I think it is a good thing you stood up for Apple - in this particular instance. Having shitty policies doesn’t mean everyone gets to point and laugh when you try and protect your IP that was infringed upon. Jerks have rights, too. Observing those rights doesn‘t make you a „fan“. It means you are trying your best to be fair.
If I don't stand up for the rights of my sworn enemy, how can I expect anyone to stand up for mine? I don't believe the current implementation of IP law is ideal. However, the way Jack Telecom broke it was with willful intent to deceive. That's disgusting. Henrik Huseby was not intending to deceive anyone, and was collateral damage in Apple's action to hold someone accountable. That must be made clear. It doesn't change that Apple had a reasonable justification for their anger at this situation.
I want to buy a similar chair to Louis has. What would I need to Google? I can't find it and I've been searching online in the Netherlands the entire day. Tia!
@@rossmanngroup Would be pretty neat if Apple was as humble as you, no matter, you're a proverbial tank that stands up for doing the right thing, take that and hold your head real high. I respect you so much more than trillion billion dollar brand, in other words they are just another soulless corporation so far from their roots it's not even funny. /END_RANT
@@rossmanngroup Put simply: Credit where credit is due. I hate Apple as well, their most inhumane practices and predatory pricing and vendor lock-in... but I must say product hardware and software is top tier regardless of the process before said product. In this case, yes, no one should label a part with official logo even if that part is up to standard, only if the brand owner allows it. This is deceiving buyers/users and at the end of the day I stand for the people (the "consumers") (as long as it's not unfair towards the manufacturer)
Same ideology goes for civil rights, they must be defended even for heinous criminals, even if that makes us uncomfortable. It's just the best way we have to do things.
I stopped trusting VICE when I watched one of their videos and they purposely translated the words of one of their interviewees to something waaaay different, darker, and dramatic than what the person actually said. Luckily there were a bunch of people in the comments calling them out in their bullshit.
Omg Soooo stupid🤦♀️. Yup they went the way if the I want to say dodo but dodo birds deserve better.... 🤔 They went the way of the Trump election appeal.😂
I've always viewed VICE as sensational "news" outlet. They did a piece on the "mole people" here in Vegas some time ago and entire pieces of my interview (and others in the crew that helps these people) got cut out or misrepresented. Narrative completely changed by doing it. I am happy to see them fold.
@@eldenfindley186 About VICE? Untrustworthy and disingenuous. The "Mole People"? Fun. Interesting. More trustworthy than the people I met at VICE. While they are mostly self sufficient people, we still make our way to the larger washes and tunnels and let them know when raining season has started or when the city practices water diversion. We remind them of food pantries and places they can go for meals.
@@Steven_Grey The term "mole people" for me has also turned slightly sour. When we started using the term years ago, there was absolutely nothing wrong with it. It has slowly turned into a pejorative, but there is nothing else anyone can think of that resembles or describes them more. They aren't just homeless (the general disdain for that group that has developed might also be part of the reason), they are quite industrious and develop a working (for the most part) community wherever they go AND find a use for "trash" the rest of us throw away or take for granted. I mean, how pretentious and classist is it to call the homeless... I think the term was "unhoused"? I was homeless from 2011 to 2012 when my business went under, in the most spectacular fashion. My employees were fine but me and my cofounder were so utterly devastated, we lost everything. This particular group seem to be more "off grid" living people who would like to stay in the city close to the services and amenities they have grown accustomed to. A large portion of them are pushed into it and would rather be doing something than sitting on their arse all day anyway. There is a lot to the story of this culture.
I used to work for Vice Germany and they kicked me out after I told the CEO that they are treating interns like serfs and that I disagreed with that. So I agree with you!
@@labrador-fx3fb Even if that was true, you would be in the wrong firing someone over a personal issue, even though i admit, that i love labratdoors, they are adorable.
The most outrageous part about not correcting today's publishing errors, is that there really is almost no cost to fix it. NO TYPESETTING, NO NEWSPRINT... required.
I think the people that control Vice do t measure costs in dollars, but in units of power. They probably tie the price to the current supply of adremecrome.
