that a rich person sucks all of a sudden? its like youtubers are immune to criticism but elon and bezos arent. makes zero sense lmfao
Parasocial bullshit. Or: "my favorite rich guy can't be a piece of shit because he's my favorite and that would mean I don't know how to pick people to be unhealthily attached to!"
People say its parasocial relationships but I think its deeper than that. I think society’s keen defense of Mr. Beast is highly indicative of how our culture and economy shapes how we think of and treat things. You’ll notice that a lot of the pro-Mr Beast arguments are eerily similar to the way people defend Capitalism and deny sexual assault allegations. Rhetoric about how Mr Beast wasn’t coercive but instead Weddle consented - paying no thought to the psychological implications of wealth. Many of these beliefs and arguments have been made before, this is just a weird internet manifestation of it.
I agree. At the end of the day, he's not your friend, he's not even really a RUclipsr as we know them, no, he is the leader of a multimillion dollar business and we all know how shady that world is. The thing is you can tell how over the time his brand completely took over. A lot of business-owning rich people suck. That includes your favorite RUclipsr.
mr beast hired his mother, an ex military corrections officer (iirc), as chief compliance officer right since he started his company. them not running background checks is crazy and defending hiring a RSO saying it's a silly mistake... his mother effectively runs HR for him, according to that infamous 2023 Time article his mother also wrote a book about domestic abuse and holds some... interesting views. it's one of those situations where victim jumps into activist role and isn't the best at recognizing maybe it's too soon
Even though he made a point sometimes in other videos, i just cant stand Soggy's voice. I wanted to watch it but i already started to click off once he starts speaking.
I agree. I was aware of his video but refused to watch it because it sounded like it would be really annoying. Now after watching this video I know I was completely right. I could barely finish this video, I think a few seconds at a time is the most I can take of this guy
I'd already heard that in the Dogpack video and I agree, it's disgraceful, but what got me here as I haven't watched the (have we seriously run out of internet names now that this is a real name?) Soggycereal video was how the person who I assume is what amounts to an HR professional in the Mr Beast company, laughs at it, then says with her whole chest, "OH YEAH, I WROTE THAT TEEHEE!" Considering this was a blatant smear campaign on behalf of Mr Beast, it felt so weird of (ugh) Soggycereal to have been allowed to leave that in. There wasn't even an obligatory, "Of course, we have updated this policy now to be more in line with our forward thinking modern approach here at Beast 2.0..." bit, they just laughed and moved on.
them having something named "No does not mean no" comes across so fucking gross. like forgoing the context of what it was about. the phrase "no does not mean no" gives off very r@pey vibes. LIKE... YES NO DOES IN FACT MEAN NO, THEY'RE NOT AGREEING, BACK OFF?????
"No, no, it doesn't mean what you think it means! We just encourage employees to cross ethical and professional boundaries, harass and bother people until they give us what we want, and we phrased it as a kinda rapey joke to be funny."
The amount of people calling Jake a "cry baby" especially in Soggy's comments is actually disgusting. I'm not one to call toxic masculinity, but I don't even know what else to call it. Like anyone acting like they've never cried over something terrible that happened in their life as an adult is either super rich and can solve all their problems and buy happiness with money, or they're a toxic liar who will do anything to be perceived as a sociopath because they think it makes them better than other and look stronger for being completely out of touch with what's going on in thier own mind.
pretty sure he also was crying when recounting telling a dad to ask for a raise alongside with him. the father ended up losing his job, so did jake but he was ecstatic because he just wanted out. when recounting he was saying he wouldn't have done it or encouraged him (the dad) if he knew it'd cause him to be fired.
Yeah, but those are sensible moments to get emotional. People aren't robots. But yeah, if you already have functionally unlimited funds as far as personal finances are concerned, problems that can be solved with money aren't problems, now are they? A lot of the people doing the finger-pointing are influencers who will never experience being disadvantaged to that degree.
I’m in the middle. I don’t like Mr Beast and I think Dogpack has exposed a lot of bad stuff he has done. However I find Jake just really annoying and I don’t really think he was treated that badly. He just seems like a grifter trying to get more attention for his failing comedy career. There is a middle ground. Not just Mr Beast Good / Bad
@@georgeh4171 maybe there is a middle ground, but calling someone a grifter over coming out about a thing that was mentally damaging is such a fucking stretch. he might ride the wave of sympathy... but if someone is a victim of mistreatment, why shouldn't they be allowed to make the most of the validation others give them for speaking on something that traumatized them? the character of jake, if he's """annoying""" or a "grifter" is irrelevant. what is relevant is the treatment. also people label others as "annoying" when said person is ND / socially awkward. not saying jake is, I don't know him, so I wouldn't know, but from personal experience, calling someone "annoying" in this context feels ill-willed.
The “no does not mean no” thing is wild to me because what an insane fucking thing to have in your employee training/instruction documents. Like does Mr.Beast not have a legal team? Because I cannot imagine a legal team looking at that paragraph and advising anything other than burning the whole document and starting over. That policy seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen (or I guess it is in fact happening now and that policy is gonna be a huge part of the plaintiff’s case). It immediately destroys any defense of “well they weren’t forced to continue, they could stop whenever they wanted” by admitting that they would not take refusal or rejection without attempts at coercion. A legal team should really be one of the first investments when these RUclipsrs start sizing up to a company, right along with HR. Because otherwise you get these absolutely rancid examples of illegal or unethical behavior being treated like company policy or company culture. If you want to be a business, that comes with the expectations of behaving like a business
Fr, even if it doesn't mean what the big bold text implies. Not a single person saw that and noticed any problem with a big bold rapey phrase in official documents
sounds pretty expensive. why don't you just skip all those investments, keep it a smaller operation so it feels more intimate, and everyone can feel comfortable about reporting incidents if they need to. you know it probably won't even be necessary to report incindents since it's not like anything will happen in the first place
The problem with all of this is that Mr. Beast is kind of like the Mister Rogers or the Steve Burns of this current time. But he is NOT teaching kids kindness and how to be helpful. He is teaching kids hyper consumerism and how to exploit others. We took the childrens television personalities of our time for granted.(Except for Jimmy Saville of course)
I watched a few episodes of Reading Rainbow with my friends and their kid today and the difference couldn't be more stark. Levar Burton encouraging kids to ask their parents about the parents own childhoods or learning to cook with a famous chef with delightful children's books read by the likes of Helen Mirren and Matthew Broderick. Polite but frank conversations about the importance and joy of reading between people who respect one another as human beings. Not everything needs to be educational television but the examples set by old PBS kids shows were something to aspire towards.
@@NeighborhoodOfBlueliterally came here to say this. Other than both being synonymous with "entertainment for kids" there is absolutely no acceptable reason to compare Jimmy Donaldson with Mr Rogers. And even that is being generous, b/c we all know Jimmy does it for money.
@@NeighborhoodOfBluechillout slugger, it's meant as a comparison of the absolute state of children's entertainment and how empty, dishonest, disingenuous, hyperconsumerist and nothing but advertising.
the whole "he took money therefore he's not allowed to complain about mistreatment" thing just reminds me of all the people who claim if a woman takes a settlement after, say, getting SAed by trump, then she's not allowed to talk about it ever again. Even though clearly twenty plus years ago, and even today (look at weinstein's acquital and trumps 'reelection') clearly coming forward with SA allegatioons doesn't affect powerful men whatsoever, so accepting the settlement is probably the most they'll ever "get back" period.
On the "no does not mean no" bit, I think the criticism was both what you described, which was the policy itself, but also the fact that riffing on a phrase about consent like that is just bad optics. No one who actually read that policy legitimately thought that was literally defending or perpetuating sexual misconduct, but the fact that they thought it was funny to twist that specific phrase accompanied by the many allegations of mistreatment and coercion paints a very poor workplace/management culture around boundaries and respect. The actual name of the policy in itself is just distasteful on it's own, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum.
53:58 but… isn’t 5head usually used in a sarcastic sense… isn’t it usually used to pretend something is smart as hell when it isn’t? what a dumb thing to be focusing on in the first place but this is so weird to me
Mr Beast defenders still ain't beating the allegations that they can turn a blind eye to any and all bad business practices and just say his critics are merely jealous of his wealth.
christ this guy is absolutely insufferable. like between how smug his voice is and how all of this feels like "oh you had a tiny inconsistency therefore everything is bullshit!!! gotcha!!! now the whole thing is invalid", i do not want to isten to soapy at all. like the "um it isn't actually a war crime to deprive someone of sleep" okay? it's still wrong. it's still scummy. dogpack404 being a flawed guy doesn't immediately exonerate mr beast.
Unfortunately, this is what internet dramas have devolved into, or perhaps always were. Every discussion of a topic or controversy, even serious ones, has to hinge on the outcome of some sort of tribal purity test.
People in general fall hard for the logical fallacy of "wrong about one thing means wrong about everything". Especially in hostile online discussions. You can write a very detailed post or comment with a lot of points, but people who disagree would not address them. They would typically look for some small technical error about a minor point, sometimes even a typo, to claim you are wrong. As if a typo makes your whole argument unvalid. It is extremely annoying bad faith behavior.
@1:01:00 Honestly, I actually disagree here. That document comes across rapey as fuck. While its not explicitly about anything.. explicit, it IS fundamentally reinforcing the idea that consent should be bulldosed, and that no doesn't matter. While the document alone doesn't guarantee anything bad about workplace harassment at the company, its a pretty horrifying look.
It is insanely indicative of company culture that there was nobody in the approval process saw the clear bad vibes of having "no doesn't mean no" in what seems to be training material
I think especially if you put it in the context of the REST of the document. The "let the boys be idiots" and "assume they've already assessed the risks" statements are disgusting on their own but there is no way to isolate the "no does not mean no" from all the other sludge.
I agree that this is a valid point of criticism, but I don't think it's necessarily in conflict with anything Jack is saying. Though there are some pretty tricky semantics going on in this part, so I get why it could sound that way. To my understanding, right at timecode he's calling back to how parallels have been drawn between the treatment of Weddle and that paragraph, in the sense "if no also didn't mean no in that situation which isn't explicitly mentioned in the paragraph, who's to say that attitude isn't tolerated in any number of situations", such as SH. I don't interpet this as Jack taking any stance on that argument, just describing it to contrast with how the interview mis-characterizes it as "the paragraph was explicitly, intentionally about how SH is okay at the company". Then he says regardless of what can or can't be extrapolated, what the paragraph literally, unambiguously says is also unethical. So the response in this interview is off-mark for the criticism it's trying to counter, and straight up admits to another point of criticism as if there was nothing weird about that attitude. But yeah, personally I think both points of criticism are valid. What the paragraph literally says is probably the more rhetorically persuasive point, but especially when it's literally phrased "no doesn't mean no", it's worth asking what kind of company culture would allow that to be published. There are other kinds of unethical business (e.g. telemarketing) where that attitude is also encouraged, but I've never heard it phrased as literally "no doesn't mean no", because even most unethical businesspeople understand how that would look. This business apparently doesn't.
As far as a teenager performer unknowingly hiring a pdf file I went to a concert once where an artist who earlier in her career had been on the teen pop circuit and they made a comment about a drummer or a roadie from those days being a little too into the teen groupies so they had to get rid of that guy. It's not that hard, you're the boss, part of your job is making sure everyone is safe and if that means firing someone who isn't safe to be around then that's what you've got to do.
If Mr. Beast can't take basic responsibility to make the work environment liveable he isn't responsible enough to be a bussiness owner. they act like people have more right to run a bussiness than to not be assaulted or coerced.
Less than 10 minutes in and this Soggy Cereal guy reminds me of all the worst stuff from mid to late 2010s youtube. He's trying so hard to be Pewdiepie it's painful.
I've told this story before, but the first time I came across Mr Beast was one of his really old worst intro videos where he made fun of an intro by calling it autistic. As an autistic child, this was f i n e for my self esteem, and when he blew up years later I was just taken aback, wondering if I was making a big deal over old stuff, or if he even was the same guy.
@@Muhluri i mean people were also alot less sensitive and so didnt have as much of a filter but over time our culture has evolved to be more sensitive about this stuff so people will now filter their speech more in my personal opinion someone saying something that wasnt really seen as bad at the time doesnt make them a bad person
@buisnessbandit I agree and disagree, only reason why people were so vulgar back then because the internet was just becoming more mainstream to the public and wasn't monitored like it nowadays, and most people back then were pretty young and never really cared or thought about how their words would hurt someone, hell, even the adults were pretty childish, i remember grown men and women bullying a 15 year old girl because she made a terrible music video😂 It wasnt that people were less sensitive, it was just that most people werent being filtered, Though I do miss some aspects of it.
@DanielJacobs-rz1zl The statement itself provides the context. It being not used in that context doesn't change the cultural and social understanding of said phrase. Was it not in that context? Yes. Does that change the fact that it's weird that someone chose to use that specific phrasing? Yes. If you say that was a joke, that's even worse. If it was between friends? Sure. But to employees of a company? No, absolutely not. It'd be an HR nightmare in any other situation.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zlIt's specifically parodying a phrase and saying the opposite. It's at best very poor taste and completely unprofessional. And that's without talking about the actual intructions it precedes: the name alone is a red flag
I finally understand why I like Jack's videos so much: we share the Zillennial torment of kind of hating Zoomer culture but also living in perpetual fear of being considered cringe.
Its because we feel responsible *(whether we like it or not but thatsa livin on a prayer no?)* like generation talk is bunk the way i often see it used *(by lifestyle sections/opinion pages, so flat with context removed)* and cos material conditions n whatever its gonna look different, feels honestly as helpful as going by Spike Milligan poems to decide ur personality forever *(of in which case, hehehehe mines on the SABBATH!!!! DAS GOTHIC SHABBATMAN!!!!! !)* ANYWAYS!!!! b4 i distract meself any further, it can be like asking what tv u watched as a kid, might say something on its own (free to air vs cable vs satelite), might need a heap more context to actually understand (say paytv in competition with the internet being a potential disrupter) where the money and investments ended up, who was PM like OMG!!! EVERYTHING!!!!?? so much of everything is timing?!?! *Ah rats i did it again* 😂😢😅
That's probably why I like him so much. EFAP kept me away from this kind of content until the hypocrisy and haterism and beating the same dead horses for money got old AF
@@AnotherAustin-z7b Surprised you stuck around like enough to even get into EFAP. I never watched anyone else on the show but mauler and quickly went from falling asleep to his rant videos about Star Wars to not being interested in any of his surface level complaining about every new piece of media.
have people missed the point of squid games??? mr beast is literally the thing that show is criticizing about. those people wouldn't get slapped on the face till it bleeds if it weren't for money. they wouldn't have joined a deadly game if it weren't for money. the same thing is happening with mr beast. who would turn down a big amount of money for a bit of suffering? and then it turns out its more than just a bit of pain, but they're in too deep to back out by then. a little bit more pain wont hurt, right? especially if money is on the line like, damn.
