The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 6.10 My Response To NYT "Making Of A Youtube Radical", Detroit Pride Controversy, & Bieber

Starting point is 00:00:00 Sup you beautiful bastards hope you have a fantastic Monday Welcome back to the Philip DeFranco show and actually a quick note before we get started today about an hour ago I posted a brand new video on a brand new channel. It's youtube.com slash DeFranco does I'm gonna include a link So you can go to the channel you can subscribe to it I want a place where it didn't create confusion like on this channel where it's all news and it wasn't on the old secondary channel Which has so much baggage and is all over the place It's just a place for me to put something up different which different different is what you got today. Because after today's PDS, when you go check out youtube.com slash defrancoduz,

Starting point is 00:00:28 you subscribe. First video is of me having a mini podcast slash interview with my five-year-old son. I'm obviously biased because he's one of my three favorite things, but I think it'll be a great watch after today's show. Enjoy that. But with that said, let's just jump into it.

Starting point is 00:00:42 And the first thing we're gonna talk about today is one of the most requested stories. It's also a little awkward for me because I end up being part of this story. But it's about this New York Times article that went out over the weekend. The article is called The Making of a YouTube Radical, and right there at the top,

Starting point is 00:00:55 it prominently features a collage of people speaking to camera, majority right-wing people, and then I am also included. And on the digital version of this story, as you scroll down, videos start disappearing and the language starts to escalate. I took screenshots of my first experience on the site. You see, Caleb Kane was a college dropout

Starting point is 00:01:10 looking for direction. He turned to YouTube. Some thumbnails disappear and it says, soon he was pulled into a far right universe watching thousands of videos filled with conspiracy theories, misogyny, and racism. We scroll down to see me right above the making of a YouTube radical

Starting point is 00:01:22 with the quote, I was brainwashed. We also saw other people's experience with the site where people were taking screenshots and I was the only face that was left. And then even looking into the article, it was even more confusing why I was included in this collage because I'm not even referenced. Right, they talk about several creators,

Starting point is 00:01:37 including the likes of Dave Rubin, Joe Rogan, who's much better thumbnail material than myself. You know, they talk about those guys, they reference the intellectual dark web. You know, for some reason I'm featured in this collage and my photo staying up as the language is escalating. So I respond on Twitter with, "'Heya New York Times, what the F is this?"

Starting point is 00:01:54 That then begins to blow up. And a quick note I wanna hit on before moving forward, please, please, please do not seek out and harass or do anything negative to the person that wrote this article. That is not my intent or desire with this video. But the writer of the article responds, Hey writer here, this collage is just a sample from his viewing history, some far right, some not.

Starting point is 00:02:12 To which I respond, then please speak with your graphics department, because this slowly disappearing thumbnail collage with escalating language seems to insinuate a lot. You know how many people scam or just read headlines. To which the author responds, I hear you, working on it. That then leads to an update where he says, we've updated the collage with a caption to explain that it's a sample of videos that Caleb watched. We're also tweaking how the grid fades,

Starting point is 00:02:31 so it's clear that people like Philly D are not far right. Which, if I can insert a note, also appears to be part of the reason why there are some people now accusing me of just making up this story. Because you've had people now going to the article and they're like, well, when I scroll down, Phil's one of the first people that disappears.

Starting point is 00:02:45 But there's not a note explaining that they changed that top graphic from displaying how it was previously displayed. So there's that, but they did add the caption. A sampling of more than 12,000 videos that Caleb Kane watched going back to 2015. Many, but not all of which were from far-right commentators. So obviously that caption doesn't specifically say who is, who isn't. There's still potentially the issue of association and an insinuation of the worst. You know, not everyone's gonna be familiar with every single person that is featured in that collage

Starting point is 00:03:09 and there are gonna be associations made. Right, because while I'm talking about my personal experience, this isn't just about me. All that said, that's where ultimately I thought the story ended, but that's not the case. Because whether it was the plan ahead of time or because of the controversy and the virality of the controversy, it ends up being the front page

Starting point is 00:03:24 of the Sunday New York Times. And there is a portion of the collage and the portion that is the controversy, it ends up being the front page of the Sunday New York Times. And there is a portion of the collage and the portion that is included still has me. And there, once again, includes the Iowa's brainwash quote. Right above the collage it says, "'Caleb Cain, 26,' who said he slipped down a, quote, "'rabbit hole of alt-right ideology on YouTube.'" Underneath it in the late edition it reads,

Starting point is 00:03:40 "'Commentators from across the political spectrum "'have filled YouTube with a complex stew "'of emotional content.'" On the national edition, which yes, I gave New York Times six dollars, it read, commentators have proliferated on YouTube whose business model has made it an inadvertent boom for extremists. So that's a great association. And then of course the title, The Making of a YouTube Radical, how the site's algorithms played into the hands of the far right. At this point, I really don't know how to feel. It appears that the author of the article realizes the issue with the graphic. Hell, even the subject of this front page