I actually think the lack of cost might be part of the problem for it. A correction costing a noticeable amount of money makes it more easy to believe that they are trustworthy because they spent actual resources. An unnoticed correction on a clickbait story that is probably going to not be read much anymore after the initial airtime was probably weighed to have no effect. It’s just poor ethics meeting a business decision. The lack of cost would also mean less need to vet what your saying leading to more problems.
Vice was like having a cooler older brother, who ends up on drugs and stealing from your parents. They were awesome when they first started and went way downhill fast.
I remember that they used to be the best, raw, unedited live coverage of events without commentary, people on the ground showing what was going on. Overnight the company changed, it was back in 2014 when they were doing the reporting on the Invasion of Crimea, they went public, got their own network television channel, and suddenly within weeks the whole news network sucked. I still followed them for awhile, but it was like watching a good friend get their soul sucked out in real time.
The thing about news oulets (no matter their political bias) is that everything they say sounds believable right up until they cover a topic in which you're an expert.
Yep. That right there, because if they get something you KNOW is wrong then how can you trust that the material about things you don't know so much about isn't equally wrong.
Also known as the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect: "Media carries with it a credibility that is totally undeserved. You have all experienced this, in what I call the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. (I refer to it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.) Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them. In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know. That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I'd point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn't. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia." - Michael Crichton
@@Martin-dg7it Sometimes I wonder if the whole vice going under was part of the plan. "I don't like what these people are saying, let's buy them." Imagine having so much money that when a news company says something you don't like, you can just buy the company and make it fail. Am I crazy here?
I'm pretty sure they were originally founded as a magazine. Which would make sense as to why they'd write the same article over and over again if it's meant to be skimmed in the waiting room.
@@KidCorporate I have been concerned about this, as well. WHERE will we find this kind of journalism ? Maybe the "new" fox network will pick up this mantel... they got an open time slot.
Hey Louis, I owned a website that Vice bought. You know what they did to it? Ran it into the ground with poor content, lots of ads, and links to the rest of their brain dead empire of sites. I didn't shed a tear yesterday, either!
@@iceink Don't know much about them, aren't they subscription based? I don't have enough time in the day to watch UA-cam. Speaking of which, this platform is going to fail eventually; the aggregation of data that's growing exponentially can't be a viable buisiness model.
I really admire you, Louie, the fact you can actually reference you past videos from years ago and you’re still standing up as the justified corner of the internet. I admire also the way you always ask for feedback from people. We really do need honest people like you in office.
Integrity is an overhead that most media can't afford anymore. Proper reporting is time intensive and they barely pay journalists as it is. That's on the readers who gravitate towards free content to some extent not everything can be advert supported. For what its worth I'll miss Vice for the documentaries some of which were quite entertaining.
Exactly why I can't watch any of the news on TV these days. Horrendously wrong about xyz, minor correction months after the damage is done, or double down. It's all so tiresome.
I had a family friend who was interviewed for a Vice article tell me the following after I posted a link to the article. "The info in that article was stolen...guy ripped me off, misquoted, coloured RCMP version of what happened" and "I gave him all the facts and he chose to glamorize it instead." I've been leery of their reporting ever since.
Agreed. Used to be very entertaining back then when it had a more "guerilla news" feel to it . Today's (well yesterday's Vice now) Vice looked NOTHING like it did back then.
You are perfectly correct. And this is how things should be done. On the other hand, considering integrity and validity of other media outlets, the alternatives to Vice are even worse...
I watch this guy Louis for one reason. He has this amazing ability to swear at just the right time. Doesn't swear too much. Doesn't swear too little. Just nails it every time and he has me cracking up.😂😂
Verbal Diarrhea is a plague in society. Swear words mean nothing if used often. If I ever drop the f bomb.. it's not just a flutter but a damn nuclear hurricane and my friends and family know it.
This is exactly what I have been saying for years. To operate a news media, one needs to have all members of the team working for truth. Everyone at all times, without personal biases. Occasionally everyone gets something wrong, but they should admit the errors with the means proportionate to the original story. What usually happens here is that the corrections get hidden or they don't happen at all because the reporters/news outlets are too arrogant to admit they were wrong. This is just childishness to the max. And this is exactly what drives people to embrace fake media. Regular media creates the demand and temptation for fake media.