Also, I watched another video riding the coattails of Soggy's, which directly dismissed the hideous things in that group chat as 'edgy humour.' and I just have to say, as a CSA survivor, it is so utterly disgusting to me that so many people still just don't take it seriously whatsoever. The Internet's brazen apathy towards, or even endorsement of, CSA is utterly vile. This is perhaps Soggy's most dangerous motte and bailey of all, and shows a far uglier attitude within him than I initially realised. Thank you for taking it seriously, something which is nauseatingly rare.
The main problem that I see with the internet in general is a lack of basic empathy. Because when they see all these things, they believe that it wouldn't happen to them, that it's all just a goof, they smarter than this and not idiotic. Then, when these people actually get into these positions, they'll see how they would fall into these things if they were desperate.
It’s also why Rosanna is no longer talking about Mr Beast. All of the slop commentary RUclipsrs went after her in bad faith. Although I don’t think that the video shouldn’t have been made in the first place…and if so, should have been done in a more careful manner.
@@Marchers46yes and that’s why she shouldn’t of made that video at all. She also started her podcast after the black lash she got from the commentary slop community for her shit video. And since then, she hasn’t mentioned another thing about Mr Beast and probably never will ever again,
I'm so sorry, but Soggy Cereal looks like someone tried to draw Onision or IDubbbz from memory and accidentally creating their cursed caricature child ☠️
I'm pretty sure that sharing a recording of a private meeting regarding employment without the consent of both parties would be against GDPR in the EU/UK (don't quote me on this, it's been a few years since my training...) To me, as someone that has fired people in the past and has been fired in the past, I definitely wouldn't want those recorrdings shared as those are often very stressful conversations for both sides. It's unreasonable to expect people to behave stoicly in situations like that, and I feel sorry for Snoop Doggy Dogpack that his dirty laundry is being used to defend a RUclips channel's honour, of all things. I would also like to say, that in my opinion as a manager who has worked in many corporate (read: hell) jobs, it is bad form for the person being fired to be so shocked by it if it was during their probation period. There should have been reasonable management in place to ensure they were aware of what steps they needed to do to improve, and to let them know they were not performing to the standards set by the company. Sometimes, if handled properly, both sides of that conversation will be in agreement that a probation needs to end (they get fired) or it needs to be extended (they remain under the terms of the probation period for longer with conditions). Granted, I am from the UK and I am sure that it's a lot looser in the US, but I imagine we stole a lot of our corpo rubbish from across the pond anyway... Aside from the fact that leaking the audio is an obvious attempt to smear the 'disgruntled former employee', if I was a current employee of Mr Beast, I would be very concerned that audio of my meetings could be used in future if I were to leave the company. I'd also suggest that if D to the O to the G to the PACK404 was feeling disgruntled, that there are probably other employees at Beastable Towers that feel similarly, but will probably not want to speak up for fear of reprisals. This is just my opinion, but the whole thing screams Toxic Workplace to me, and I've worked for a few of them. I get the impression that Mr Beast's company, like a lot of company's today, runs under the excuse that it is a 'Startup' regardless of the fact it is worth millions of dollars. With the 'Startup' label, you can play fast and loose with things that are essential in companies with even a couple of hundred employees, like decent HR policies (see 'No Does Not Mean No') or training, or reasonable expectations of their jobs. Loads of unpaid labour (or labor over there) is undertaken by workers in 'Startups' because they have a 'super-fast' 'muck in and grind' approach to work. Again, I'm making assumptions here, but from the testimonies of people who worked for James Beastman, I reckon they winged a lot of things because of that 'Startup Mentality'. I'm ending this comment here, or I may as well just make a video about it myself, but thanks for this video, it was a good watch and also made me feel less like an old, dumb idiot about this whole situation.
Unfortunately, in the US, companies, especially extremely successful ones like Mr Beasts, can do pretty much as they please with impunity, and the only way to push back against them is through courts, which are 9/10 times rigged in their favour, where they do their best to drain you of all your money, so you would stop the lawsuit due to bankruptcy. The only thing that might bring about any change is either government regulation, which won't happen due to the bizzare amout of corruption, *ahem* I mean lobbying that happens, especially coming from big businesses like Mr Beasts, or by class action lawsuits. Unfortunately, compared to, say a water source being contaminated by improper waste disposal, the damage Mr Beasts does is both less tangible, measureable and provable.
Actually in the U.S. you can be fired at any time for any reason except discrimination that's on the employee to prove. I know I got blindsided by it at my last job.
@@phyllisford2130 Oh, absolutely, you can be fired at any time for any reason here too, but if you do it without a 'legitimate' reason here, you leave yourself open to be taken to an employment tribunal for what we call 'unfair dismissal'. What is 'legitimate' is very open to interpretation (other than obvious things like discrimination, but still the employee must prove this for it to be upheld.) Do you have anything like that in the States? If I've wanted to fire someone in the past, this has involved a lot of private discussions with a Human Resources team, or more senior manager to make it happen, and even for really severe things it can take a lot of time, investigation and hard work to make it happen. When someone is still in their probation period (usually the first 3-6 months of employment) they have basically zero rights, and you can fire them with a week's pay for basically any reason (again, non-discriminatory reasons, obviously...) In these cases, I would still feel it was my responsibility to ensure that that person had been supported as much as possible before we got to that point, but I know a lot of managers use it to 'manage people out' that they just don't like. My point was really, from a management perspective, it's a bad look if your firing conversations sound like the one that was shared by Dogpack's former employers. Don't get me wrong, they are NEVER pleasant conversations, but there's a way of handling them with empathy and respect for the person on the other end which I would hope other Corporate Hellscape Managers like myself would agree with me on. I find the sharing of that audio absolutely disgusting, and I would be shocked if it hadn't broken some sort of employment law, somewhere. ... and really, that's my main interest in this Gen Z-ass topic of 'BEAST BAD?!' - I'm really interested in the way that young people are indoctrinated into corporate ways of thinking, and the things that Dogpack brings up should be a problem, but they aren't problematic enough unless they are 'illegal'. It's not illegal to run a shitty workplace, cut as many corners as possible, lie to your audience about your the way things are done, leak people's management conversations, only do things in the name of profit... but they are bad, and he is rewarded with a huge audience-share. If it turns out that Jimmitha Beast's involvement in Crypto pump-and-dumps don't get him into any legal trouble, the rest of these allegations will most likely be brushed under the rug, because who cares, right? Ethical and moral 'crimes' aren't crimes any more, according to our court of public opinion.
I’ve witnessed a decade of internet celebrity drama, and I find the aspect that affects it the most to be that most of the people viewing the situation are children. They usually do not have the life experience to understand different kinds of abuse, especially work abuse, so they have to rely on the video they are watching to tell them what actions are right or wrong. They don’t understand how you can be a “willing” participant in something and also be abused. It becomes really easy to convince them that their fav youtuber is actually not that bad because what they did wasn’t cartoon level of obvious evil. I also saw this with the drama about the youtuber who was called out for going to a party instead of going to the hospital to support their girlfriend who had a life threatening ectopic pregnancy. A majority of people commenting on the situation did not have the experience to understand how a person would feel in that situation and how bad it was physically and emotionally, or haven’t had the relationship experience to understand the dynamics
I would also like to add that kids see things in black and white, there is often no nuance. Since their influencer is ”not that bad” it’s no biggie. And I say kids but sadly teenagers and young adults are also like that nowadays
@uttsu1537 Not to be to much of an "kids these days" or "this generation is bad" guy but we genuinly have a problem with people even over 18 not having developed a lick of emotional or mental maturity
Jake Weddle was slammed off the internet in the worst way due to Soggy's video, Soggy REAAALLY downplayed how serious this was to the point people literally bullied him off of social media.. its sickening.
So you think it's okay jake weddle is legally threatening small creators with international lawsuits because they criticized him? (even though he himself said he's "broke")
@JulieWooly-pn6tx i don't in any way condone what Jake Weddle did in that regard, but I myself am easily stressed out as a person, and understand what its like to be pressured into doing dumb shit. Jake Weddle did exactly that. Got overly sensitive when people made fun of his situation or called him out when he should've expected it (you're gonna have that happen to you when you're going after mr. Beast of all people) If anything he made the right decision by leaving the internet, he wasn't built for that, but it was still wrong that they shat on him like that after he literally cried his heart out.. you don't do that to people when they legit have emotional trauma, even if you think the trauma is over something dumb. I've been pressured with money before too.. I used to think it was stupid that anyone would do this for money or let money control them to this extent, but.. you don't know until you're there. now as to whether he's a good comedian- nah, he sucks, his jokes aren't funny, but its hard to find anything that makes me laugh these days so Idk.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl A youtuber called hellbent, leaked DMs from jake weddle and his girlfriend threatening her with an international lawsuit. nicholasdeorio made a video on that
@glimmerstantroop46321 It is true though and mind you he was getting paid 10k a day to stay in there if he hated it that much he could just left and taken the amount he earned there with him.
True, also very pathetic to pick the side of the billionaire celebrity and act like he is the underdog. Reeks of desperation for a fight, like he knew his takes are dogshit so he had to premptively prepared other MrBeast acolytes to disregard criticism and lionize him.
"Pissing off anime twt" is the funniest criticism I've ever seen. Imagine thinking that causing the lolicon avengers to start a klan rally against you is proof someone was in the wrong.
33:50 Maaan, as a CSA victim it is insane how often this kind of shit gets used when you point out obvious abuse material that isn't explicitly sexual. Clearly I must be disgusting, too, if I'm thinking of that when I see an image of some mechanic's 9-year-old daughter in a bikini making a kissy face to advertise his shop on Facebook.
This comment aged like milk (I’m just getting in early before the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash starts)
Both of these comments have aged like milk(I'm getting ahead of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash@@schoo9256
That "recorded them without their consent" line is fair, sure, until you remember that his own video literally opened with a recording made of dogpack presumably without his knowledge or consent. Like, sure, it's a valid criticism, but also you really don't have any ground to stand on in making it yourself.
We don't care about Dogpacks personality, I don't think he is 100% reliable but the entire Soggy Cereal video is a deflection, a character assassination and doesn't address anything.
49:20 Is this dude trying to imply that nobody would be able to intervene if a contestant turned violent? Either they have safety regulations or they don't, make up your mind 😂 And he criticizes dogpack for recording someone without their consent, but then turns around and uses a recording of dogpack, which I assume was taken without his consent
They can have those there but that only reduces the risk it doesn't actually save much and companies have every right to avoid situations where an ex employee lies on them, this is not the same.
It was probably taken with consent, to be fair. At least it should be. "For legal reason I must tell you this conversation is being recorded" something like that
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zlyeah but they didn't. Having someone on the sidelines to intervene in case the contestants get violent is an incredibly low bar to set. If you're doing a game show, it is your responsibility to keep the contestants safe, and part of that is keeping them safe from other contestants. And Mr. Beast didn't do that. It's one thing if it was an unfortunate accident that he did his best to prevent, but he didn't even do the incredibly basic thing of having someone stand by the sidelines just in case.
This reminds me a lot of how many RUclipsrs tried to discredit Amber Heard’s allegations against Johnny Depp; take what she said he did, exaggerate what she actually said, & then when her evidence of events didn’t align with their exaggerations claims that’s proof she’s lying (&ignore how the evidence aligned with her original claims).
And just like mrbeast paid for soggy's flight, depp's legal team paid (mostly right wing youtubers) to talk about edited and out of context leaked clips that made amber look bad before the trial even began
Amber's claims were that Depp physically abused her. None of her evidence aligned with that. I have zero doubt he was verbally and emotionally abusive. Both of them were. But considering Amber has a history of perpetrating domestic violence, and the photos of her bruises were taken from a PC rather than just plainly in a phone raises suspicions. Also, let me speak as someone who has seen spousal abuse first hand. An abuser will NOT hit walls or cupboards, recording or not. They'll hit YOU. But all her evidence involved Depp hitting things aside form her. She was even caught in a recording mocking him because he WOULDN'T hit her. She even told him nobody would believe him. And before you mention the UK trial, the Judge should have recused himself, because one of his relatives was involved with the organization through which Amber initially made her accusations, meaning there was financial motivation to rule in her favor. Amber and Depp were poison for one another. But there's zero concrete evidence of him hitting her. All we have is him badmouthing her to his friends. We have actual proof she hit him.
@@TimedRevolveramber doesn't actually have a history of abuse, that was just made up by a homophobic cop Medusone has a very long and detailed series of videos that go over that and go over everything
It really stood out with the short part talking about payments for eye surgeries. It's not a very important part, but I feel like the same people who shrug off a company fucking up and not making sure they pay for things that they are massively publicising, would also be the ones who were hounding AH for having to pause charity payments after being sued (with the full understanding and agreement of the recipient).
In this situation many of the claims of the original vid was found to be false, not even the guy who made the vid thinks the one who startled it all is above criticism.
Better Life Decision is not equivalent to stripping down your personality and getting into a relationship with a woman whose life decisions stress him tf out lmao. All his fellow creators he collab'd with are still universally beloved while stopping the edginess. Looks like his friends grew up while he pretends to be a grown up or smth
I find it weird that people are claiming that everything MrBeast did to Jake is null because "he did it for money, he could've just not accepted it and left" when there's literally a whole show that is suuuper popular and mainstream, which MrBeast himself did a shitty parody series with as well, showing how this sort of behavior is immoral and borderline evil. You know. Squid games ? Where contestants are motivated to literally kill themselves for a life changing amount of money ?? Odd how people can watch a show like Squid Games, acknowledge the core themes and how realistic it is, but then still blame people for putting themselves through torture for a life changing amount of money. This is almost comical.