Starting point is 00:04:05 New York Times story says, "'I should not have been included.'" Graphic's so stupid, some of the most opposite people I've ever seen online agreeing, such as Keemstar and Hank Green, that it was a dumb move on the part of the New York Times. You know what one of the real shitty things is? I actually think there needs to be a continued conversation

Starting point is 00:04:20 of what the algorithm on so many social media platforms have been feeding us and will continue to feed us in the future I think it's a fascinating and incredibly important conversation because this is very Important balancing act when it comes to a social media platform because you don't want people to just stay inside of their their echo chamber Bubbles, but at the same time you don't want to start feeding people videos that these these horrible Tragedies these horrible shootings or hoaxes because they they consumed news about it elsewhere. Right, obviously not exactly what we're talking about here but you know, you don't want to have a system that that ends up promoting well engaged

Starting point is 00:04:50 anti-vax content, you know just because someone had previously consumed a video that talked about how anti-vax parents are part of the reason that we're seeing the measles epidemic. But then a lot of that potential conversation just gets thrown out the window because of this initial misstep. And what really sucks about this because once again, I'm trying to be as level-headed as possible, I want to think that it was just a stupid graphics decision, right? But for me, it becomes one of those situations of, well, what if this is really just kind of the beginning, right? Does it start with the kind of slight inclusion and insinuation here?

Starting point is 00:05:17 And does it escalate from there as part of what, to me, at times seems like a concerted effort to just take shots at YouTube? Maybe destabilize a platform that could be seen in some way as a competitor. And or does it actually incentivize them or other places to do things like this? Because it generates controversy, it brings in a wave of views that potentially leads to the virality of the story. That's the part that really concerns me, but it also, it makes me want to think that I'm just being paranoid there. But yeah, I really don't know what else to say about this story. But just in case, I am not being paranoid there. But yeah, I really don't know what else to say about this story. But just in case, I am not being paranoid. For those out there who have been asking

Starting point is 00:05:46 how you can help support my news coverage and commentary here on this channel, what we're trying to build out with RogueRocket.com, the Rogue Rocket socials, the Rogue Rocket YouTube channel that's set to launch next month, you can support us with a paid subscription over at DeFrancoElite.com,

Starting point is 00:05:58 or if you're not a fan of Patreon, you can go to RogueRocket.com slash support. That's our own system we put into place. And or, of course, supporting our sponsors who support us even including the one today Which is our own company, but with all that said that's the story some of my personal takeaway And of course I pass the question off to you Well, what are your thoughts around all this is once again? This isn't about you just agreeing with me

Starting point is 00:06:17 I do you think that it is a big deal or it's you feel like it was inadvertent or targeted any and all thoughts you Have I'd love to see in those comments down below. Then in what is happening news, we had Justin Bieber seemingly out of nowhere tweeting, "'I wanna challenge Tom Cruise to fight in the Octagon. "'Tom, if you don't take this fight, you're scared "'and you will never live it down. "'Who is willing to put on the fight? "'Dana White?'

Starting point is 00:06:38 And the two questions I have following that tweet, "'One, what? "'And two, how high were you when you tweeted this?' And here's the thing, I'm not saying I don't wanna watch the rumble in the under 5'10 jungle. I'm just saying, what's happening in 25 year old Justin Bieber's world where he's like, I wanna fight that 56 year old dude.

Starting point is 00:06:54 Also, if you're wondering if anyone was willing to put on this fight, it turns out yes. Although it was not Dana White who responded back instead, it was fighter and entrepreneur, Conor McGregor, who tweeted, if Tom Cruise is man enough to accept this challenge, McGregor sports and entertainment will host the bout does Cruz have the sprouts to fight like he does in the movies stay tuned to find out and then I guess because it wasn't already ridiculous enough he then added I challenged Mark Wahlberg

Starting point is 00:07:15 on the very same card back when Mark Wahlberg was Marky Mark I'd have still slapped the ears off him and took my UFC shares back ah the situation's so dumb but yeah it's finally happening the mainstream drama is finally it's finally like. The mainstream drama is finally, it's finally like the YouTube drama. They're taking everything from us. But then to shift gears, let's talk about what happened in Detroit over the weekend. Over the weekend, all over the country,

Starting point is 00:07:34 there were these festivals and parades celebrating Pride Month. And one of them happened in Detroit, Michigan. It was expected to have 40,000 people in attendance. And it appeared that all was well at this festival until a white nationalist group called the National Socialist Movement showed up. They've been described as an organization

Starting point is 00:07:47 that specializes in theatrical and provocative protests, described as being one of the largest and most prominent neo-Nazi groups in the United States. There were reports that the self-identified commander of the National Socialist Movement wrote on a Russian social network, NSM will be armed and counter protesting the freaks. NSM, let's put some boots on the ground.