"And this is exactly what drives people to embrace fake media. Regular media creates the demand and temptation for fake media." Exactly! This is especially true when people look to fake news (or extremely biased news outlets), it's because it's all twisted and only shades of truth, so people think 'we can't trust any of it, at least these guys are saying something different!' In having to do more research (because) we can't trust the single one (or 2) we used to be able to trust, we need to find a range of sources- which is likely to lead us to looking into less reputable sources...
trust is hard to gain and easy to lose. it's very valuable and it makes me really wonder why people nowadays so easily throw away their credibility. I don't agree with everything you say but I value your input because you present all the facts.
There's a dutch saying that roughly translates to "Trust comes on foot but leaves by horse". Louis is someone I would trust not to fuck me over but go for the win:win deal..
Yup, big entities these days are far too quick and reckless when it comes to destroying their public trust to push an agenda. It's a really shortsighted strategy, going all in on the quick win while losing everyone in the long term.
Yea, I used to enjoy VICE until the Naomi Wu (Sexy Cyborg) story came up. When she made some very clear boundaries for VICE's mini-doc featuring her, some rules that, one, were very reasonable, two, do not detract from the doc, three, could seriously put unessecary and even dangerous attention on her, and four, VICE AGREED to omit those few things. Except when the article came out, it had everything there, including everything she was told would be left out. When I saw how much MORE popular that terrible VICE article was than these other articles talking about how scummy VICE is, that was it for me. It seems since then, they have not changed at all, they are more of a National Enquierer in video format, rather than a 'news agency'. They profit off of exaggerating the truth, exploiting people, and shock value. Which is unfortunate, since I know there are some genuinely good reporters there who are actually trying to do the right thing and trying to grow and be ethical reporters. You are not harsh, the US has a serious issue with the way they consume media labelled as 'news' and it has really screwed things up. It is imperative that anyone claiming to be a news outlet have that integrity whether that is good/bad/indifferent to their biases.
This reminded me of when Marc Cohodes came out with the information that showed FTX was fraudulent. He gave the information on a silver platter to Bloomberg. They refused to run with it because they were afraid to lose access to SBF.
Shades of Harry Markopolis. He tried to alert authorities to Bernie Madoff and his shenanigans. No one would listen and that's what Harry called his book.
Its amazing, this guy here. I remember watching Louis when his channel was all about repair, watching him fix a computer, while mesmerized and fascinated with all his technical talk that I never understood. And now he has these talks about business, NYC which I guess you can call politics, and right to repair. I'm still just as interested in his channel and also now actually understand everything that he is saying, and so far I have agreed with him on everything despite being an independent thinker.😆 I really do like what he is saying, and he's not boring either. Now with Vice, down with any media that lies! One time and their done in my book! I will not tolerate being lied to. Lies are the first step in manipulating people into doing or not doing things, and maybe in a certain way sometimes too, especially from a lying media with an agenda, whatever that agenda may be.
They really rely on the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect, huh? That's when you read news about something you know a lot about, realize how they're wrong about absolutely everything, then turn the page and believe the news is right about the next topic because you don't know much about it.
It's how the media as a whole operates. And our current government leadership. "Oh, things aren't like that! That didn't happen, believe me not your eyes!"
Nobody prints retractions anymore. It's crazy. Insincere UA-cam apologies appear to have more integrity. At least they kinda acknowledge that they made a mistake even if they don't believe it.
Is it the Japan one? I’ve seen it. Absolute dogsh*t. They’re full of sh*t and so is Emmy. US-based “news” tended to be just sensationalism of things they didn’t know.
Vice seemed like a good thing until they did the mistake of stepping into an area where I had some expertise. Suddenly I did notice that their "documentaries" were a bit biased and had a lot of errors in them, so you are right Louis, they do screw up. The problem is that you have to invest a bit more time to see the full truth of it all, which makes the value they bring, less than the work you have to put in for yourself, and that is not good. Of course, the contract they sent you, sort of also highlighted what a scummy outfit they were.