@Non-profitorganizationinKenyaComparing sports with a shitty remake of a show which showed how money can be coercive is a one heck of brainrotted comparison
Is this really what we are doing? Come on now. Some videos come out with some bad accusations and it looks like Mr. Beast's popularity may take a tiny dip, but then just like magic all these videos come out to either debunk those claims, muddle the water around the whole situation, confuse viewers about what the actual claims are, and personally slander those making the claims. Many of those videos coming from people who have financial ties to Mr. Beast in 2 degrees of separation or less. I think it is pretty evil genius, but it very much looks like Jimmy, the king of RUclips, got other RUclips creators to come out of the woodwork and clog the space around the allegations he was facing, just throwing enough spaghetti content against the search engines and algorithm to see what sticks (or overtakes the actual allegations) Jimmy really is on some real dastardly supervillain nonsense, but it seems to be working. Who could have guessed the person with the most money wins? Everyone, everyone should have seen this coming. It's not a mystery about what is happening here. it is the wealthy doing what the wealthy always does in America, this time it is just using RUclips instead of traditional media and before the courts because producing a thousand of these RUclips videos costs about the same as 15 minutes worth of a great law firm's time.
@@guilhermeito2295 announcing your short attention span and belief that reciting meme phrases is a valid contribution aren't as relevant to an adult dialogue as you're telling yourself they are. If you're unable to read more than two lines and don't have anything relevant to add you don't have to comment.
What do you mean by "we" though? I actually see much worse coming eventually regarding James Dawson but wether that's before or after he runs for president only time will tell. He's amassing Epstein level power for reasons beyond wanting to be a children's entertainer that much is clear.
Just gotta say, it's wild to me any time I see the anime community online get together to pretend that 100% of anime fans appreciate anime for the narrative and that there are zero creeps in the anime community. Like. I'm a huge fan of Evangelion. I have definitely seen some shit related to Evangelion that I wish I could unsee, because a lot of Evangelion 'fans' are not there for the tragic story about child soldiers' trauma. It's totally okay to say 'that person made me uncomfortable with how they discussed anime, so I no longer want to be around them'.
Again with this soggy guy having outright garbage takes. Nobody gives a shit about anime twitter. As an anime fan it is a community full of degenerates, not to mention the anime referenced is actual lolicon which Jack called out. So much of soggy’s video could have been cut out entirely especially the last portion.
ah, yes, exactly the reason I can't with anime fans anymore and I was a big otaku growing up (cringe for me, I know). I miss old internet where I could find random sites about Eva lore and discussions on its symbolism and narrative.
It's a cartoon from thirty years ago, move on with your life. Evangelion is one of my favorite anime, and I could not care less what people are doing in the fanbase. Go outside.
@@Jimmykisskiss I like how your response to "I don't want to interact with all the pedos in the anime community" is people shouldn't care about the pedos lol.
i think the worst kinda hell there would be for me would be to be caught glazing a bilionare this hard on camera for no reason other than i'm a dumbass
I have loathing in my heart for people, specifically content creators, that make observably wrong or inaccurate claims in a deeply snarky and/or condescending tone.
I hate to say anything akin, simply because it's bad faith, but yeah. Everything Soggy Cereal does feels incredibly forced and butt-hurt. The cocky "I gotcha" shit is so annoying when often that just isn't the case. Soggy Cereal seems like a persona born of copying what was popular amongst 16-year-old boys in 2014 instead of being genuine and wanting to genuinely discuss and argue. The only time I felt as if they were genuine was when they were insulting that Dogpack person.
As a gen z then, I have to say i have no issue with soggy. His previous videos are great, like with airax. This video of his wasnt bad either as a critical piece against dogpack. And his sense of humor is literally a nothing burger. Background noise to my hyper stimulated brain.
@@viderevero1338I don’t think you actually like soggy the person, or even his content all that much. But you’d rather enjoy having background noise of stale or outright bad takes. I get it, I’m a gen Z, as well. But I just can’t agree.
I saw Soggy Cereal's video and just felt like "Wait why did they record firing someone?" and also "How did you get to the Mr.Beast headquarters?" Then it turned out he was paid basically.
I honestly couldn't even begin to get through the Soggy Cereal video when I opened it. The ignorance, and hypocrisy of his own, and of Jimmy's that is put on display is pretty mind blowing.
@@Marchers46 The hypocrisy of being angry at Dogpack for using a recording without consent, and then using a recording of Dogpack being fired without his consent.
@@flyerton9958 Also how did he obtain that recording? Is Soggy an employee of Mr. Beast's company? I don't think so. Why would it be released to a 3rd party to begin with? Nevermind this potentially being illegal (depending on the state) and definitely being unethical. This is literally Mr. Beast's company running to the media with unethically obtained recordings to character assassinate a former employee who accused them of wrongdoing instead of releasing it themselves and addressing it directly. No idea why anyone would defend the usage of this recording. Would these people defending it be okay if their former employer had been secretly recording their very uncomfortable firing where they tried to plead to keep their job and just released it to some random drama RUclips channel or Buzzfeed columnist? I doubt it.
@@kylegonewild It's genuinely ridiculous seeing what I cannot believe to anything other than soggy sockpuppets or paid accounts going around in this very comments section going "This 'leaked' recording of dogpack being fired disproves dogpack's allegations" What the fuck do the recordings disprove?? That he was fired?? We knew that already, and isn't material to anything Dogpack claimed!? It's just pure character assassination and utter hypocrisy from soggy.
@JulieWooly-pn6tx My uncle and cousins on my mother's side would NEVER say a slur to a black man's face. They sure will say it around the dinner table though. What kind of braindead response is this?
Everything in Soggy's video makes me suspicious. If he's just 'debunking', why does call this dude a vengeful, spiteful ghoul in the first, like, ten minutes. The recording of dogpacks firing, the various bits of insider information he has and MrBeast DM'ing people this video but not wanting anyone to know that he's doing that (or unless doesn't want screenshots) and not publicly sharing the video himself in any way, shape or form. I'm not gonna go so far as to say MrBeast paid for the video or anything like that, but Soggy is not in this just for the facts and MrBeast is far more involved than anyone knows.
Shadiversity is super into AI art and happens to be Draw with Jazzas brother....which is a complete tanget but I can't help pointing it out whenever he comes up oh and Jazza had to publicly say he didn't agree with shad's views...which is like, damn
@@eniettelia8698 man you should have seen the "isn't to great how we can come together in civility" comments on Jazza;s announcement post (he was as diplomatic as he could be given it's family and he has a broad audience so I don't hold that against him and I actually appreciate it cause it would have been very easy to say nothing)
"He could have left at any time and was being paid, he did this willing! So Mr. Beast did nothing wrong!" You just described that plot of Squid Games, which Mr. Beast did his own version on his channel and then made a full on show with Amazon (which he is now being sued for). Like, are Soggy and Mr. Beast defenders are so oblivious.
Also the people currently working for Mr east candidly talking about a former employee is fucking wild. Like i know people just think this is normal behavior cause its content creation. But imagine any other industry where someone who was HR just talking about internal harassment investigations, naming employees, describing events, to just, a fucking random guy. That is the most insanely unprofessional shit ever. Like these people are still actively on the payroll for a company, publicly shitting on a former employee, commenting on their firing. In almost any other business, especially of this scale, every person involved in this would be fucking shit canned. This is insane.
@chidubemanukwu yeah that's not how that works at all. It doesn't matter what a disgruntled employee says after being fired, at any other company, just take like google for example. There would never in a million years be a band if current google employees speaking to a fucking RUclipsr, candidly, about how they covered up sexual misconduct in their company. That is insanity.
I think my new least favorite guy of all is generically European Zoomer with an exaggerated accent that uses Discord slang "ironiccally" but you can tell he actually just talks like that. XQC was the original but he's emboldened a lot of guys that I just genuinely fucking hate.
Honestly, Soggy's video seems so incredibly easy to undermine that Im surprised dogpack didn't do it already. Edit: On second thought, yeah, he'd have to admit to having exaggerated many of the claims, manipulating his viewers in the process. So yeah, that might be why he's gone silent and not responded back.
Soggy made enough good points about dogpack's character and reasonability that I'm not surprised he doesn't want to respond. But frankly, I am pretty surprised it hasn't gotten the appropriate amount of backlash
DogPack had already came forward publicly to address that he f**ked up with some of the allegations like the Ava Tyson Group Chat and James Warren Even if he came forward to admit that he has been manipulating and exaggerating some points, he still would’ve taken more accountability than Jimmy and Soggy COMBINED
For those that dont empathise with jake weddle, i simply ask you to evaluate if youre being mistreated at your job and then quit... these people really cannot rationalize the effects of capitalism
Go to ground.news/saint to stay informed through diverse sources and geta clear view of the world around you. Save 50% off the Ground News Vantage Plan
there are at least 3 videos you should ideally watch before this one, I have linked them all in the description. looking forward to a drama free comment section ❤
support links:
💰 PATREON @ www.patreon.com/jacksaint
🔴 RUclips @ ruclips.net/channel/UCdQKvqmHKe_8fv4Rwe7ag9Qjoin
👛 TIPS @ ko-fi.com/lackingsaint
Credit to Skutchdraws for the thumbnail
bsky.app/profile/skutchdraws.bsky.social
Second Channel: www.youtube.com/@officalwordfromjack
Bluesky 🦋 lackingsaint.bsky.social
Instagram 📷 instagram.com/lackingsaint
ok but where's the weasel video playlist?
@@Axolotine I'm sorry I just added it to the description 😬
Half life opposing force
*pop goes the weasel on the playlist reminder* 14:44
You can't afford mic stand? Get a day job.
People trying to claim money isn’t coercive are just factually wrong. Anyone who has been broke can tell you, yes, we’d absolutely let someone torture us for money if it was that or being homeless. Jake clearly says he was having financial issues and needed the money, that is not true consent.
and as bad as extreme game shows are, even those contestants are not subjected to conditions as bad as those weddle was. where was the health and safety advocate? the on-site medic? the fire safety staff?
@ Yeah, like…I do think a lot of extreme game shows are in a way predatory on their own, and that is worth discussing, but not having health staff on any professional grade set is basically inhumane. Like I get it’s RUclips not TV, but dude, you are a millionaire, hire fucking consultants and staff.
If money wasnt coercive then there wouldn't be as many SW as there are. Because remember kids, it's not consent even if you buy it, especially if that person has no other better choice.
THANK YOU! I've been waiting for someone to call this out, it annoyed me so bad
I mean, wasn’t that what Squid Games was actually about???
I appreciate you and I am leaving a comment, but I had to tap out. I don't know who like any of these people are and I think that's something I should seek to preserve.
Real af
you are wiser than most for sure
i'd tap out too but im in too deep
never change basilia
I wish I could make this decision too, but alas, it's 3am, I need to finish making a poster about Greek mythology by like 4.30 and need something to keep me awake
Idk if it's just my bias, but anytime I hear the "disgruntled employee" defense, I'm immediately very skeptical.
As you rightfully should be.
Companies have been using that excuse against whistleblowers for decades upon decades, and it’s almost always just an attempt at character assassination.
You shouldn’t disregard it completely, but it definitely deserves a metric ton of scrutiny.
Having been a "Disgrunted employee" many a times, as soon as you explain it people rightfully get why you'd be pissed.
the important thing is determining WHY they're 'disgrunted'
Yeah, just because they're disgruntled doesn't mean that everything they are saying is unfactual. Just look at Boeing.
"Disgruntled employee" is code for "capitalism-induced problem".
Mr beast promoting hypeconsumerist and gambling ideals to 7 year olds is good actually if Dogpack got some other details wrong
“Getting some details wrong” is a strange way to put intentionally lying and fabricating evidence
Like I think Dogpack can be an untrustworthy source on many claims…and Mr Beast can have done some of that wrongdoing.
Like I don’t care if Mr Beast didn’t intend for those things to happen, if the result is real suffering, he has to be held accountable, that is the responsibility you take on as a CEO and face of a company. And it seems some of the claims in that Dogpack video have been corroborated.
@@alexbennet4195ok but there is a lot of actual irrefutable evidence in those videos (faking signatures is the one that pops to mind) so you can’t just call the whole video into question
@@alexbennet4195 you're doing the same thing they made fun of, of ignoring the key criticisms to nitpick. you are the punchline.
@@alexbennet4195slander and libel is ok if it harms MrBeast because he sucks and is stupid (I’m saying this without a hint of irony)
The “Mr Beast is not bad but is the best person ever because he gives people money” narrative that had the internet in a chokehold for years was so strong I felt like I was living in a skit parodying the US it’s been that comical.
I've heard so many people say about celebrities "you can't call them bad because they donate to charity." So did Al Capone. So did Pablo Escobar. So did Prince Andrew. Philanthropy (with very few exceptions) exists to make rich people look good, not serve the public. For most, its about subverting critique, converting money into PR points, justifying unequal wealth, or covering up scandal. People are still drinking the Kool Aid, though.
Jimmy Saville hid all of his atrocities because he donates to a lot of charities.
"living in a skit parodying the US" Welcome to anywhere south of Rio
niche reference, but as someone who didn't care about the beast and only heard from hearsay--during the entire time that narrative was going on, I couldn't stop picturing Mr. Beast as Magnus McGilded from Ace Attorney... lol
@@brassenrio?
"Mr. Beast isn't responsible for Jake's financial situation" BROTHER HE WAS LITERALLY HIS EMPLOYER??
yeah which implies he was not paying Jake a living wag???? I gueess he could be arguing that it might be a previous to employment existing severe financial situation but we don't know if it is or not
so is my boss responsible for my student loan? since, you know. he is my employer. your argument didn't make sense
@@rollingvice he's resposible for paying you a livable wage?? especially when he's a fucking millionare?? damn, does the boot really taste that good?