Starting point is 00:08:02 I don't really give a damn about the OPSEC or Antifa in this situation. We go in with swastikas blazing and if people don't like it, tough shit. And according to reports, a dozen or so members marched along the streets towards the main festival yelling things like white power, Nazi salutes, blood and soil, you will not replace us, and F you slur.

Starting point is 00:08:19 And some were seen wearing armbands with swastikas. There was also a person waving a flag with a swastika and others holding riot shields with a group's flag. We saw members ripping apart a pride flag. One member even appeared to be urinating on an Israeli flag before that was also torn apart. While there were no reports of injuries or arrests stemming from these neo-Nazis showing up, people were obviously still upset that the group was there. And we also saw people getting even more enraged that the Detroit Police Department was escorting the white nationalists. You know, you had these videos on social media getting more and more attention,

Starting point is 00:08:45 seeming to show the police guarding the NSM. Like this one where the caption for the footage says, "'Today at Motor City Pride, a friendly LGBT plus event, "'Detroit PD escorted Nazis in full uniform "'outside of the entrance to the festival. "'Detroit PD bruised those that tried to intervene, "'see below, and allowed this to happen.'" And in this video, you can also hear people on the back

Starting point is 00:09:01 shouting at the police, asking them why they are being protected. How come they get to protect them, but we're not? Another saying, where was Detroit police when armed Nazis were marching their Nazi flag, shouting homophobic slurs, anti-black racism, and white nationalism, you ask? Serving and protecting the Nazis.

Starting point is 00:09:15 The crowd shouting things like, fuck these Nazis, step back, do your fucking job. A few even pointing out that some of the police escorting the neo-Nazis were wearing rainbow hearts on their uniform. And while there have been conflicting reports on what the police actually did, according to videos posted by an NSM member,

Starting point is 00:09:28 it can be seen that the National Socialist Movement arrived at the festival without any police escort. Then when the group began to approach a more crowded area, police stopped them saying, quote, "'You guys are not coming across. "'You're not coming across.'" Another officer then approaches them, says that they're free to walk towards the outside

Starting point is 00:09:41 and he would bring in some police units to help with any conflict. The video then shows the cops moving the NSM, putting themselves between pride goers and the neo-Nazis. Also regarding this, one anonymous Detroit police sergeant told the Metro Times that the cops actually surrounded neo-Nazis because they were armed and they were worried about the gunmen opening fire

Starting point is 00:09:55 if they felt threatened. And regarding all of this, in a press conference today, police chief James Craig said, "'The number one goal was to keep the peace. "'Five members from the group were armed, "'two with long guns and three with handguns. The police chief was told the group wanted a quote, "'Charlottesville' number two."

Starting point is 00:10:09 He reiterates what they were doing was they were keeping two groups separate, adding, in doing so, we did walk at points with them. And adding, we view this as a success because nobody got hurt. But ultimately, that's where we are with this story. I mean, as far as my reaction, I mean, I'm disgusted that people like this exist.

Starting point is 00:10:23 I'm disgusted that people like this exist in our country. These Nazis, in my opinion, are scum, which is a weird sentence to have to say. I like the good old days when the only time I talked about Nazis was because I was playing a new video game. And as far as the police, I understand the visual creates this kind of very visceral reaction. Unless there was more to it and we've been kind of scouring for different angles and all this. It really does appear that they were trying to make sure that there was no violence breaking out. But yeah, ultimately that's where we are with this story and of course any and all thoughts you have on it, I'd love to hear from you.

Starting point is 00:10:51 Alright, I think we're all on board of the Nazis bad. What are your thoughts about the police involvement and the reception of the police online? And that's where we're going to end today's show. And remember if you liked this video, you want to show some support, we'd love if you took a second to hit that like button. Also, if you're new here, be sure to hit that subscribe button, maybe even click that bell to turn on notifications so you don't miss these daily videos, which actually on that note, if you're not 100% filled in, maybe you missed the last Philip DeFranco show, maybe you

Starting point is 00:11:14 want to watch that extra new bonus video on that brand new channel, you can click or tap right there to watch those. But with that said, of course, as always, my name's Philip DeFranco, you've just been filled in, I love your faces, and I'll see you tomorrow.

Your Ad Here

The Philip DeFranco Show - PDS 6.10 My Response To NYT "Making Of A Youtube Radical", Detroit Pride Controversy, & Bieber

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.