2OLD2PLAY
Search

When threatened with legal action, clean out your backyard and blame your viewers.

C
CrypticCat


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJdflnvS8to

That one was in the making I guess. Jim Sterling, not one to be known to support his opinion with a superlative-free and balanced vocabulary is beginning to see how his videos are not contributing to sorting out the Self-publishing sector of Steam. He has been made aware in the past that his videos are hurting developers in their livelyhood, while he himself merely uploads a five minute video raging against an indie-studio, often without balancing out junxtaposing one studio against the other. Jim Sterling has also been made aware of impending legal action taken against him and his channel.

In that light, this video is not exactly coming out of nowhere. Jim Sterling makes a video and generally is done after that, moving on to the next fish in the barrel to shoot at, but his viewers linger on a game's Steampage for days harrassing the developer or studio. And that harrassment includes deaththreats and invititations to commit suicide. The backlash on a game discussed by Jim Sterling is clearly tracable. He makes a video, moments later the harrassing starts.

With impending legal action against him, Jim Sterling had to upload this so that he can make a case that he's aware and trying to appeal to his viewership. I don't think that he would ever have done it if no one would dare to stand up to him and try to put an end to his cyberbullying. Afterall, Jim Sterling loves what impact Jim Sterling videos have, how is videos sway opinions and how people band together calling themselves Jimquisitors as they harrass developers in Jim Sterling's name.

It's not that hard to figure out the nature of the impending legal action against Jim Sterling.

I'm very interested in the future here because if the indies that are regularly targetted by Jim Sterling can get a case together then whatever conclusion it will have will set precedents in regards to youtuber responsibility. It's something I talked about in earlier blogs. Youtubers need a code of conduct, they need to be regulated and scrutinized. Their profession has to be made more transparant, their dealings made public and the content of their videos made to adhere to specific rules.

Basically, youtubers have to be pulled out of their wild west power-fantasies and be shown the damage they can do. They have to be made to understand that if you for instance appeal to 4channers, that you don't say things like 'This developer has no right to exist'. Since youtubers have lofty ideals about their profession but rarely do something about it; let it be done through legal action.

 


Comments (3)

O2
Oldschool 2o4f·
I don't think they need regulation as stringent as you'd like. They do need to be held accountable for liable, mischief and perhaps transparency if they're sponsored by a rival group. It is free speech, to a degree.
C
CrypticCat·
'Free Speech' is the most abused understanding ever and is only valid in America. The Internet isn't America. Europe's free speech only pertains to having an opinion on politics, political figures or royalty without fear of reprisal. A great many countries don't even have free speech. Free Speech in America allows an individual to speak his mind on all kinds of things, even things he doesn't know jackshit about but still feels the need to have an opinion about. In the last five years or so, free speech is getting coupled with 'it's my opinion and I'm in my rights to have it.\", which does away with the given that an opinion can be objectively false. Meaningful communication is no longer possible. In the case of Jim Sterling, his videos do a lot of damage and while he has a right to do what he does, that doesn't make it right. He's a prime example of why youtubers need a code of conduct, just as radio and television has. All I see with youtubers that claim to be professional is that they possess very expensive microphones.
O2
Oldschool 2o4f·
Deliberately false or intent to do harm are the issues. And laws already exist. Now if they are deliberately posting falsehoods and intentionally doing so to cause harm, AND are deleting all attempts to argue the opposing position (of whatever it is), they are not professional and are open to litigation. None of this needs more regulation. A couple of precedent setting litigations should calm it all down.