@@rollingvice The difference is your boss isn't known for being charitable and giving away money to people. It just reinforces the idea that mrbeast only does charity for the money. He could have at any time helped Jake's financial situation without bribing him to do inhumane challenges
@@dreamraptor994 so someone being charitable is a code for them to give me free money to cover financial irresponsibility. good to know
The dude criticized the use of a video recorded without consent, yet the video opens with a recording of DogPack getting fired that dogpack did not know he had, and likely did not consent to him sharing??
The difference is that it hasn’t been proven yet if DogPack’s firing audio is being faked or not.
@@Marchers46It's clearly real.
All companies have the right to do this in cases like these it's not illegal.
@DanielJacobs-rz1zl one party consent (to record a conversation) states exist and are most states so neither are illegal
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl the audio was a bit too clear tbh for a leak recording, and even if it was recorded by one of the parties themselves its still really odd
"people probably clicked off after 13 seconds and missed the clarification that it was AI" followed immediately with "it's peoples own fault for not checking the bottom of the description" is a wild shot chaser combo tbh
almost like its intellectuall dishonest argument... almost...
One is irresponsible framing for a controversial video topic, and the other is for participating in a no-lose lottery, read the context
@@kenjhudiel2290 again, less than half a minute, it takes less than half a minute to get to the part where its said to be fake
@@swordshaver
also soggy never said anything anywhere near that second quote, he was debunking claim that dogpack falsely made. why lie?
@@swordshaver and to nitpick, its not "less than half a minute (
"why did Jake take the money" why did Mr. beast offer it? Literally why is everyone ignoring Mr. Beast willingly and obviously for PR reasons offered Jake money? If taking the money is bad what is offering it then?
So, why did Jake take the money if he doesn’t care about money?
@@Marchers46 Nice to have
@@Marchers46 Dude, chill
@@Marchers46 you can not care about having a fortune, what you HAVE to care for, is buying food
@@Marchers46 because people need money to live. Food, water, shelter, clothes, etc. all cost money. Especially when Beast is offering life changing amounts of money.
regardless of anything else, mr beast IS bad, and it's very goofy to me to see people constantly flip-flopping over whether they can say that or not based on the current youtube drama of the week.
Not to be a Boomer, but does anyone actually have principles anymore? Or is that not part of this stage of capitalism?
dont forget about lunchly, bro tried to sell moldy cheese
@@thecatlurking this is not a new thing, people don't like being othered, especially if it's a moral stance, think about how many people were comfortable with things like human sacrifice, enslavement, forced religious and cultural conversations, racism and homophobia a whole, that we feel comfortable denouncing.
@@thecatlurking the only principles that have been lost in recent times is the facade of having any, it's the same rot as it's always been
@@Killazaa The facade is still there, its the motion to remove or downplay responsibility that the world has been doing. This is the same playbook used in politics, business, and legal issues. There is no difference between this situation and past ones, its all just chasing the money and denying responsibility.
That's so funny he thinks Best Buy wouldn't hire a sex offender to work in their store.
Seriously, like do you think giant companies give a shit about protecting people?
@@kaibaiarrio1299 yeah right? Take a peek at MrBeast
@@kaibaiarrio1299 yeah, the only thing even close to them caring about people is them is worrying about their image (because of its impact on profits), and in that case it's usually a pathetic "apology" after the fact and perhaps lip service toward doing better in the future with no substantive changes. For them to fix things usually requires a court order (which might be part of why so many companies settle out of court, come to think of it… huh.)
that was so funny lmao.....if he really thinks that he really is removed from reality
@@jannecapelle_artHis whole point was more of the guy thought the person who he hired working there alone made him qualified and he didn't think to do background checks as he was very young at the time.
I started questioning the whole Soggy video because of what happened with Coffeezilla. He wasn't able to get in contact with Mr. Beast's employees to figure things out yet Soggy literally had lots of contacts, even got a freaking audio recording on Dogpack getting fired. This made me question it yet not enough for me to confirm it was wrong. Then this video pops up and it reveals that all the stuff Soggy said was lies. Then the interview with Oompaville had its last questions made exclusively about the crypto stuff Coffeezilla was investigating and he lied through his teeth throughout the questions. This just made me realize how Mr. Beast is literally doing everything to reduce the damage done to his reputation.
mr beast commented under that video. That, combined with suprising amount of cooperation from employees, made me suspect that soggy is just a shill
I questioned Soggy right away. A charity Mr Beast didn't pay but was in his video about giving people eye surgery. The charity couldn't get a hold of him for 8 months. The charity claim was stepped around in Soggy's video with the employee lying about it. They only paid because the charity did a video about it that went viral.
I thought Oompa and Coffee would be acquainted enough for at least Oompa to steer clear of the drama.
I guess, on that side of RUclips at least, clout and drama is more important than actual morals and convictions.
@@oserodal2702 money does wonders. oompaville is like a money hungry guy that got famous of making videos about nikakado
I love when Mr Beast is smiling because it is so authentic and beautiful.
I literally just got an ad for an AI app from Mr beast that starts out with him yelling “I HATE READING!”
His team took advantage of his illiteracy😔when will the suffering end
Anti-intellectualism, both illiteracy and media illiteracy and simping for giant corpoations (in the form of massive YTers) are on the rise; Don't wanna be an alarmist but at the very least the internet has gotten worse in the last 8 years
@Ashe_and_Dusthahahahahahah
imagine yelling that to someone appearing one of his philantropy video's
The milk may have curdled, but the THUMBNAIL has NOT. Skutch is over here making ART for the CLICK PICTURE, DAMN.
Skutch is such an awesome artist
Skutch came in clutch
The thumbnails test my ability to keep myself away from internet culture.
the clicture
Thanks a lot! I'm really happy with how this one turned out!
the candy bar part made me spit out my coffee when he claimed that "uh actually the mr beast bar is healthier if you only eat half" like..... the candy bars are that size bc mr beast wouldn't make as much money on half sized bars, the label splits it up into two serving sizes bc otherwise his candy bar is clearly less healthy gram for gram. I worry for soggy if he really believes any of his own arguments
His argument was him comparing the different sizes he used two that were about the same size and found that one was more healthier than the other.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zlbro no ones payin you to defend this guy in every comment you can do literally anything else
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zlwhich doesn't make much sense because people eat chocolate bars in one go, so the "per gram" thing is irrelevant here
@@involithI'm not doing that all over but if I see a comment that intentionally misinterprets an argument I will respond to what it's saying.
@ youve been responding to comments about shit like people finding him smug or the technical usage of a word/term. you gotta have some sense of self awareness if youre gonna leave this many comments nitpicking the smallest shit
I just want to say thank you for hiring artists to draw awesome, original thumbnails. Most creators have already accepted that AI I just the future and it's so hard to watch. So thank you, it actually means more than you know.
Yeah, as an artist it warms my heart when some RUclipsrs do that.
ALSO, it legit makes me want to click on a video more.
This! It has been really hard for me to take "educational" youtubers seriously when they would overuse AI generated clips instead of filming some relevant footages, or just themselves talking to us like human beings.
This!
6000 AI bots lost their jobs because of this and you're celebrating
Jack is an artist himself(animator) so I totally understand why it’s important to him.
I hate the "he had a weird vibe" so much. What does that even mean? That he's neurodivergent? That he's awkward? or that he's lowkey abusive? or maybe he himself wasn't vibing with the team and it's them who have a weird vibe, who knows?
It means he has no empathy and it's evident by just looking at him. Humans are objects to him.
Feels kinda like she was just bullying him
Yeah, thought the same. 'Weird vides' is such an easy way to point at and put sus on people who might just be neurodivergent, or awkward, or shy, or have social anxiety... Not saying this is the case bc I don't know the guy, it's just a nothing burguer argument that can be easily weaponised against certain people that don't fit our idea of 'good vibes'
You can tell he has not mentaly left high school if that's the kind of things he tried to dig up.
like, wdym weird vibe ":3" or "i like children" vibes?!?
The problem is that the guy is basically sponsored by MrBeast. Like he's getting insider knowledge, being able to interview the employees who ain't gonna say publicly that MrBeast has done anything wrong. Then the whole "Soggy called" thing(Either it was planned or the chef and employees knew him in advance).
This whole thing is just stupid. Why do people simp millionaires and celebrities so much? It's like people you are fan of can never do anything wrong.
soggy explained this on a stream. Apparently he tried getting in touch with the chef prior to get him for an actual interview but he declined and that was how he knew of soggy's existence. Also how is soggy sponsored by mrbeast? Because he got a flight ticket paid to middle of nowhere greenville NC? Yeah risking your youtube credibility over a plane ticket to the middle of nowhere for a 15 minute interview section which don't add much to ur video seems logical at all
@JulieWooly-pn6tx ... He is betting on future work with MrBeast and access to his subscribers if he wags his tail the right way. Google quid pro quo ffs. It's not that the tickets were payment It's that it shows he was getting direct access in order to paint a narrative. If he wanted to be neutral he never would have accepted ANYTHING from the subject of an investigation aside from an interview.
Soggy explained on a stream? Were you expecting him to admit to being dishonest? To being paid off? The hell are you on about?
"Also how is soggy sponsored by mrbeast? Because he got a flight ticket paid to middle of nowhere greenville NC? "
Yes. That's what a sponsorship means.
"Yeah risking your youtube credibility over a plane ticket to the middle of nowhere for a 15 minute interview section which don't add much to ur video seems logical at all"
Okay? And Soggy chose to put that portion into his video? That's his choice not to leave it out? I would almost certainly think that the interview portion of the view blows up any impression of impartiality soggy might've had, but we're in a video where everyone involved risked their "youtube credibility" for whatever the fuck it was worth.
@@flyerton9958You need to look up the definition of a sponsorship if you genuinely think that's what that word means.
Getting info from the other side important if they have things they want to say or show.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl i have seen you from i think 10 comment chains.
First of all i agree with you about hearing the other side. and also i do think that soggy was sponsored (by the mrbeast company) although not directly it was an employee of the company that paid for soggy cereal.
the funny thing to me is this is a recurring pattern of mrbeast not really showing his involvement with things such as with the hiring of delaware, the questionable art in his wall, and finally his his crypto wallet
Dogpack uses stock footage of a rocket exploding for visual aide: "Cringe, liar, how dare he manipulate you."
Mr Beast using CG to show things that never happened: "Based, cool, good content. What an honest guy!"
dogpack was misframing and jimmy was demonstrating with animation
@@GetDogPunked
You gotta be trolling
@@GetDogPunked>1 comment on this channel
Why are you defending an entity wearing the skin of a "normal human being" on a channel you don't watch. Instant filter for me seeing someone glaze billionaires
@@GetDogPunked Yes, we know. The real rocket was bigger and then it also blew up. That's why he showed footage of the rocket blowing up.
@@dracocrusher The rocket exploding isn’t the problem, why didn’t DogPack use actual footage from the rocket?
the "a big company wouldn't hire a sex offender" or whatever sounds an awful lot like what drake said in the heart part 6 about how he would never look twice on a minor cause he is way to famous for that and he would be arrested. Which is such a terrible defence
many women have been assaulted by co workers!!!! saying an offender wouldnt be hired is such a shit defense!!!
It's the same as saying Hollywood wouldn't have sex offenders, it's bs
It's very much a 'the bible is true because it says it's true'. Circular reasoning.
So, do you think a sex offender is working at your McDonald’s right now?
@@Marchers46man I looked at the SO registry in my area, I HOPE NOT. They had teens working in every one of mine, but I know damn well they could have a creepazoid in there considering the numbers.
19:30 kinda frustrating that the word "consent" has become so common in these sorts of situations. Like if we look at where the place it originates, in conversations about sexual assault, we would know that you cannot give consent under coercion, which can include economic coercion.
Uh... I have my doubts that's where the word truly originated, especially since it's a word that's hundreds of years old. Although such topics was likely the originating point for why many of us now put such weight on the word.
yeah no it doesn't originate with that but not wrong
@@damien678 they mean this context of "consent" not the word itself. It's like the scientific usage of the word theory vs the casual usage of theory. They are basically different words. If people appropriated the scientific meaning of theory it can be misleading and confusing no?
just because someone provides consent doesn’t mean you can fucking torture them. yes doesn’t mean “do whatever the fuck you want to me and i’ll be fine with it”.
@ no one was forced to do anything and could stop at anytime it wasn’t torture lmao
im ngl im only a tenth into this video and the soggy guy using the term “yikes out of ten” to describe mr beast hiring a legitimate criminal and predator kinda makes my blood boil
That was a manipulative edit done by Jack, watch the original video before proving you’re a dumbass.
He didn’t, Jack manipulated the footage to make Soggy look worse.
@Marchers46 38 comments, soggy doesn't want you bro...
Reddit language is always awful. Just terminally online slop.
He didn't though. He used "Yikes out of ten" to describe Lunchly
I'll never stop being disgusted in the ways people are dismissing Jake's trauma. I was severely abused as a young child and one of the main things I went through was being locked in closets, cabinets, toy boxes, etc in complete pitch blackness for hours on end. It's been over two decades, I'm almost 30 years old, and to this day I am completely petrified of the dark and have to sleep with my light on because of it. Our situations have their differences obviously, but I completely understand and sympathize with Jake's trauma and how deeply it's effected him. No one can understand how immensely PTSD effects nearly every aspect of your life unless you've experienced it yourself.
Which one? the one where he could have not have done it? getting paid 10k a day to the point where by the third day he would have already had enough money to pay the bills as he claimed?
@DanielJacobs-rz1zl Ah yes, you would definitely stop at $30k (about yearly wage for most people in the US) when you could have up to $1M if you kept going (about 25 years worth of wages if you earn $20 an hour, 40 hours a week). This isn't even mentioning the fact that on top of all the severe effects that solitary confinement can have even in a short period, he was also severely sleep deprived due to them never turning off the lights which can also severely effect mental health almost immediately, AND THEN the whole time he was forced to try and perform to the multiple cameras pointed at him and watching his every move 24/7, even as he struggled to sleep. This man wasn't even sane by the third day.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl Beast isn't going to do you my guy. You've been waging a battle here for him with no promise of a reward, and in the process you're pretending that money is not coercive.