Just so you know this is the case with ALL mainstream news media. The moment they start talking about things you know very deeply about, you will notice that it's mostly if not entirely garbage. This doesn't change when they talk about things you don't know so much about, you just don't notice it as much. Science reporting has been basically a joke for a long time because science is an area where factual accuracy is important and known, but they do no better on any other subject.
Media has been corrupted. They have been used to support certain ideologies and rewarded for that support. This has led to the degradation of journalism itself and the standards which were once upheld as the bedrock of that profession.
I think you're level of integrity puts you head and shoulders above almost any U.S. "news" organization, and sets you apart in the most positive way possible. You acknowledge your biases and don't let them cloud the truth. Thank you for all you do sir. (Note, I specified U.S. news organizations as I'm an American and haven't really experienced news organizations from other countries so I have no way to judge them accurately.)
When Vice on HBO premiered it blew me away with their coverage, I hadn't seen reporting like that before. Unfortunately they fell from grace after just a few years and now when I see an article from Vice it usually isn't even worth even reading the headline.
It seems that Vice suffered some form of self sabotage with Shane abandoning his role and everything being hands off to "traditional" media execs who proceeded to have no idea how to run it.
That style of reporting still exists, it's called Vice News and they have a channel on UA-cam. The show itself moved to Showtime where it continues and their television network has a show as well called Vice Special Report that's dedicated to investigative journalism.
I just subscribed, and this was the 3rd video I have seen by you. I have been screaming all of this to everyone for 3 years now. Keep it up, fix your own stuff if you can, if you own it you should not have to keep paying for it.. remember LYVE? total BS, Best Buy, APPLE, Vice..smh! You are awesome! Keep it up!
Journalism became entertainment, bought and paid for whatever interest group that organization thinks gets them ratings a long time ago. I quit treating them as a source of fact-based data the first time that I had real-world data that contradicted their story. Each outlet has failed that test for me, from local newspapers to national news channels, from Fox to CNN. They are good to get an initial hey, maybe I should look into this, but most of the time the facts are counter to what their story is, sadly.
It has always been that way, they used to save the hijinks for what they felt was important and pretend to be doing something useful. No more though, they preach to their choir
@@M167A1 Obscure and obfuscate. Lie and cover up. Push agendas and propogandise. It's not a bug it's a feature. It's not incompetence, it's by design.
Always been sensationalist and agenda driven - the difference is now you can more easily dig for the facts and question it where 40 years ago you just had to accept whatever they said as gospel. That's what the war on "misinformation" is all about really. Shutting that down and going back to the days when you just had to accept whatever CBS says as the truth unquestioningly.
No, you're not going too far. I am 100% with you and i believe that no matter what "side" you're on people want honesty no matter the narrative. The mainstream media has lost the trust of many they will never get back in their good graces including myself. Thank you immensely for what you do "man yelling in the camera" 😂
Years before that, they snuck into north korea. Some of the best stuff I've seen ever posted. Mocking NK, sneaking out photos, etc. Then, years later, they went back as "friends"... playing basketball... now its just sad trash, playing for scraps.
It's kind of the same thing though? Doing dangerous journalism in North Korea requires exactly the same kind of political dogmatism, which would also cause you to have a publishing bias. People who are level headed and not extremists wouldn't want to fuck around in North Korea.
Independent and alternative news are some of the best and most honest I have seen. And that includes you, Louis. The mainstream are the ones getting 90% wrong or a lie of omission. They all deserve to go under, not just second rate news like Vice.
Exactly. I have seen far more honesty and integrity among alt news sources than I have from mainstream news sources these days. Heck that isn't even limited to major and political news, take something as stupid and inconsequential as video game journalism, I have found many youtubers to be far more trustworthy than any of the big websites out there. It's like the big entities are always trying to please big interests and sponsors.
@@jjay350 this is because youtubers by en large, live and die by their audience. The audience is the most important part for them. Mainstream media, and secondary media, live and die by sponsors and their political connection. The audiences trust is not as important to them as pleasing their backers is.
