PewDiePie Under Fire For Not Watching His Mouth During Live Stream
A Campo Santos developer believes it is time devs stop enabling the content creator to profit while being toxic.
The relationship between content creators focused on gaming and the creators of those games
PewDiePie, one of the handful of content creators that made themselves millionaires on the early wave of content creation centered on video games, has found himself making the rounds in the news cycle once again. While attempting to take someone out in PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds, PewDiePie used “ni**er” during the tense firefight:
In this video, PewDiePie can be heard saying the N word. pic.twitter.com/51lkg0kdWP
— Pop News Hub (@PopNewsHub) September 10, 2017
Sean Vanaman, the co-founder of Campo Santo which is the team responsible for Firewatch, caught wind of the clip and decided enough was enough. Vanaman’s Twitter thread called PewDiePie out for essentially pushing past the breaking point in the give and take
He's worse than a closeted racist: he's a propagator of despicable garbage that does real damage to the culture around this industry.
— Sean Vanaman (@vanaman) September 10, 2017
Of course, Vanaman’s statements inspired a series of comments making excuses for PewDiePie. Many of those hung their hats on the fact that PewDiePie using the n-word in the way he did doesn’t exactly mean he’s racist, an accusation that quickly spiraled out once the video started making rounds on social media. Some even pointed out that Campo Santo wouldn’t be able to take down his videos because, on their website, it explicitly says creators are allowed and encouraged to stream their game.
Regarding his use of the word, one could debate the ill-intent of his frivolous use of a racial slur...if you want. It looks like one thing you can’t debate is Campos Santos ability to issue a strike against PewDiePie’s channel. Glixel reached out to a lawyer to get his take on it and he had this to say:
"Ideas are not protected under copyright but the expression of an idea is," Lee tells Glixel in an email interview. "Therefore, many parts of a video game are protected under copyright including the look of the game, the dialogue, and the music. The DMCA permits copyright owners to issue takedown requests of people infringing the copyright to a game. Technically, video game companies can issue takedown requests for any gameplay that is posted online and companies like Nintendo have done this in the past. However, companies have gotten a lot of bad feedback from issuing takedown requests and usually don't do so. Besides bad feedback, playthroughs drive a lot of new people to a game and therefore it acts as a promotion for the game. I, like many people, don't buy a video game until I see some of it played online."
We’ll update with more information as it becomes available.
-
Shacknews
replyCharles Singletary posted a new article, PewDiePie Under Fire For Not Watching His Mouth During Live Stream
-
pewdiepie once again manufacturing 'controversy'
-
This is a very generous headline.
I'd have gone with "PewDiePie under fire for using racial slur during live stream". -
I haven't seen the stream in question but I see a lot of people saying "well, it's not so bad because he said it by accident".
If you ask me, saying it by accident is worse. If you plan to say something insensitive just to drum up controversy that makes you a dick but if it just slips out it means that the rest of the time you're actively reigning it in - you're a casual racist on the inside. -
-
I still don't get how that idiot is the President of the United States of America. His speeches SUCK and the way he just said that word, clearly he is racist as fuck. I hope they kick him off planet Earth.
-
-
Come on we've all shouted the n-word from time to time.
-
-
Really happy that you found your new "virtue signaling" phrase. I know it brings you a lot of joy.
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
His inability to respond to the reasonable challenges to his questionable positions, choosing to only chide and snipe with sarcasm leads me to think he has a certain amount of malice in his posts towards the community.
If he engaged in a more healthy manner I'd welcome him with open arms, but he so far appears to be totally unwilling to display much in the way of intellectual good will.
-
-
-
-
This kind of response just makes me think that you have and that you think it's totally ok.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
Nor I.
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
lol I hope you guys know I was joking. I'll add the /s tag next time.
-
-
-
You guys defending him in the original thread are absolutely insane. I don't get how this is defensible from any possible point of view. If some random Republican said the n word you would collectively lose your shit, but because it's some weirdo gamer that for some reason people around here look up to, you're making every single excuse you can think of to make it not so bad.
It's bad. Fuck this guy and his shit content. Any defense of his does nothing but label you as a complete hypocrite and a fool.-
it's because they feel like PDP is one of 'them'
-
-
I can be 100% against what he did and still feel like a DMCA takedown is a bad move.
I can't stand PewDiePie and I have serious issues with a lot of things he did, but I'm also super uncomfortable with where DMCA takedown use in this case might lead - it's already used to silence criticism. There are plenty of examples of youtube videos and other types of posts getting taken down via DMCA abuse over legitimate criticism or even being entirely unrelated and still getting knocked down via an unjustified takedown notice.