@lich109 I don't carr for that and I've done nothing but point out misinfo.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl Wrong, you spent a whole day arguing with me that Beast's team did not show a CGI pit when they did.
“‘No does not mean no’ actually means you need to exhaust every avenue available to you to the point of harassing workers” somehow makes an already fucked idea to have floating around the office worse.
LET ME FILM IN DOLLAR TREE
"glazing mr beast would be career suicide!" (proceeds to perform a long winded character attack on his biggest detractors with information that he was given by his company, alongside downplaying his actions at several points)
I feel like there is legitimate criticism to level at dogpack, but holy shit lmao
It's actually insane how he can legitimately act like Weddle getting a pay out from Mr Beast is damages his credibility. Soggy literally got financial support to to make his video from Mr Beast and that isn't? Normally when you hear someone got a bunch of money from someone you assume it biases them in the giver's favor, not something that makes your accusations seem untrustworthy. Normally when a company gives a potential victim a massive amount of money the company immediately looks extremely guilty.
The fact that is in the video at all immediately throws away any credibility this person has, but that was obvious from pretty early on. It's actually wild how a video that concedes they had CP shared between employees, had a sex offender working there, did just transfer someone who was accused of SA around rather than firing him, ran illegal lotteries and had dangerous working conditions.
It was so annoying when Sog's video came out and lemmings started to scream that Beast is exonerated. People who claim that Sog's video is good either did not watch it (would not blame them, his style is grating) or have major brain damage. It is just a collection of deflections, manipulations, misdirections, ad hominems and strawmans with a conflict of interest as a cherry on top.
Yes, Dogpack made mistakes but his main claims still stand. Sog's video is far worse.
At least now people are coming to their senses, it seems.
He literally express multiple times that the intention was only to clear up misinfo he also didn't actually try to excuse much of anything.
The criticisms are all in the original vid.
@@TheNotshaunaIt does though why y'all keep trying to paint one employee flying him down to make it easier to interview people as him somehow being paid off?
You clearly did not actually watch the vid he's responding to if you actually the vid is concluding that they kicked out the guy immediately they didn't just send him off.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl "the intention was only to clear up misinfo"
Then Sog proceeds to misinform people about what Beast did (painting Beast in positive light) and misinform them about Dogpack (painting Dogpack in extremely negative light). Independent journalism, right?
"why y'all keep trying to paint one employee flying him down to make it easier to interview people as him somehow being paid off?"
Because that's a classic journalistic conflict of interest. Sog can no longer claim that he is independent and unbiased if he receives favors from one of the sides. Getting a paid flight to U.S. to help him make a video is a definitive quid pro quo favor: Soggy gets juicier video (more views, more ads, more $$$$). Beast's team gets best possible coverage.
In the video itself Beast's team does in fact get most sympathetic coverage. To the point where it is pure cringe like Soggy literally asking them for more dirt on Dogpack or a woman making a laughable defense of "no means no" (with no pushback from Soggy) or another woman telling a guy that Sog is on the phone (trying to make orchestrated interview more natural). So, the only conclusion a reasonable person can make is that there is a collusion between Beast and Sog. Who knows how deep it actually goes.
The way this Soggy guy handwaived the whole Delaware situation tells me enough about him. Defending hiring a convicted sex offender at a place where he has easy access to children is not something anyone should defend nor downplay, especially in such a dishonest and weaselly way. What a garbage human being.
Especially the ways he immediately slammed Ava as a "degenerate" for less legally actionable child creeping. (Not a defense of either, both those creeps shouldn't be in positions of power in an industry ained at children) Makes you wonder what the difference between the two that would make him go harder on her than the registered sex offender.
Calling hiring a registered sex offender "cringe, but he didn't do it intentionally" is the downplay of the century
@@Seloliva1015 He didn't lol, that was a manipulative edit by jack
Based on vibes only there's a non-zero chance he has skeletons in his closet as well
Soggy never handwaived this, Jack however manipulately edited this segment as if soggy called it a "yikes out of 10", which he actually said about lunchly, not about the Delaware situation.
Soggy extensively talked about how Jimmy hiring delaware was a big mistake and be held accountable, but also talked about how the accusation that this was done knowingly/intentionally made by dogpack and jake weddle was false. Which is completely fair.
Nothing says "Fair criticism" like making a video where you callout slightly off wording in accusations and then have a 45 minute ending segment where you call up their ex-boss and ask "hey so like, his vibes were really bad right? Like just garbage vibes?"
Exactly
Did you not watch the video, and hear what his video suggestions were.
@@Marchers46 What? My only point is that soggy is someone who invalidates criticism arguments over small missteps while also having a huge amount of manipulative shit himself, including a large portion of his video dedicated to basically just asking ex-coworkers to tell him what a weird rude freak someone is. dogpack could be the biggest freak on the planet and it wouldn't change a thing about if his arguments are true or not.
@@Enoploteuthidea Considering the fact that DogPack criticized Beast for his poor management, I find it ironic how doing it to him is unfair for some reason.
@@Marchers46 Its not unfair to criticize dogpack's mishandling of information or poor execution on his statements. You'll notice jack agrees with many of soggys points about how dogpack handled his video. But calling someones coworkers and asking for you to gossip about how he had bad vibes is not doing that: its just trying to poison the well and get a smug "wow get a load of this guy. Must be a petty freak"
also, theres a world a difference between mishandling things while putting together something yourself, and mishandling things in a way that harms your employees and coworkers. I care a lot less about dogpack's video having lackluster wording than I do about Mr Beast's torture gameshows poisoning people or exposing them to sex pests
I feel like this whole situation, particularly with the Jake Weddle and Beast Games scenarios, a disturbing lack of basic empathy. That awful MrBeast glazing channel that Soggy recommended (Have come across him before, absolute monster) seems to regard SA and mistreatment as some kind of joke, and the "well, he/she/they could just leave" statement seems to only be being used more and more now. It's silly that among all this crazy stuff, this is the one thing that disturbs me the most, but it really is
Youre not fucking wrong though, like the sheer amount of lack of empathy and oh he had free will to leave and I'm like no he needed that money for his own debt being a motivation and you can't tell me there wasn't peer pressure to last and stay.
Most of what Mrbeast did is "technically legal" by the book, but really immoral and below the belt.
@@kiz5562 yeah it was legal in the same way sweatshop are legal in the global south.
doesnt seem silly to me
@@minnow1337It’s maybe silly that it stands out to me among the rest of this, and Beast’s crimes I meant. But yeah, definitely not FUNNY
The universe has brought forth you a creator called "soggy cereal" as a follow up to your "aged like milk" video.
APPRECIATE the level headed takes brother ❤️
I hope you’re doing okay! I don’t really know what to say, but I hope you know that most people are on your side. Regardless, your feelings are valid and validated. I’m really sorry that some people only see this as “drama” and not dangerous.
Aren’t you planning on taking legal action against a smaller creator?
Ayo Jake, you deserve better than the victim blaming soggy and his cronies are putting you through low key
@redcarseat6816 ty ❤️
Lets hope soggy isn't such a scumbag like you and doesn't sue this moron for anything.
Dude shot himself right out of the gate by using audio of someone who didn't know they were being recorded, then...criticizes dogpack for using audio of someone being recorded without their knowledge.
Soggy proved his hypocrisy instantly. Then, the fact that Mr. Beast's employees knew exactly who he was, instead of treating it like an interview with a RUclipsr. You can see the familiarity in their conversation. It's like watching Chris Van Vliet interview wrestlers he's on friendly terms with. The entire dynamic changes.
How do you consider those two to be similar in anyway?
@@Marchers46 It's called an example. You've heard of that, yes?
You use an example to demonstrate your point or more easily convey your meaning.
In this case, I used an easily found example to show what it looks like when someone interviews people they're friends with.
@@TimedRevolver I was talking about the first paragraph. Soggy isn’t being hypocritical for showing that interview, because as far as we know it hasn’t been altered in favor of anyone. In comparison, DogPack manipulated someone into answering the questions he wanted to hear.
@@Marchers46 "manipulated someone into answering the questions he wanted to hear" what are you going on about?
It's no more unethical to record someone while asking them questions than it is to record someone being fired without their knowledge. Both are shitty, but neither is worse than the other
@@Marchers46 Dude, chill
it's genuinely a bit difficult to watch somebody openly call themselves a brave and oppressed lone hero for defending planet's biggest youtuber/evil billionaire mr. beast 😬 haha
Fr, it's like the millionaire comedian specials on Netflix or even the random minor celebrities that subexist pretty solely off punching down and acting like they are brave for it.
They will make an hour long video mocking trans, blacks, latinos, immigrants, whomever else they can think of, then act like the same rich folk that often fund them are actually trying to silence them.
so true lmao, same dishonest energy
@@LuizAlexPhoenixHey just wanted to let you know that you shouldn’t use “trans” to describe a group of trans people, it feels a bit dehumanising to be described as “a trans”. Anyway I entirely agree with your comment otherwise, best of luck to you!
"hahaha 'no doesnt mean no' is FINE to write into an official company document actually because we dont mean in a RAPE way!!! just in a 'all other unethical practises' kinda way!!! so its fiiine actually dont make such a big deal out of it :)))" yeah....thats really really convincing me to not think mrbeast is a horrible person with a horrible company lmao
Saying no means yes is fine bc its a funny little jokeeee dont worry about it keepp enjoying ur mrbeastables ^-^
@urbroz uwu uwu its just a widdle joke uwu uwu
why is everyone shocked that a rich person sucks all of a sudden? its like youtubers are immune to criticism but elon and bezos arent. makes zero sense lmfao
Parasocial bullshit. Or: "my favorite rich guy can't be a piece of shit because he's my favorite and that would mean I don't know how to pick people to be unhealthily attached to!"
tgcf profile picture 🙏🙏 you're so right
People say its parasocial relationships but I think its deeper than that. I think society’s keen defense of Mr. Beast is highly indicative of how our culture and economy shapes how we think of and treat things. You’ll notice that a lot of the pro-Mr Beast arguments are eerily similar to the way people defend Capitalism and deny sexual assault allegations. Rhetoric about how Mr Beast wasn’t coercive but instead Weddle consented - paying no thought to the psychological implications of wealth. Many of these beliefs and arguments have been made before, this is just a weird internet manifestation of it.
I agree. At the end of the day, he's not your friend, he's not even really a RUclipsr as we know them, no, he is the leader of a multimillion dollar business and we all know how shady that world is. The thing is you can tell how over the time his brand completely took over. A lot of business-owning rich people suck. That includes your favorite RUclipsr.
@@vetreas366 judgy? too judgy. presuming why someone else thinks something without sufficient reasoning. stating it as a fact. judgy.
mr beast hired his mother, an ex military corrections officer (iirc), as chief compliance officer right since he started his company. them not running background checks is crazy and defending hiring a RSO saying it's a silly mistake... his mother effectively runs HR for him, according to that infamous 2023 Time article
his mother also wrote a book about domestic abuse and holds some... interesting views. it's one of those situations where victim jumps into activist role and isn't the best at recognizing maybe it's too soon
doesn't jimmy beast also share at least one lawyer with elon musk
@@tinoesroho Alex Spiro, also known for representing Alec Baldwin and Eric Adams.
It's so clear this kid is trying to emulate the way Idubbbz used to speak in some of his older videos and it's unbearably cringe
Yeah, especially a year after the original Idubbbz has publicly disavowed those videos for how they were like 30% racial slurs as non sequiters.
Leaving a comment and a thumbs up to offset the watch retention because I can't listen to another 32 minutes this Soggy kid's delirium.
Even though he made a point sometimes in other videos, i just cant stand Soggy's voice. I wanted to watch it but i already started to click off once he starts speaking.
Ive been taking breaks from this vid 2 lmao
I agree. I was aware of his video but refused to watch it because it sounded like it would be really annoying. Now after watching this video I know I was completely right. I could barely finish this video, I think a few seconds at a time is the most I can take of this guy
That's funny cuz I felt literally the exact same way about dogpack's videos lol
The "no means no" bit made me go nuclear, no one misunderstood that, its just a horrible shitty thing to do to some small franchise you dorks lol.
Yeah, it is 100% morally wrong to try and pull employees into making decisions that could get them fired
I'd already heard that in the Dogpack video and I agree, it's disgraceful, but what got me here as I haven't watched the (have we seriously run out of internet names now that this is a real name?) Soggycereal video was how the person who I assume is what amounts to an HR professional in the Mr Beast company, laughs at it, then says with her whole chest, "OH YEAH, I WROTE THAT TEEHEE!"
Considering this was a blatant smear campaign on behalf of Mr Beast, it felt so weird of (ugh) Soggycereal to have been allowed to leave that in. There wasn't even an obligatory, "Of course, we have updated this policy now to be more in line with our forward thinking modern approach here at Beast 2.0..." bit, they just laughed and moved on.
them having something named "No does not mean no" comes across so fucking gross.
like forgoing the context of what it was about. the phrase "no does not mean no" gives off very r@pey vibes. LIKE... YES NO DOES IN FACT MEAN NO, THEY'RE NOT AGREEING, BACK OFF?????
"No, no, it doesn't mean what you think it means! We just encourage employees to cross ethical and professional boundaries, harass and bother people until they give us what we want, and we phrased it as a kinda rapey joke to be funny."
@@alexcharteris Well she was also apart of the amazing HR that just moved Locoya around after he had been inappropriate with an assistant XD
The amount of people calling Jake a "cry baby" especially in Soggy's comments is actually disgusting. I'm not one to call toxic masculinity, but I don't even know what else to call it. Like anyone acting like they've never cried over something terrible that happened in their life as an adult is either super rich and can solve all their problems and buy happiness with money, or they're a toxic liar who will do anything to be perceived as a sociopath because they think it makes them better than other and look stronger for being completely out of touch with what's going on in thier own mind.
This is something I hated too. You cut right into the meat of it, great comment
pretty sure he also was crying when recounting telling a dad to ask for a raise alongside with him.
the father ended up losing his job, so did jake but he was ecstatic because he just wanted out. when recounting he was saying he wouldn't have done it or encouraged him (the dad) if he knew it'd cause him to be fired.