You are a journalist, Louis. You seek out information, collate it, and present it. That's journalism. It's impossible to present information without biases, as the necessary act of deciding which information to present or not present is rooted in bias and creates bias. Beware of anyone claiming they have no bias, because it just means they're concealing their biases and trying to frame their narrative in a favorable way.
2 things I'd like to point out: 1. Opinionated style news is only in the US. In Canada, you can only present the facts when doing the news. Opinions are not allowed as a journalist here. I remember Fox News was sued around the year 2000 and there defense for lying in the article, was that the first amendment allowed them to lie. 2. For news articles online, when there is an error in the original article, news organizations with integrity will update the original article with the updates at the bottom of it, as well as updating the original article to point out what was updated. This is not a newspaper where once it is published, it can't be updated.
Corporations are owned and run by people. There are trustworthy and non-trustworthy people. Not all (nor even most} people should be trusted by anyone, while trustworthy people make trustworthy corporations. I have no idea what the "concept of corporation" has to do with trustworthiness. Except that oftentimes a corporation is able to give even better assurances for the trust than a single person could. But that is, of course, to be assessed for each individual case to be trusted.
@@TheSimoc If you don't know what the concept or a corporation has to do with trustworthiness, you can't be helped. I'm sure in the USSR there were many inherently trustworthy ppl, just as in the US government, the CCP, Pfizer. Heck, even Walter White was a trustworthy person in season 1. As said, if you cannot understand the logic of organisational structures and institution to incentives, accountability, and liability, you can't be helped. Take care. 🙏🏻
@@wreagfe maybe you're the one that can't be helped. I shall name one corporation right now that I trust like 90% of, assa abloy. As far as I can tell apart from bolt cutter resistance, their cheapest walk is superior to even the most expensive thing you can find here in Canada or the US, and again as far as I can tell that is one of their original designs from over 100 years ago. They don't make wild or outlandish claims they just present the facts as they are. And I know other corporations exist that are like this. Don't paint with too broad of a brush
The other thing is that publishing that information doesn't even make the journalists look bad to a reader with even half a brain cell. If I understand correctly, the information was previously inaccessible, meaning that they published the information that they had access to. And its not hard explain that. What's a lot harder to explain is "hey we didn't think you should know this even though its about a case we already covered and its information that completely changes the meaning of the case".
I remember an airsoft youtuber having VICE paint his hobby in a bad light and used barely any footage they gathered. It was opinionated to all hell, though, I'm going from memory, and I can't be bothered looking back into it, I might be completely wrong lmao.
I know they did that with some WW2 reenactment groups a few years ago, but it wouldn't surprise me if they went after airsoft LARPers too. They just love misrepresenting people.
Hi Louis, a great post as always. As an aside, I am from the UK, and as I was watching, an advert for reMarkable 2 popped up. I was thinking to buy it for my son to use at work. It looked great and the price at £279 wasn't bad. Then I noticed that after the free year's subscription ended you have to pay £2.99 a month to be able to continue using the device. Not a great sum but what if they then decide to put it up to £10 a month or more. As you keep saying, we own nothing except a pice of junk if we don't pay up.
@@VV-nw4cz No, I guess you didn't see them when they would follow both sides of polarizing topics to give both perspectives and left it up to the viewer to decide which side to be on. It was real journalism back then. Long before the sensationalism, clickbait and before HBO bought them out.
I watched VICE a long long time ago when I still had cable. Always found it weird why all the people reporting HAD to be in the story every single time. Like they were the star of that story, not the story itself. Then they lost me when I watched a show where I kept getting vibes of reefer madness from them and knew they were just bs. After that, every time I heard someone quote VICE as a source, I lost respect for them and usually after they quoted VICE a few times as their news source, I just stop following them cause every single time the story didn't pan out or was highly misleading. So good riddance to seeing their downfall.
Also- Louis, you are a journalist now. You would be really successful at it as a primary profession and right-to-repair and repair in general can be your hobby that gives you joy. Or not. I just trust that you're giving accurate information, and that if you find out something else you will let me know. That is integrity.