If we accept it here it'll potentially makes it harder to fight in other cases.-
-
There's no way you could do a general ruling on if they are or not.
For example, I've got a friend who streams, and he'll play something like Skyrim, inventing a character class and then abiding by some absurd class rules, doing voice acting all the while against the super-serious Elder Scrolls backdrop.
What he does is definitely fair use, but also basically just a lets play. It's not criticism, but it is transformative and would generally be covered.
There are other arguments for transformation that could be made.
-
-
-
-
-
I'm not going to defend him, but context does matter. Using racial slurs as a random expletive is highly inappropriate, yes. Clearly he lacks respect for the history of the word. Does that inherently mean that he himself is prejudiced against black people? Maybe, maybe not. I think the term "racist" is losing its meaning due to overuse. Nobody believes that it applies to them because the definition is so fluid.
-
The only defending I saw was people arguing whether or not saying something racist for a laugh makes one a racist. It was pretty much unanimously agreed that he's completely tone deaf and doesn't know when to stop. He demonstrates all the tact and comedy skill of Michael Richards' last stand up performance.
-
What? Who the fuck was defending him? The only "defense" I saw in that thread was that people don't think the DMCA should be abused. That's not defense of PewDiePie.
-
[deleted]
-
-
you're real bad at reading threads apparently. The entire thing was basically shack vs same wave as usual
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=36700954#item_36700954
antisocialjacobuu - "Jealous of success"-
-
"No he just makes millions and millions of dollars. Which people are jealous of."
"I feel like people do the same to Notch."
Oh, hmm.
Instead of being obtuse why don't you explain yourself? You explicitly said that people are attacking him because of his success, not because of the things he said (forget the fact that there are far wealthier and more successful people that nobody here gives a shit about).
Clearly there's some subtle point that you're either too coy to explain or that you're incapable of explaining. -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I apologize in advance since I hit a character limit on this, but I think its worth saying.
Post 1:
I think, aside from guys like sanewave, oldshackdude might be referring to folks arguing that PewDiePie isn't racist and/or that him saying what he did doesn't constitute a "real racism" because in their mind his use doesn't indicate that he believes expressly that black people are worthy of degradation or otherwise less than others.
I could be wrong in this analysis but I participated in the thread and there was more than some confusion to some of the posts in that vein.
In a similar way to how people who posited those arguments didn't believe PewDiePie was explicitly, expressly racist, I don't believe those people were necessarily explicitly or intentionally defending PewDiePie, in fact they often went out of there way to make sure people understood they thought his words were still grossly irresponsible and ignorant, but simply stopped short of calling them racist.
The reasons for not wanting to call what PewDiePie did "racist" or a representation of "racism" seemed, from what I read, to stem from a combination of the idea of not wanting to cry wolf about racism for what some consider minor or unintentional incidents such as this, with a belief that that would dilute or weaken the term for when it must be used against more visible, actively harmful acts of racism perpetrated by those who purposefully intend to degrade other peoples.
I think they have a point in the idea that our words are incredibly imprecise and a dilution of meaning can be problematic in its own right and that accuracy is important so we can more readily explain and describe what is transpiring.
Where I take issue however is in the notion that because PewDiePie may not have strictly intended to degrade black people or perhaps does not actively believe that black people are less than, that because of that and that alone, neither PewDiePie nor his words can be construed as "actually, truly racist."
I believe what PewDiePie said, regardless of his intent, is a form of racism. His words, his actions, spread and supported the idea of the degradation of a people and should be called out for that regardless of if he meant to or if he understood that was what he was in fact doing. I expand upon this at some length here:
http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=36700285#item_36700285
http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=36700817#item_36700817
http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=36700906#item_36700906
http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=36700886#item_36700886
They are similarly long posts but I hope you read them and reply, I think these are important discussions to have.
It is important to note that PewDiePie's words are not necessarily an Active Racism, like that of white supremacists or nazis who call for lynchings and/or expressly believe in the purposeful degradation of peoples.
Rather what PewDiePie represents here, more than anything, is a Passive, Systemic Racism. The soft and quiet racism that we collectively allow to transpire whenever we do not call it out for what it is. When we let it linger under labels of mere ignorance or unintentionality or miscommunication. IT is not simply those things. Ignorance and miscommunication, unintended or not, are the bedrock of Active Racism. The n-word itself in any context, in any intent, carries with it centuries of racism. His use, however casual, however unintentional, does not merely tacitly spread a notion of black people as less than, black people as equivalents of negative persons, but in fact supports and strengthens those who would be if not already are Actively Racist. Using the word, and using the word alone, is a form of racism.