Yeah, but those are sensible moments to get emotional. People aren't robots.
But yeah, if you already have functionally unlimited funds as far as personal finances are concerned, problems that can be solved with money aren't problems, now are they? A lot of the people doing the finger-pointing are influencers who will never experience being disadvantaged to that degree.
I’m in the middle. I don’t like Mr Beast and I think Dogpack has exposed a lot of bad stuff he has done.
However I find Jake just really annoying and I don’t really think he was treated that badly. He just seems like a grifter trying to get more attention for his failing comedy career.
There is a middle ground. Not just Mr Beast Good / Bad
@@georgeh4171 maybe there is a middle ground, but calling someone a grifter over coming out about a thing that was mentally damaging is such a fucking stretch. he might ride the wave of sympathy... but if someone is a victim of mistreatment, why shouldn't they be allowed to make the most of the validation others give them for speaking on something that traumatized them?
the character of jake, if he's """annoying""" or a "grifter" is irrelevant.
what is relevant is the treatment.
also people label others as "annoying" when said person is ND / socially awkward. not saying jake is, I don't know him, so I wouldn't know, but from personal experience, calling someone "annoying" in this context feels ill-willed.
The “no does not mean no” thing is wild to me because what an insane fucking thing to have in your employee training/instruction documents. Like does Mr.Beast not have a legal team? Because I cannot imagine a legal team looking at that paragraph and advising anything other than burning the whole document and starting over. That policy seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen (or I guess it is in fact happening now and that policy is gonna be a huge part of the plaintiff’s case). It immediately destroys any defense of “well they weren’t forced to continue, they could stop whenever they wanted” by admitting that they would not take refusal or rejection without attempts at coercion. A legal team should really be one of the first investments when these RUclipsrs start sizing up to a company, right along with HR. Because otherwise you get these absolutely rancid examples of illegal or unethical behavior being treated like company policy or company culture. If you want to be a business, that comes with the expectations of behaving like a business
Fr, even if it doesn't mean what the big bold text implies. Not a single person saw that and noticed any problem with a big bold rapey phrase in official documents
sounds pretty expensive. why don't you just skip all those investments, keep it a smaller operation so it feels more intimate, and everyone can feel comfortable about reporting incidents if they need to. you know it probably won't even be necessary to report incindents since it's not like anything will happen in the first place
Exactly. These shady mfs knew what they were doing
The problem with all of this is that Mr. Beast is kind of like the Mister Rogers or the Steve Burns of this current time. But he is NOT teaching kids kindness and how to be helpful. He is teaching kids hyper consumerism and how to exploit others. We took the childrens television personalities of our time for granted.(Except for Jimmy Saville of course)
Absolutely
I watched a few episodes of Reading Rainbow with my friends and their kid today and the difference couldn't be more stark. Levar Burton encouraging kids to ask their parents about the parents own childhoods or learning to cook with a famous chef with delightful children's books read by the likes of Helen Mirren and Matthew Broderick. Polite but frank conversations about the importance and joy of reading between people who respect one another as human beings. Not everything needs to be educational television but the examples set by old PBS kids shows were something to aspire towards.
Fred Rogers is a saint, and to even use him as comparison to this trash is offensive.
@@NeighborhoodOfBlueliterally came here to say this. Other than both being synonymous with "entertainment for kids" there is absolutely no acceptable reason to compare Jimmy Donaldson with Mr Rogers. And even that is being generous, b/c we all know Jimmy does it for money.
@@NeighborhoodOfBluechillout slugger, it's meant as a comparison of the absolute state of children's entertainment and how empty, dishonest, disingenuous, hyperconsumerist and nothing but advertising.
the whole "he took money therefore he's not allowed to complain about mistreatment" thing just reminds me of all the people who claim if a woman takes a settlement after, say, getting SAed by trump, then she's not allowed to talk about it ever again. Even though clearly twenty plus years ago, and even today (look at weinstein's acquital and trumps 'reelection') clearly coming forward with SA allegatioons doesn't affect powerful men whatsoever, so accepting the settlement is probably the most they'll ever "get back" period.
Jake weddle is literally using mrbeast's "blood money" to legally threaten small creators who have been (validly) criticising him lol
@JulieWooly-pn6txInteresting, could you provide more information?
@JulieWooly-pn6tx you keep repeating this, but never cite a source. Please name a creator who he is suing.
On the "no does not mean no" bit, I think the criticism was both what you described, which was the policy itself, but also the fact that riffing on a phrase about consent like that is just bad optics.
No one who actually read that policy legitimately thought that was literally defending or perpetuating sexual misconduct, but the fact that they thought it was funny to twist that specific phrase accompanied by the many allegations of mistreatment and coercion paints a very poor workplace/management culture around boundaries and respect. The actual name of the policy in itself is just distasteful on it's own, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum.
53:58 but… isn’t 5head usually used in a sarcastic sense… isn’t it usually used to pretend something is smart as hell when it isn’t? what a dumb thing to be focusing on in the first place but this is so weird to me
100%. I was like ... has this guy never heard the term 5head before??
I thot it just meant you had a bigass forehead
5head means he has a big ass forehead
@@idrk3707yeah that was my interpretation too. Was really confused when that bit came up
@@dylan9025He has and that word has been used for exactly those situations as he also showed in the vid.
Mr Beast defenders still ain't beating the allegations that they can turn a blind eye to any and all bad business practices and just say his critics are merely jealous of his wealth.
christ this guy is absolutely insufferable. like between how smug his voice is and how all of this feels like "oh you had a tiny inconsistency therefore everything is bullshit!!! gotcha!!! now the whole thing is invalid", i do not want to isten to soapy at all. like the "um it isn't actually a war crime to deprive someone of sleep" okay? it's still wrong. it's still scummy. dogpack404 being a flawed guy doesn't immediately exonerate mr beast.
Unfortunately, this is what internet dramas have devolved into, or perhaps always were. Every discussion of a topic or controversy, even serious ones, has to hinge on the outcome of some sort of tribal purity test.
Sleep deprivation is a torture tactic. Small but important distinction if your goal is to break people without _technically_ doing war crimes.
People in general fall hard for the logical fallacy of "wrong about one thing means wrong about everything". Especially in hostile online discussions.
You can write a very detailed post or comment with a lot of points, but people who disagree would not address them. They would typically look for some small technical error about a minor point, sometimes even a typo, to claim you are wrong. As if a typo makes your whole argument unvalid. It is extremely annoying bad faith behavior.
ironically, in a war, it is absolutely a war crime to deprive someone of sleep.
Binary brain. Either you support mrbeast & hate dogpack or vice versa
@1:01:00 Honestly, I actually disagree here. That document comes across rapey as fuck. While its not explicitly about anything.. explicit, it IS fundamentally reinforcing the idea that consent should be bulldosed, and that no doesn't matter. While the document alone doesn't guarantee anything bad about workplace harassment at the company, its a pretty horrifying look.
It is insanely indicative of company culture that there was nobody in the approval process saw the clear bad vibes of having "no doesn't mean no" in what seems to be training material
I think especially if you put it in the context of the REST of the document. The "let the boys be idiots" and "assume they've already assessed the risks" statements are disgusting on their own but there is no way to isolate the "no does not mean no" from all the other sludge.
I agree that this is a valid point of criticism, but I don't think it's necessarily in conflict with anything Jack is saying. Though there are some pretty tricky semantics going on in this part, so I get why it could sound that way.
To my understanding, right at timecode he's calling back to how parallels have been drawn between the treatment of Weddle and that paragraph, in the sense "if no also didn't mean no in that situation which isn't explicitly mentioned in the paragraph, who's to say that attitude isn't tolerated in any number of situations", such as SH. I don't interpet this as Jack taking any stance on that argument, just describing it to contrast with how the interview mis-characterizes it as "the paragraph was explicitly, intentionally about how SH is okay at the company". Then he says regardless of what can or can't be extrapolated, what the paragraph literally, unambiguously says is also unethical. So the response in this interview is off-mark for the criticism it's trying to counter, and straight up admits to another point of criticism as if there was nothing weird about that attitude.
But yeah, personally I think both points of criticism are valid. What the paragraph literally says is probably the more rhetorically persuasive point, but especially when it's literally phrased "no doesn't mean no", it's worth asking what kind of company culture would allow that to be published. There are other kinds of unethical business (e.g. telemarketing) where that attitude is also encouraged, but I've never heard it phrased as literally "no doesn't mean no", because even most unethical businesspeople understand how that would look. This business apparently doesn't.
It doesn't, it's not being used in the way you are trying to describe it that's just how it works in businesses.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl connotations exist, holy fuck how do you not understand that?
As far as a teenager performer unknowingly hiring a pdf file I went to a concert once where an artist who earlier in her career had been on the teen pop circuit and they made a comment about a drummer or a roadie from those days being a little too into the teen groupies so they had to get rid of that guy. It's not that hard, you're the boss, part of your job is making sure everyone is safe and if that means firing someone who isn't safe to be around then that's what you've got to do.
If Mr. Beast can't take basic responsibility to make the work environment liveable he isn't responsible enough to be a bussiness owner. they act like people have more right to run a bussiness than to not be assaulted or coerced.
@@lunatykica5636 FAX😭😭😭
Less than 10 minutes in and this Soggy Cereal guy reminds me of all the worst stuff from mid to late 2010s youtube. He's trying so hard to be Pewdiepie it's painful.
no need to be rude 😅
more like idubbbz rly. but swedish so 10x more annoying
@@nat9380 good lord man
I'm so glad I never have to relive that period of youtube honestly
Gen Z onionsan
I've told this story before, but the first time I came across Mr Beast was one of his really old worst intro videos where he made fun of an intro by calling it autistic. As an autistic child, this was f i n e for my self esteem, and when he blew up years later I was just taken aback, wondering if I was making a big deal over old stuff, or if he even was the same guy.
beast also happily used the "r word" a lot in the past. Unfortunately that was quite common in the online gamer space back then
@@Muhluriand its coming back. its no longer a “bad slur” for most now. dont know if that makes sense but the r word no longer seems to matter.
@@Muhluri i mean people were also alot less sensitive and so didnt have as much of a filter but over time our culture has evolved to be more sensitive about this stuff so people will now filter their speech more in my personal opinion someone saying something that wasnt really seen as bad at the time doesnt make them a bad person
@buisnessbandit I agree and disagree, only reason why people were so vulgar back then because the internet was just becoming more mainstream to the public and wasn't monitored like it nowadays, and most people back then were pretty young and never really cared or thought about how their words would hurt someone, hell, even the adults were pretty childish, i remember grown men and women bullying a 15 year old girl because she made a terrible music video😂
It wasnt that people were less sensitive, it was just that most people werent being filtered, Though I do miss some aspects of it.
"No does not mean no" is still extremely weird. Even if a woman wrote it, that changes absolutely nothing.
It's not meant to be in that context it being woman further proves this.
@DanielJacobs-rz1zl The statement itself provides the context. It being not used in that context doesn't change the cultural and social understanding of said phrase. Was it not in that context? Yes. Does that change the fact that it's weird that someone chose to use that specific phrasing? Yes. If you say that was a joke, that's even worse. If it was between friends? Sure. But to employees of a company? No, absolutely not. It'd be an HR nightmare in any other situation.
@DellXDellY It does though it clearly has no actual connections to what you are trying to claim it does, if this was found with anyone else.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl If you don't see the connextion, then, sir, you are indeed a very dense man. No offense
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zlIt's specifically parodying a phrase and saying the opposite. It's at best very poor taste and completely unprofessional. And that's without talking about the actual intructions it precedes: the name alone is a red flag
I finally understand why I like Jack's videos so much: we share the Zillennial torment of kind of hating Zoomer culture but also living in perpetual fear of being considered cringe.
Its because we feel responsible *(whether we like it or not but thatsa livin on a prayer no?)* like generation talk is bunk the way i often see it used *(by lifestyle sections/opinion pages, so flat with context removed)* and cos material conditions n whatever its gonna look different, feels honestly as helpful as going by Spike Milligan poems to decide ur personality forever *(of in which case, hehehehe mines on the SABBATH!!!! DAS GOTHIC SHABBATMAN!!!!! !)*
ANYWAYS!!!! b4 i distract meself any further, it can be like asking what tv u watched as a kid, might say something on its own (free to air vs cable vs satelite), might need a heap more context to actually understand (say paytv in competition with the internet being a potential disrupter) where the money and investments ended up, who was PM like OMG!!! EVERYTHING!!!!?? so much of everything is timing?!?!
*Ah rats i did it again* 😂😢😅
We deserve more representation damn it!
@@audiosurfarchiveNo, you don't you are overgrown, spiteful teenagers.
That's probably why I like him so much. EFAP kept me away from this kind of content until the hypocrisy and haterism and beating the same dead horses for money got old AF
@@AnotherAustin-z7b Surprised you stuck around like enough to even get into EFAP. I never watched anyone else on the show but mauler and quickly went from falling asleep to his rant videos about Star Wars to not being interested in any of his surface level complaining about every new piece of media.
The takeaway is this: always use comic sans when discrediting someone.
have people missed the point of squid games??? mr beast is literally the thing that show is criticizing about. those people wouldn't get slapped on the face till it bleeds if it weren't for money. they wouldn't have joined a deadly game if it weren't for money. the same thing is happening with mr beast. who would turn down a big amount of money for a bit of suffering? and then it turns out its more than just a bit of pain, but they're in too deep to back out by then. a little bit more pain wont hurt, right? especially if money is on the line like, damn.
Maybe a trite thing to say but this Soggy guy is just.. extremely annoying
Truly don’t know how anyone watches that
I couldn’t watch him for 30 seconds, he just oozes “I’m so cool look at me” energy. He is not some kind of smart guy like he thinks he is.
The exact same energy as a class clown in like 7th grade.