I’ve watched a lot of vice content. As I came across videos in my area of expertise, mental health, I noticed quite a few inaccuracies. It was illuminating for me in the same way this was for you.
All media does this now. Every day, all day. Maybe they always did, but now it's easier to see it with a Google search if one is so inclined. Take nothing at face value unless you personally witnessed it.
It also sucks when one 'journalist' writes an iffy article and then other 'journalists' cite that initial article while adding additional wrong/fake/twisted information. Edit: Cite, references or uses the initial article as a base for the new article/report.
Not sure why I got this on my feed but I am happy it found me. Great point about media agencies that selectively present news. I love your kitty co-presenter!
His entire channel is literally just "Capitalism is absolutely awful, we should apply a bandaid maybe" It's kinda wild just how little thought is given to replacing the cause of the problems...
@@kristoffer3000 I'm kinda glad he's humble enough to not want to change the entire system... My grandparents were killed by the secret police as a side effect of this "quest for an alternative to capitalism" so it's probably a good thing he doesn't pretend to have infallible solutions.
It all falls apart on them when people find out that a "news outlet" starts to hew closely to "popular narratives" instead of providing nuanced stories for which they take responsibility. I've noticed that in the "news" scene, stories are getting a LOT more black and white, good vs. bad. Reality often begs to differ.
Yes Louis. The job of any journalist is to investigate and uncover THE FACTS and then to present them to their audience without fear or favour. You have the 1st Amendment backing you for as long as you tell the truth.
It's so sad to see VICE media fall from grace. I discovered them about a decade ago on youtube and i thought they were the best. i was like these are real journalists! went all over the world and covered things mainstream media cant and wouldnt do. i.e. sitting down and interviewing a cartel member right in their production plant in columbia making that white powder. crazy stuff. and now here we are.
I first came across VICE when after I heard Joe Rogan mention that cannibal dude in Liberia general Butt Naked back around 2015. Vice provided insights on the overlooked and wildly out there stuff. They then became infected by the woke virus who declared anyone they disagreed with alt-right, racist, -phobes, Nazis, etc. They perpetuated slanderous of many people and people caught on and got fed up. Hopefully this is a trend of more entities who've gone full-blown woke going full-blown broke.
This is soo damn true about the trust thing. We had that happen here in Korea around 2019 when this big case came out Burning sun, the journalist covering it had their own agenda to boost their career had this crazy focus on one person who was a small fry in a huge problem and gave massive warning flags to all the big people way above this guys pay grade an easy way out by basically warning everyone it was coming, so they had more than enough time to clean house, set alibi's get "witnesses' and for themselves to dissapear. This led to a travesty of justice and unfortunately alot of idiots believing a set narrative and not paying attention to legitimate real facts presented by judges and police.
You make a lot of really great points for discussion here, Louis. I respect your diligence in journalism and the fact that you circled back to your own mistake to make your audience aware of it. There used to be more passion around the revision and correction aspects of journalism. If you look through old newspapers and printed media, there was usually a showcase for mistakes and a reward culture for readers who brought those mistakes to light. They weren't always "mistakes" either; sometimes it was just a higher fidelity understanding of the reporting. That vibe never made it to "Web 2.0". Perhaps with this new era we are entering using AI tools and more efficient communication platforms, we can revive an interest in promoting those kinds of activities.
This is why I love your channel. And Breaking Points. And others like that. It's good to know there are people out there that care about dignity and integrity.
I believe there should be laws requiring news agencies to publish corrections and updates the same size and on the same page that they carried the original story,
Louis, you have more integrity than all the major news agencies put together. You’re biased, but you at least acknowledge it. You do your absolute best to tell an entire story, and are willing to admit when you’re wrong and also openly correct anything you got wrong. Keep doing what you’re doing.
Anytime I see an article in the media that happens to touch on a subject that I happen to be an expert in. It's amazing how often it's covered inaccurately. I'm sure it's the same for most subjects. It's just rare it happens to overlap with your own skill set so most people assume it to be accurate until they experience this scenario.