And so for all of those who would rather not risk loss of meaning to ascribe racism to these passive, systemic forms, I say we have the capacity to accurately call out all forms without loss of meaning. We can call this incident Passive, Systemic Racism and we do not dilute instances of Active, Conscious Racism. We can do both and we can safeguard our words from miscommunication.-
Post 2:
And as for the final argument from some people like Sanewave, what separates his use from that of black people's is simply this: when they use the word its whole history and context primarily only affects them and thus their use is truly only their prerogative. When anyone else uses it, the history and the context of the word that has no bearing on us, it does not affect us, it primarily affects black people and exclusively in a negative manner, and so we do not have free reign to use it if we are told and understand that that use is harmful.
We need to all stop getting hung up on the question of "Am I/him/you racist?" and instead ask each of ourselves, "Do I want to be racist? Do I want to hurt other people?" And if the answer is no, then your path is simple and straightforward. Whenever someone says "Hey, this thing you said or did, it hurts me and here is why" and you can understand how your actions or words affected them you simply apologize and stop doing it.
Not saying the n-word or faggot or retard takes nothing away from us. The only thing we lose is the capacity to degrade whole groups of people with no personal or real context. And if we don't want to be bigots and we don't want to hurt people that is really no loss at all.
-
-
I wasn't really defending him as much as I was just laughing at the outrage around it. Yelling the N word on a stream being watched by thousands, potentially millions of people (I'm assuming at least a million people have seen a clip of him saying it by now) is incredibly stupid. He has to realize the consequences behind that after his previous controversies.
That being said, despite saying the N word, I doubt he's actually racist. The online gaming community has always reveled in its toxicity and people are often trying to one-up each other in terms of offending each other and being offensive in general. This is the community Pewdiepie has decided to cater to, it seems. There was no actual racial hatred behind the word he said. I doubt he assumed that person was black and tailored the slur to attack his race. It was used as almost a generic, catch-all insult, meant solely to be offensive. In that regard it probably achieved its goal.
-
-
-
-
-
Where was the thread with ppl defending PDP? In the two I saw yesterday most people were simply defending Fair Use in some form or another, or criticizing the use of the DMCA to take it down. I didn't really see anyone at all defending PDP himself or what he said.
-
i can't speak to this incident, but in the anti-semite incident there were a TON of people shacksplaining in his defence
-
-
I think you mean sanewave, who will do the same thing for basically any topic that has an "anti-liberal" side.
-
-
It wasn't even criticizing a DMCA takedown of the offending video. The criticism was that the DMCA was being used to take down a completely unrelated video.
-
-
-
now think about THAT in relation to the anti-semitic and racist 'slips'. this dude is supposed to be a role model.
-
-
of course he is, if 9-14 year olds are watching him regularly they likely want to be him and will emulate him, and since he puts himself in that position on purpose he has a responsibility to be the best person he can be.
-
-
exactly
-
-
-
-
-
-
Some of his videos are enjoyable, you know
-
-
Bad headline Shacknews. Under fire is a metaphor for attacking, and I wouldn't say people are attacking him, they are pointing out how he casually uses racial slurs on his streams. Also 'not watching his mouth' is a gentle as shit way of saying 'uses racial slurs'. The article itself is fine but the headline reads like it's defending him for some reason
-
Oh God, come on, people make mistakes, move on
-
And stop being sensitive about everything
-
-
He explained that and it's getting old, he's a very simple that makes so much fun of everything even himself, he had a point and was trying to prove it.
No need to be too literal about everything like a grumpy old person.-
-
-
[deleted]
-
No. He should be held to a higher standard because of his large audience and their age.
-
-
-
you should probably be asking why racial slurs are in his/your 'things I blurt out when I'm upset bucket'
-
Cause it happens everywhere, you can find it in South Park, Family guy, GTA and many games and shows
We're living in time where everyone is pissed by anything-
neither of your statements are true and believing them so only leaves me to conclude you're some combination of delusional, racist and/or idiotic.
-
There's a difference between use of that or any racist term in a film, book, standup routine, basically anything where there is a point to the language being used.
That's very different from reflexive use of a racial slur as an insult towards someone else in anger in a casual setting. Nobody is complaining about Chris Rock or Quentin Tarantino using those words.