Well, the average Mr Beast fan probably. So like 10 yearolds
@@durnel2001 that’s too generous they’re like 5 year olds
Thank you for saying so. I was trying to be open minded (as a GenX/Millennial) but jfc his voice & mannerisms _made my sht itch_
Also, I watched another video riding the coattails of Soggy's, which directly dismissed the hideous things in that group chat as 'edgy humour.' and I just have to say, as a CSA survivor, it is so utterly disgusting to me that so many people still just don't take it seriously whatsoever. The Internet's brazen apathy towards, or even endorsement of, CSA is utterly vile. This is perhaps Soggy's most dangerous motte and bailey of all, and shows a far uglier attitude within him than I initially realised. Thank you for taking it seriously, something which is nauseatingly rare.
The main problem that I see with the internet in general is a lack of basic empathy. Because when they see all these things, they believe that it wouldn't happen to them, that it's all just a goof, they smarter than this and not idiotic. Then, when these people actually get into these positions, they'll see how they would fall into these things if they were desperate.
@@WokioWolfyBeing an anonymous doesn't help either
It’s also why Rosanna is no longer talking about Mr Beast. All of the slop commentary RUclipsrs went after her in bad faith.
Although I don’t think that the video shouldn’t have been made in the first place…and if so, should have been done in a more careful manner.
@@Dave102693 Wait, didn’t she use what she thought was CP as clickbait for one of her videos on this situation?
@@Marchers46yes and that’s why she shouldn’t of made that video at all.
She also started her podcast after the black lash she got from the commentary slop community for her shit video. And since then, she hasn’t mentioned another thing about Mr Beast and probably never will ever again,
I'm so sorry, but Soggy Cereal looks like someone tried to draw Onision or IDubbbz from memory and accidentally creating their cursed caricature child ☠️
Him aping the old iDubbbz mannerisms/editing made me feel so embarrassed. I can't believe after all these years people are still doing this
@@goztboyThe guy who made the vid he's responding wanted to come off like he was so he thought he'd also act in that same way.
@@goztboy Particularly embarrassing given iDubbbz is ashamed of those times and has since grown up as a person.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl is this Soggy Cereals alt account? Lol. All your comments are so funny
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl Why would it stop being cringe when a 2nd person does it?
I'm pretty sure that sharing a recording of a private meeting regarding employment without the consent of both parties would be against GDPR in the EU/UK (don't quote me on this, it's been a few years since my training...)
To me, as someone that has fired people in the past and has been fired in the past, I definitely wouldn't want those recorrdings shared as those are often very stressful conversations for both sides. It's unreasonable to expect people to behave stoicly in situations like that, and I feel sorry for Snoop Doggy Dogpack that his dirty laundry is being used to defend a RUclips channel's honour, of all things.
I would also like to say, that in my opinion as a manager who has worked in many corporate (read: hell) jobs, it is bad form for the person being fired to be so shocked by it if it was during their probation period. There should have been reasonable management in place to ensure they were aware of what steps they needed to do to improve, and to let them know they were not performing to the standards set by the company. Sometimes, if handled properly, both sides of that conversation will be in agreement that a probation needs to end (they get fired) or it needs to be extended (they remain under the terms of the probation period for longer with conditions). Granted, I am from the UK and I am sure that it's a lot looser in the US, but I imagine we stole a lot of our corpo rubbish from across the pond anyway...
Aside from the fact that leaking the audio is an obvious attempt to smear the 'disgruntled former employee', if I was a current employee of Mr Beast, I would be very concerned that audio of my meetings could be used in future if I were to leave the company.
I'd also suggest that if D to the O to the G to the PACK404 was feeling disgruntled, that there are probably other employees at Beastable Towers that feel similarly, but will probably not want to speak up for fear of reprisals. This is just my opinion, but the whole thing screams Toxic Workplace to me, and I've worked for a few of them.
I get the impression that Mr Beast's company, like a lot of company's today, runs under the excuse that it is a 'Startup' regardless of the fact it is worth millions of dollars. With the 'Startup' label, you can play fast and loose with things that are essential in companies with even a couple of hundred employees, like decent HR policies (see 'No Does Not Mean No') or training, or reasonable expectations of their jobs. Loads of unpaid labour (or labor over there) is undertaken by workers in 'Startups' because they have a 'super-fast' 'muck in and grind' approach to work. Again, I'm making assumptions here, but from the testimonies of people who worked for James Beastman, I reckon they winged a lot of things because of that 'Startup Mentality'.
I'm ending this comment here, or I may as well just make a video about it myself, but thanks for this video, it was a good watch and also made me feel less like an old, dumb idiot about this whole situation.
Unfortunately, in the US, companies, especially extremely successful ones like Mr Beasts, can do pretty much as they please with impunity, and the only way to push back against them is through courts, which are 9/10 times rigged in their favour, where they do their best to drain you of all your money, so you would stop the lawsuit due to bankruptcy. The only thing that might bring about any change is either government regulation, which won't happen due to the bizzare amout of corruption, *ahem* I mean lobbying that happens, especially coming from big businesses like Mr Beasts, or by class action lawsuits. Unfortunately, compared to, say a water source being contaminated by improper waste disposal, the damage Mr Beasts does is both less tangible, measureable and provable.
They really wouldn't, trying to prevent situations like these from happening isn't bad.
Actually in the U.S. you can be fired at any time for any reason except discrimination that's on the employee to prove. I know I got blindsided by it at my last job.
@@phyllisford2130 Oh, absolutely, you can be fired at any time for any reason here too, but if you do it without a 'legitimate' reason here, you leave yourself open to be taken to an employment tribunal for what we call 'unfair dismissal'. What is 'legitimate' is very open to interpretation (other than obvious things like discrimination, but still the employee must prove this for it to be upheld.) Do you have anything like that in the States?
If I've wanted to fire someone in the past, this has involved a lot of private discussions with a Human Resources team, or more senior manager to make it happen, and even for really severe things it can take a lot of time, investigation and hard work to make it happen.
When someone is still in their probation period (usually the first 3-6 months of employment) they have basically zero rights, and you can fire them with a week's pay for basically any reason (again, non-discriminatory reasons, obviously...) In these cases, I would still feel it was my responsibility to ensure that that person had been supported as much as possible before we got to that point, but I know a lot of managers use it to 'manage people out' that they just don't like.
My point was really, from a management perspective, it's a bad look if your firing conversations sound like the one that was shared by Dogpack's former employers. Don't get me wrong, they are NEVER pleasant conversations, but there's a way of handling them with empathy and respect for the person on the other end which I would hope other Corporate Hellscape Managers like myself would agree with me on. I find the sharing of that audio absolutely disgusting, and I would be shocked if it hadn't broken some sort of employment law, somewhere.
... and really, that's my main interest in this Gen Z-ass topic of 'BEAST BAD?!' - I'm really interested in the way that young people are indoctrinated into corporate ways of thinking, and the things that Dogpack brings up should be a problem, but they aren't problematic enough unless they are 'illegal'. It's not illegal to run a shitty workplace, cut as many corners as possible, lie to your audience about your the way things are done, leak people's management conversations, only do things in the name of profit... but they are bad, and he is rewarded with a huge audience-share. If it turns out that Jimmitha Beast's involvement in Crypto pump-and-dumps don't get him into any legal trouble, the rest of these allegations will most likely be brushed under the rug, because who cares, right? Ethical and moral 'crimes' aren't crimes any more, according to our court of public opinion.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl Sorry mate, I don't understand what you're trying to say here... Probably my bad, but could you explain again?
I’ve witnessed a decade of internet celebrity drama, and I find the aspect that affects it the most to be that most of the people viewing the situation are children. They usually do not have the life experience to understand different kinds of abuse, especially work abuse, so they have to rely on the video they are watching to tell them what actions are right or wrong. They don’t understand how you can be a “willing” participant in something and also be abused. It becomes really easy to convince them that their fav youtuber is actually not that bad because what they did wasn’t cartoon level of obvious evil.
I also saw this with the drama about the youtuber who was called out for going to a party instead of going to the hospital to support their girlfriend who had a life threatening ectopic pregnancy. A majority of people commenting on the situation did not have the experience to understand how a person would feel in that situation and how bad it was physically and emotionally, or haven’t had the relationship experience to understand the dynamics
emotional maturity and experience is a really big factor, youre right
I would also like to add that kids see things in black and white, there is often no nuance. Since their influencer is ”not that bad” it’s no biggie. And I say kids but sadly teenagers and young adults are also like that nowadays
@uttsu1537 Not to be to much of an "kids these days" or "this generation is bad" guy but we genuinly have a problem with people even over 18 not having developed a lick of emotional or mental maturity
Jake Weddle was slammed off the internet in the worst way due to Soggy's video, Soggy REAAALLY downplayed how serious this was to the point people literally bullied him off of social media.. its sickening.
So you think it's okay jake weddle is legally threatening small creators with international lawsuits because they criticized him? (even though he himself said he's "broke")
@JulieWooly-pn6tx Exactly, these people don’t care about nuance, they just want to have the popular opinion.
@JulieWooly-pn6tx i don't in any way condone what Jake Weddle did in that regard, but I myself am easily stressed out as a person, and understand what its like to be pressured into doing dumb shit. Jake Weddle did exactly that. Got overly sensitive when people made fun of his situation or called him out when he should've expected it (you're gonna have that happen to you when you're going after mr. Beast of all people) If anything he made the right decision by leaving the internet, he wasn't built for that, but it was still wrong that they shat on him like that after he literally cried his heart out.. you don't do that to people when they legit have emotional trauma, even if you think the trauma is over something dumb. I've been pressured with money before too.. I used to think it was stupid that anyone would do this for money or let money control them to this extent, but.. you don't know until you're there. now as to whether he's a good comedian- nah, he sucks, his jokes aren't funny, but its hard to find anything that makes me laugh these days so Idk.
@JulieWooly-pn6txI am curious though which youtuber did you hear that from? this is interesting to learn though.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl A youtuber called hellbent, leaked DMs from jake weddle and his girlfriend threatening her with an international lawsuit. nicholasdeorio made a video on that
having almost completed this video i wish soggy a very log off, five years hard labour, and to learn and grow as a person
He doesn't need any of those.
He is such a weird amalgamation of every obnoxious internet mannerism ever.
The lingo, the tone...
Eugh
fr, especially not a fan of how he treated Jake Weddle
@glimmerstantroop46321 It is true though and mind you he was getting paid 10k a day to stay in there if he hated it that much he could just left and taken the amount he earned there with him.
True, also very pathetic to pick the side of the billionaire celebrity and act like he is the underdog. Reeks of desperation for a fight, like he knew his takes are dogshit so he had to premptively prepared other MrBeast acolytes to disregard criticism and lionize him.
"Pissing off anime twt" is the funniest criticism I've ever seen. Imagine thinking that causing the lolicon avengers to start a klan rally against you is proof someone was in the wrong.
Exactly 😂
33:50 Maaan, as a CSA victim it is insane how often this kind of shit gets used when you point out obvious abuse material that isn't explicitly sexual. Clearly I must be disgusting, too, if I'm thinking of that when I see an image of some mechanic's 9-year-old daughter in a bikini making a kissy face to advertise his shop on Facebook.
This video aged like milk
(Im just getting in early before the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash starts)
This comment aged like milk
(I’m just getting in early before the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash starts)
This comment is now a fine aged Stilton cheesw
Both of these comments have aged like milk(I'm getting ahead of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash of the backlash@@schoo9256
The backlash, to the backlash, to thing that's just begun.
I won't not be surprised if this whole comment section ages like milk. But yeah I get the point
That "recorded them without their consent" line is fair, sure, until you remember that his own video literally opened with a recording made of dogpack presumably without his knowledge or consent. Like, sure, it's a valid criticism, but also you really don't have any ground to stand on in making it yourself.
We don't care about Dogpacks personality, I don't think he is 100% reliable but the entire Soggy Cereal video is a deflection, a character assassination and doesn't address anything.
49:20 Is this dude trying to imply that nobody would be able to intervene if a contestant turned violent? Either they have safety regulations or they don't, make up your mind 😂 And he criticizes dogpack for recording someone without their consent, but then turns around and uses a recording of dogpack, which I assume was taken without his consent
They can have those there but that only reduces the risk it doesn't actually save much and companies have every right to avoid situations where an ex employee lies on them, this is not the same.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl ??? What lie is being refuted here? The fact that Dogpack was fired????
@@flyerton9958 The many in the claims in the vid made by the guy you mentioned.
It was probably taken with consent, to be fair. At least it should be. "For legal reason I must tell you this conversation is being recorded" something like that
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zlyeah but they didn't.
Having someone on the sidelines to intervene in case the contestants get violent is an incredibly low bar to set.
If you're doing a game show, it is your responsibility to keep the contestants safe, and part of that is keeping them safe from other contestants.
And Mr. Beast didn't do that. It's one thing if it was an unfortunate accident that he did his best to prevent, but he didn't even do the incredibly basic thing of having someone stand by the sidelines just in case.
I like the video but the guy you're covering is too annoying to watch.
that annoying RUclipsr voice and smug attitude just made me have to tap out
Yeah, the fakeness is unbearable.
It's taking every bit of Jack Saint's likeability to keep it bearable.
@@arculoHe just didn't feel like tolerating those who were gonna keep making excuses to side with the other guy.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zlbro clock out of the bakery shift, you don't need to glaze him in every comment thread
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zl I'm confused and idk what you mean I'm sorry 😭
This reminds me a lot of how many RUclipsrs tried to discredit Amber Heard’s allegations against Johnny Depp; take what she said he did, exaggerate what she actually said, & then when her evidence of events didn’t align with their exaggerations claims that’s proof she’s lying (&ignore how the evidence aligned with her original claims).
And just like mrbeast paid for soggy's flight, depp's legal team paid (mostly right wing youtubers) to talk about edited and out of context leaked clips that made amber look bad before the trial even began
Amber's claims were that Depp physically abused her. None of her evidence aligned with that. I have zero doubt he was verbally and emotionally abusive. Both of them were. But considering Amber has a history of perpetrating domestic violence, and the photos of her bruises were taken from a PC rather than just plainly in a phone raises suspicions.
Also, let me speak as someone who has seen spousal abuse first hand. An abuser will NOT hit walls or cupboards, recording or not. They'll hit YOU. But all her evidence involved Depp hitting things aside form her. She was even caught in a recording mocking him because he WOULDN'T hit her. She even told him nobody would believe him.