Michael Crichton called this the "Gell-Mann Amnesia effect" after Nobel Prize winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann. “Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them. In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.” - Michael Crichton (1942-2008)
it's 100% the case on all subjects. And yet people still treat them with credulity. When you see the media write some laughably stupid article about whatever you know well about, just know that they're the same way on science, geopolitics, economcis and any other subject you can think of. It's all BS pushing a narrative. The media is propaganda, it always has been and it always will be.
Louis is probably one of the most genuine and fair people I've ever had the pleasure of "meeting". The way society, social media and news outlets work these days is shameful. This is the INFORMATION ERA. The point of the internet is to share information, not fantasy novels on news outlets!
As a CPA, I experience a similar frustration and anger when the media (pretty much all of them) mess up financial reporting. Daily. They don’t know the difference between a budget deficit and the debt, which has huge implications in budget talks, inflation, and even national security. They don’t understand the difference between accrual basis and cash flow basis accounting, which explains why the Social Security “Trust Fund” could run out of money. Likewise for the difference between operational and capital budgets, which matter greatly in local and state fiscal health and defaults. I don’t expect every reporter to be a finance major, but I do expect a national or global media organization to have an experienced editor who would tell their reporter, “Let’s run this past an expert before we run it.” Or perhaps they actually prefer their readers and viewers to be perpetually confused? One wonders.
Media literacy is hard and people don't understand nuance anymore (have they ever?) You could argue that the current media has groomed society to behave this way or you could argue that society has made choices through capitalism that has shaped modern media to be this way. Either way, it does not bode well for the apple logo screen story and I agree with your friend that the overall impact of releasing that story would have been negative. How should we solve this problem? I'm not sure but I don't think celebrating the death of one more media outlet helps. We have so little diversity in the space already.
For the USA the only hope is a multi-party system. As long as there are only 2 parties, the endless cycle of polarisation/lack of nuanced reporting will never end. One other way to depolarise/deradicalise USA would be if political donors would not be allowed to fund/invest/dictate political parties to such a large degree anymore.
Vice as an organization is not the same organization as in 15 years ago but they still do great international reporting. Just yesterday Isobel went to Moscow to do an interview. She has done great reporting in Middle East, South Asia and now Eastern Europe.
Louis is not "popular" despite admitting mistakes, but BECAUSE he shows that he was wrong, how exactly he was wrong, when he was wrong. When you admit to mistakes, on the front page, it creates an atmosphere of trust and integrity.
@@riba2233 Woke is a racist, discriminatory, supremacist ideaology being forced into American culture through social engineering and corporate extortion. The only way you can support Woke and D.I.E. is if you are a Marxist Socialist Communist, where the Woke ideaology comes from, specifically from the Bulschovik idea of separating people to polarize and control them using divide and conquer through economic class warfare (Critical Race --> Critical Race Theory). Woke takes Critical Race (divide/conquer) by economic status and modifies it to divide/conquer by Race (Critical Race Theory). Welcome to school.
Journalism should not just be "ok". If there are mistakes, they must be publicly disclosed and fixed. When you put something out to the public, you are responsible for it.
This - trust - is probably why, going back to the videos about SVB, why people ask you about things you may not know about. There’s such a lack of it with the media that people would rather ask you - someone they trust - even when you say you don’t know anything about the topic, rather than asking/listening to the experts who we should be listening to but no longer trust. Your opinions are now worth more than their facts for the specific reason you discuss here.
I think it is a good thing you stood up for Apple - in this particular instance. Having shitty policies doesn’t mean everyone gets to point and laugh when you try and protect your IP that was infringed upon.
Jerks have rights, too.
Observing those rights doesn‘t make you a „fan“.
It means you are trying your best to be fair.
If I don't stand up for the rights of my sworn enemy, how can I expect anyone to stand up for mine?
I don't believe the current implementation of IP law is ideal. However, the way Jack Telecom broke it was with willful intent to deceive. That's disgusting.
Henrik Huseby was not intending to deceive anyone, and was collateral damage in Apple's action to hold someone accountable. That must be made clear. It doesn't change that Apple had a reasonable justification for their anger at this situation.