Context is important, absolutely, and the issue here is that the context makes it worse. -
We're living in a time where everyone is pissed by anything groups who have been marginalized and shit on for centuries have finally gained enough agency in our society to tell the people doing the shitting to knock it the fuck off, and those people really hate the idea of not being at the top of the social pecking order anymore.
-
It's really a scary thought because it's going to get much worse before it ever gets better.
-
Name me an episode of any of those shows where the term was used derogatorily.
-
Nope. "It" doesn't happen in any of those places. "It" being using the word from a place of hate, not in direct satire or regular dialog among black folks. Name one show where somebody says that word in any way that is meant to be out of hatred or anger, and isn't the villain.
-
Everybody Loves Tom Sawyer on CBS
-
-
-
-
yeah come on black people, it's just a word, get over it because this white guy said so
-
-
yeah.. i typed up something in the last thread and deleted it all. tldr i'm also black and that word doesn't exist in my daily vocabulary
phrasing it as a 'mistake' seems to sound more like 'i didn't mean to say it where you might hear, whoops' -
I have been cringing a lot today on sites reporting on this. I get that they probably think the article is more impactful with the hard 'r' but man, I don't like it one bit.
-
-
[deleted]
-
Honestly, I wanna agree with you. Because on one hand, yes people can be overly sensitive, esp. if this was a one time Freudian slip accident. Lord knows I say some really horrid shit while playing PUBG with m'boys. But it isn't his first offense and I can't really defend him.
-
Nah, I don't buy it.
I make mistakes every fucking day, but I've never mistakenly blurted out racist slurs in anger. When I'm pissed, plenty of things come to mind to blurt out, but calling someone a nigger has never been one of them.
I'd suggest that if that's a "mistake" you're prone to making, it's probably because that word appears way too frequently in your every day vocabulary. -
I won't repost the whole thing but this is more than simply spilling milk, I really hope you read this and feel free to reply because I think this is a very valuable discussion to have: http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=36703566#item_36703566
-
-
Kleptok's writeup on this mess was interesting: https://waypoint.vice.com/en_us/article/qvvgqw/pewdiepie-doesnt-deserve-a-pass-for-using-the-n-word-because-he-was-angry
-
What's so hard about thinking Pewdiepie is a racist piece of garbage and Sean Vanaman fixed the problem by going about it the wrong way?
On one hand, I agree that developers should have a say in who profits from the marketing of their games. Streamers are extensions of the marketing arms of the game makers, or that is how they are being used. The industry thinks streaming is bad but they allow it because it also helps some of them succeed at a level that would otherwise be very difficult.
I think what is needed is some legal definition. Game publishers and developers need to be made to stop putting draconian bullshit in their EULAs, and popular streamers need to be held accountable for saying vile shit to their audience of mostly children.-
Sean admitted as much.
"I wish there was a clear way to say we don’t want our work associated with hate speech, even accidental hate speech if that's what it was," Vanaman told BuzzFeed News. "I regret using a DMCA takedown. Censorship is not the best thing for speech and if I had a way to contact PewDiePie and take the video down, I probably would. He’s a bad fit for us, and we’re a bad fit for him."
src: https://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanmac/youtuber-pewdiepie-says-racist-remark-during-livestream-
[deleted]
-
-
Can we get a black persons take on PDP? I am white as the day is long and think PDP is a cunt for a number of different reasons but I don't want the guy banned from saying anything. I think it's easy enough to denounce him and not consume his content. But I'm white, so my privilege might be making me take this all too lightly?
-
-
Thanks for the quick take.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
Or PDP has enough cash to not care anymore about hiding his callousness/racism?
-
I've tried to delineate the terms racism and racial prejudiced on the Shack a few times, because I feel the word is being overused. Racism is the systematic oppression of a minority. Overusing such an important word allows it to lose its meaning. Racism is an important word that should carry the full weight of its meaning. It's an ugly, irrational, hateful mark on humanity.
1) PewDiePie may actually be racist. Somewhere along the lines, he may have used his privilege to hold back a minority.
2) PewDiePie may not be racist, but he may be racially prejudiced. In which case, he doesn't like black people (or other minorities), but doesn't use his privilege and influence to withhold their rights and wellbeing.
3) PewDiePie may not be racially prejudiced, and just likes saying the n-word because it's bad. It's like a little kid saying "fuck" and getting away with it. When I used to say "fuck" as a little kid, I felt like I was getting away with something. It was fun.
I hear people say it in almost every single PUBG lobby that has people talking. It doesn't make it right by any stretch, but I'm not so sure that everyone is racist or even racially prejudiced. I think they like saying naughty shit and getting away with it anonymously.