And before you mention the UK trial, the Judge should have recused himself, because one of his relatives was involved with the organization through which Amber initially made her accusations, meaning there was financial motivation to rule in her favor.
Amber and Depp were poison for one another. But there's zero concrete evidence of him hitting her. All we have is him badmouthing her to his friends. We have actual proof she hit him.
@@TimedRevolveramber doesn't actually have a history of abuse, that was just made up by a homophobic cop
Medusone has a very long and detailed series of videos that go over that and go over everything
It really stood out with the short part talking about payments for eye surgeries. It's not a very important part, but I feel like the same people who shrug off a company fucking up and not making sure they pay for things that they are massively publicising, would also be the ones who were hounding AH for having to pause charity payments after being sued (with the full understanding and agreement of the recipient).
In this situation many of the claims of the original vid was found to be false, not even the guy who made the vid thinks the one who startled it all is above criticism.
41 year old here, just had to drop by and say this: 💀💀💀
An 18 year old account, and a fellow cloud 😮
SKULLLL EMOJIIII
🔥🔥🔥
@@_cloudface_ 🤝☁️
berserk rules
I always wondered what the people upset at Idubbbz for making better life decisions looked like
lmao y e a h
Damn that’s a straight up burn
saying he made better life decisions when he's getting cucked is wild tho
@@thisguyagain8149Just out of intellectual curiosity: what do you mean by "cucked" here?
Better Life Decision is not equivalent to stripping down your personality and getting into a relationship with a woman whose life decisions stress him tf out lmao. All his fellow creators he collab'd with are still universally beloved while stopping the edginess. Looks like his friends grew up while he pretends to be a grown up or smth
I find it weird that people are claiming that everything MrBeast did to Jake is null because "he did it for money, he could've just not accepted it and left" when there's literally a whole show that is suuuper popular and mainstream, which MrBeast himself did a shitty parody series with as well, showing how this sort of behavior is immoral and borderline evil. You know. Squid games ? Where contestants are motivated to literally kill themselves for a life changing amount of money ?? Odd how people can watch a show like Squid Games, acknowledge the core themes and how realistic it is, but then still blame people for putting themselves through torture for a life changing amount of money. This is almost comical.
Its fucking crazy that he was even allowed to recreate that show and get huge off it. Like its fucked up no matter what way you cut it
@urbroz what do you think of sports
@Non-profitorganizationinKenyaComparing sports with a shitty remake of a show which showed how money can be coercive is a one heck of brainrotted comparison
Is this really what we are doing? Come on now. Some videos come out with some bad accusations and it looks like Mr. Beast's popularity may take a tiny dip, but then just like magic all these videos come out to either debunk those claims, muddle the water around the whole situation, confuse viewers about what the actual claims are, and personally slander those making the claims. Many of those videos coming from people who have financial ties to Mr. Beast in 2 degrees of separation or less. I think it is pretty evil genius, but it very much looks like Jimmy, the king of RUclips, got other RUclips creators to come out of the woodwork and clog the space around the allegations he was facing, just throwing enough spaghetti content against the search engines and algorithm to see what sticks (or overtakes the actual allegations) Jimmy really is on some real dastardly supervillain nonsense, but it seems to be working. Who could have guessed the person with the most money wins?
Everyone, everyone should have seen this coming. It's not a mystery about what is happening here. it is the wealthy doing what the wealthy always does in America, this time it is just using RUclips instead of traditional media and before the courts because producing a thousand of these RUclips videos costs about the same as 15 minutes worth of a great law firm's time.
After 2 lines i aint reading no more. Just two words for you bro: thats capitalism
@@guilhermeito2295 announcing your short attention span and belief that reciting meme phrases is a valid contribution aren't as relevant to an adult dialogue as you're telling yourself they are.
If you're unable to read more than two lines and don't have anything relevant to add you don't have to comment.
What do you mean by "we" though?
I actually see much worse coming eventually regarding James Dawson but wether that's before or after he runs for president only time will tell. He's amassing Epstein level power for reasons beyond wanting to be a children's entertainer that much is clear.
Christie Paige’s take down of Rosanna definitely was apart of this as well
Just gotta say, it's wild to me any time I see the anime community online get together to pretend that 100% of anime fans appreciate anime for the narrative and that there are zero creeps in the anime community. Like. I'm a huge fan of Evangelion. I have definitely seen some shit related to Evangelion that I wish I could unsee, because a lot of Evangelion 'fans' are not there for the tragic story about child soldiers' trauma. It's totally okay to say 'that person made me uncomfortable with how they discussed anime, so I no longer want to be around them'.
Again with this soggy guy having outright garbage takes.
Nobody gives a shit about anime twitter. As an anime fan it is a community full of degenerates, not to mention the anime referenced is actual lolicon which Jack called out. So much of soggy’s video could have been cut out entirely especially the last portion.
ah, yes, exactly the reason I can't with anime fans anymore and I was a big otaku growing up (cringe for me, I know). I miss old internet where I could find random sites about Eva lore and discussions on its symbolism and narrative.
It's a cartoon from thirty years ago, move on with your life. Evangelion is one of my favorite anime, and I could not care less what people are doing in the fanbase. Go outside.
@@Jimmykisskiss I like how your response to "I don't want to interact with all the pedos in the anime community" is people shouldn't care about the pedos lol.
@@mabi2727 Hey fellow moth, we have the same moth pfp!
Literally a "We investigated ourselves" but if the FBI investigated the CIA or the other way around.
i think the worst kinda hell there would be for me would be to be caught glazing a bilionare this hard on camera for no reason other than i'm a dumbass
Dont forget those sweet sweet views
the milk is now a fungus colony
Put it in lunchly
@@SlavoidUkrI like my cheese moldy bruh 😝
The cereal has been left out too long 😔
It is now soggy..
Soggy Cereal
I have loathing in my heart for people, specifically content creators, that make observably wrong or inaccurate claims in a deeply snarky and/or condescending tone.
Soggy cereal is like a parody of an annoying Gen Z
I hate to say anything akin, simply because it's bad faith, but yeah. Everything Soggy Cereal does feels incredibly forced and butt-hurt. The cocky "I gotcha" shit is so annoying when often that just isn't the case.
Soggy Cereal seems like a persona born of copying what was popular amongst 16-year-old boys in 2014 instead of being genuine and wanting to genuinely discuss and argue. The only time I felt as if they were genuine was when they were insulting that Dogpack person.
As a gen z then, I have to say i have no issue with soggy. His previous videos are great, like with airax. This video of his wasnt bad either as a critical piece against dogpack. And his sense of humor is literally a nothing burger. Background noise to my hyper stimulated brain.
@@viderevero1338I don’t think you actually like soggy the person, or even his content all that much. But you’d rather enjoy having background noise of stale or outright bad takes.
I get it, I’m a gen Z, as well. But I just can’t agree.
@@viderevero1338 i'm also gen Z, and have to defend myself all the time because of embarassing weirdos like you. grow up man
Don't mind me, I'm just here for the videos of the guy playing with the weasel.
I saw Soggy Cereal's video and just felt like "Wait why did they record firing someone?" and also "How did you get to the Mr.Beast headquarters?" Then it turned out he was paid basically.
Signs that I'm Gullible
Takes Dogpack at his word
Takes Soggy at his word
Takes Jack Saint as a saint
lol
“The REAL TRUTH about Soggy Cereal and Jack Saint”😂
@@Europear09 The REALER TRUTH about europear09
I checked the description to see if the weasel videos where there or just a joke but they actually are,I'm glad you keeped your word.
Thank you for linking to my Ozzy the Weasel videos
Jack Saint?
More like Jack Cheese, because
because cheese is aged milk
And Jack is a kind of cheese hahaha
Pepper Jack…..
I love you marry me
Thank you JeevesAnthrozaurUS, very cool!
Cheese gets better that whey!!!! :D
*Henlo im YoGertie ye Ginosaur from las toontown expanded universe* :3
PEPPER JACK CHEESE
At this point I'm just gonna go with "Mr.Beast suck" and leave it at that, I'm done with the slop
I honestly couldn't even begin to get through the Soggy Cereal video when I opened it. The ignorance, and hypocrisy of his own, and of Jimmy's that is put on display is pretty mind blowing.
Could you please provide an example and stop making blanketed statements, please.
@@Marchers46 The hypocrisy of being angry at Dogpack for using a recording without consent, and then using a recording of Dogpack being fired without his consent.
@@flyerton9958 Also how did he obtain that recording? Is Soggy an employee of Mr. Beast's company? I don't think so. Why would it be released to a 3rd party to begin with? Nevermind this potentially being illegal (depending on the state) and definitely being unethical. This is literally Mr. Beast's company running to the media with unethically obtained recordings to character assassinate a former employee who accused them of wrongdoing instead of releasing it themselves and addressing it directly. No idea why anyone would defend the usage of this recording. Would these people defending it be okay if their former employer had been secretly recording their very uncomfortable firing where they tried to plead to keep their job and just released it to some random drama RUclips channel or Buzzfeed columnist? I doubt it.
@@kylegonewildThe reason people like Soggy will defend this illegal recording is because those people are being paid by Mr Beast lol
@@kylegonewild It's genuinely ridiculous seeing what I cannot believe to anything other than soggy sockpuppets or paid accounts going around in this very comments section going "This 'leaked' recording of dogpack being fired disproves dogpack's allegations"
What the fuck do the recordings disprove?? That he was fired?? We knew that already, and isn't material to anything Dogpack claimed!? It's just pure character assassination and utter hypocrisy from soggy.
This Soggy Cereal guy has what I can only call big slur-sayer energy
He literally never said a slur in any of his videos lol
@JulieWooly-pn6tx they didn’t say he says slurs, just that he has that energy lol
@JulieWooly-pn6tx My uncle and cousins on my mother's side would NEVER say a slur to a black man's face. They sure will say it around the dinner table though. What kind of braindead response is this?
@JulieWooly-pn6txmost literate Mr beast fan
@@isaac3140 i dislike mrbeast lol, I do like soggy
Everything in Soggy's video makes me suspicious. If he's just 'debunking', why does call this dude a vengeful, spiteful ghoul in the first, like, ten minutes. The recording of dogpacks firing, the various bits of insider information he has and MrBeast DM'ing people this video but not wanting anyone to know that he's doing that (or unless doesn't want screenshots) and not publicly sharing the video himself in any way, shape or form.
I'm not gonna go so far as to say MrBeast paid for the video or anything like that, but Soggy is not in this just for the facts and MrBeast is far more involved than anyone knows.
That's what he was, he was someone who was lying to lie just to get back at the company who fired him for being bad at his job.
@@DanielJacobs-rz1zlSee that's funny cuz soggy himself said that everything he claimed dogpack lied about was true in his own video
@@PeashamHe never did that.
Shadiversity is super into AI art and happens to be Draw with Jazzas brother....which is a complete tanget but I can't help pointing it out whenever he comes up
oh and Jazza had to publicly say he didn't agree with shad's views...which is like, damn
I was so thrown when I found that out, they don't look very much alike either, so it's less expected than it could be.
@@oneovertwo1186 It's like when people find out platform darling Markiplier's brother is a prolific furry artist lol
wait what??? I don't know much about shadiversity but from the little i do know i did not expect him to be jazza's brother
@@eniettelia8698 man you should have seen the "isn't to great how we can come together in civility" comments on Jazza;s announcement post (he was as diplomatic as he could be given it's family and he has a broad audience so I don't hold that against him and I actually appreciate it cause it would have been very easy to say nothing)
@@kylegonewildI'm sorry what?
Glad to see nuance isn’t entirely dead I guess
I’m actually blown away by how bad soggy’s video was.
I am also blown away by how good the thumbnail of this video is.
"He could have left at any time and was being paid, he did this willing! So Mr. Beast did nothing wrong!"
You just described that plot of Squid Games, which Mr. Beast did his own version on his channel and then made a full on show with Amazon (which he is now being sued for). Like, are Soggy and Mr. Beast defenders are so oblivious.
How are these comparable?
You're the only person on Earth who can still make me interested in RUclips drama, Jack
Also the people currently working for Mr east candidly talking about a former employee is fucking wild. Like i know people just think this is normal behavior cause its content creation. But imagine any other industry where someone who was HR just talking about internal harassment investigations, naming employees, describing events, to just, a fucking random guy. That is the most insanely unprofessional shit ever. Like these people are still actively on the payroll for a company, publicly shitting on a former employee, commenting on their firing. In almost any other business, especially of this scale, every person involved in this would be fucking shit canned. This is insane.
Dogpack dooxed some of these people video for no good reason. Professionalism went out the video a long time ago
@chidubemanukwu yeah that's not how that works at all. It doesn't matter what a disgruntled employee says after being fired, at any other company, just take like google for example. There would never in a million years be a band if current google employees speaking to a fucking RUclipsr, candidly, about how they covered up sexual misconduct in their company. That is insanity.
I think my new least favorite guy of all is generically European Zoomer with an exaggerated accent that uses Discord slang "ironiccally" but you can tell he actually just talks like that. XQC was the original but he's emboldened a lot of guys that I just genuinely fucking hate.
Soggy loses massive points with his video opening immediately calling names and making it clear this will be Mr. Beast propaganda.
Honestly, Soggy's video seems so incredibly easy to undermine that Im surprised dogpack didn't do it already.
Edit: On second thought, yeah, he'd have to admit to having exaggerated many of the claims, manipulating his viewers in the process. So yeah, that might be why he's gone silent and not responded back.
Soggy made enough good points about dogpack's character and reasonability that I'm not surprised he doesn't want to respond. But frankly, I am pretty surprised it hasn't gotten the appropriate amount of backlash
Dog pack is an idiot, it’s best he doesn’t embarrass himself
I think that he has done his job
@@officialmonarchmusicWhy would it?
DogPack had already came forward publicly to address that he f**ked up with some of the allegations like the Ava Tyson Group Chat and James Warren
Even if he came forward to admit that he has been manipulating and exaggerating some points, he still would’ve taken more accountability than Jimmy and Soggy COMBINED
For those that dont empathise with jake weddle, i simply ask you to evaluate if youre being mistreated at your job and then quit... these people really cannot rationalize the effects of capitalism