I would be willing to bet most of the people who are defending PewDiePie are doing so because they fall into category 3 above, and hate feeling guilty since they don't see themselves as racist or racially prejudiced. Of course it's a spectrum, and some of his supporters are gross racists and/or racially prejudiced. This goes without saying, but under any circumstance (outside of history or rap lyrics), people need to stop using the word.
Zek mentioned above that PewDiePie doesn't respect the history of the word, and I think that's the best way to frame the problem, provided he isn't actually racist or racially prejudiced. No matter what though, he should recognize that his words were hurtful, insensitive, and lacked respect. And he should explain that to his audience.-
Racism and Racial prejudice are not ever only one thing or limited to certain expressions therein.
Racism has been defined as more than simply systematic oppression of a minority and racial prejudice is not only actively disliking or thinking less of a group of people.
Prejudices manifest in a variety of different manners, most often in the form of discounting or disregarding or ignorance (that is then not sought to be corrected) of a people. To deny the history of a word or to discount its power to degrade a people is to be prejudiced inherently.
I would direct you to my post here: http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=36703566#item_36703566
and my other posts linked therein. They are long but I do hope you read and I do hope you reply.
I really appreciate your attempt at explaining your position and I find any discourse we can have the topic valuable.-
To I guess give you a thesis, his actions here constitute a phenomena related to what you would consider "true racism" and one that I would consider a different, but still directly related form.
I do believe very strongly we lose nothing and gain everything by granting his actions and actions like them a more appropriate label such as Passive or Systemic Racism, and refer to what you would call "true" or "real" racism as Active or Conscious Racism and thereby achieve both of our desired ends with nothing left to chance. -
I read your other post. It's obvious that to be racist also means to be racially prejudiced. Somewhere in the past I have also highlighted the idea that using such words and allowing them to pervade can promote racism, in which case it could be construed as racist due to that concept.
But right now a lot of the discussion centers around PewDiePie himself, not really his impact. A lot of people are trying to figure out if he is expressly racist, racially prejudiced, an asshole, or some combination of the above.
The delineation of terms is necessary for my particular conversation.
-
So would you be amenable to my proposal above? Of better defined terms so we can properly call out with nuance both Passive/Systemic Racism (the sort you posit we see here) and Active/Conscious Racism (the over sort you'd define as expressly racist)?
-
Yeah, I like precision in communication, and I think your terms are thoughtful. I don't think any form racism/prejudice/etc. is good in any way, but I really don't like vague language and would prefer a clarification in terms. It definitely makes a difference in any discourse like this.
I don't know that your terms are perfect but I do think they convey the differences pretty well. In this case though, PewDiePie said one word. I don't think that's grounds for labeling him a passive/systemic racist, necessarily. It's grounds for talking about how that word fuels passive/systemic racism and how he's an asshole.
I think where we differ is that I have a more pragmatic outlook. I like the precision but good luck getting people who feel guilty to recognize new terms that still make them feel equally if not more guilty.
For the masses we need simplification. "If you say the n-word 1) you're an asshole, just admit it 2) you're strengthening the racial divide (even if it isn't your intention). Recognize these points and be a better person!" <-- that's how I would handle it.
Unfortunately things need to be presented to most people that way.-
You're sadly most likely correct in your assessment of how people in general will respond.
I am glad at the very least that you and I can come to an understanding of each other. I appreciate your thoughtful replies.
I may well be overly optimistic with how others might respond, but I dunno at this point in time I feel I'd rather speak plainly on my thoughts first and then maybe tailor them to others second. I may do well to change that though as you say.-
Anytime, man. We need precision in discourse, so I encourage you to develop that. Race issues can get very muddy. If your terms seem to consistently describe what's going on, write about it on Medium or some other publication and see how it catches on. The idea of tailoring your thoughts to reach a broader audience is just part of coexisting. But I don't think you need to simplify your core concepts.
As much as we see flawed, bigoted, prejudiced people and want to aggressively shake them into a rational state of mind with forceful words, it's just not realistic. We all have the instinct to fight back, even if we are wrong. So that means figuring out clever ways to get people on board with your ideas.
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
What if Microsoft issued DMCA takedowns on all his Minecraft videos? Er wait did PDP already pull the plug on his Minecraft stuff because he couldn't casually drop N bombs in them?
-
I think arguing over whether he is racist or not only serves to distract from why this actually matters. It's about his platform and what his use of the word there means to his viewers. He should be held accountable for that. However by making accusations about his personal beliefs, you trigger the PDP defense squad and it instantly turns ugly.
-
-