I want to buy a similar chair to Louis has. What would I need to Google? I can't find it and I've been searching online in the Netherlands the entire day. Tia!
@@rossmanngroup Would be pretty neat if Apple was as humble as you, no matter, you're a proverbial tank that stands up for doing the right thing, take that and hold your head real high.
I respect you so much more than trillion billion dollar brand, in other words they are just another soulless corporation so far from their roots it's not even funny.
/END_RANT
@@rossmanngroup Put simply: Credit where credit is due. I hate Apple as well, their most inhumane practices and predatory pricing and vendor lock-in... but I must say product hardware and software is top tier regardless of the process before said product.
In this case, yes, no one should label a part with official logo even if that part is up to standard, only if the brand owner allows it. This is deceiving buyers/users and at the end of the day I stand for the people (the "consumers") (as long as it's not unfair towards the manufacturer)
Same ideology goes for civil rights, they must be defended even for heinous criminals, even if that makes us uncomfortable. It's just the best way we have to do things.
I stopped trusting VICE when I watched one of their videos and they purposely translated the words of one of their interviewees to something waaaay different, darker, and dramatic than what the person actually said. Luckily there were a bunch of people in the comments calling them out in their bullshit.
They have zero integrity
Based and redpilled
Which documentary was it, which word was it, what does it mean, and what did VICE translate it as?
you trust any form of media?
Omg Soooo stupid🤦♀️. Yup they went the way if the I want to say dodo but dodo birds deserve better....
🤔 They went the way of the Trump election appeal.😂
I've always viewed VICE as sensational "news" outlet. They did a piece on the "mole people" here in Vegas some time ago and entire pieces of my interview (and others in the crew that helps these people) got cut out or misrepresented. Narrative completely changed by doing it. I am happy to see them fold.
Why the hell would you let those satanic demons interviewed you?
How do you feel about those people?
@@eldenfindley186 About VICE? Untrustworthy and disingenuous.
The "Mole People"? Fun. Interesting. More trustworthy than the people I met at VICE. While they are mostly self sufficient people, we still make our way to the larger washes and tunnels and let them know when raining season has started or when the city practices water diversion. We remind them of food pantries and places they can go for meals.
I would be interested in hearing what you had to say! The "mole people" (i hate that term) fascinate me
@@Steven_Grey The term "mole people" for me has also turned slightly sour. When we started using the term years ago, there was absolutely nothing wrong with it. It has slowly turned into a pejorative, but there is nothing else anyone can think of that resembles or describes them more. They aren't just homeless (the general disdain for that group that has developed might also be part of the reason), they are quite industrious and develop a working (for the most part) community wherever they go AND find a use for "trash" the rest of us throw away or take for granted. I mean, how pretentious and classist is it to call the homeless... I think the term was "unhoused"? I was homeless from 2011 to 2012 when my business went under, in the most spectacular fashion. My employees were fine but me and my cofounder were so utterly devastated, we lost everything. This particular group seem to be more "off grid" living people who would like to stay in the city close to the services and amenities they have grown accustomed to. A large portion of them are pushed into it and would rather be doing something than sitting on their arse all day anyway. There is a lot to the story of this culture.
I used to work for Vice Germany and they kicked me out after I told the CEO that they are treating interns like serfs and that I disagreed with that. So I agree with you!
How progressive of them.
It was me that fired you for questioning why I was letting my labradors in the office. Don't mess with my doggos
@@WayStedYou far left and islamist took over that channel
@@labrador-fx3fb Even if that was true, you would be in the wrong firing someone over a personal issue, even though i admit, that i love labratdoors, they are adorable.
@@BouncingCow They are Labradorable - not just adorable but LABRADORABLE. And yes, it's totally true. They knew the risks: don't mess with the labs
The most outrageous part about not correcting today's publishing errors, is that there really is almost no cost to fix it. NO TYPESETTING, NO NEWSPRINT... required.
I think the people that control Vice do t measure costs in dollars, but in units of power. They probably tie the price to the current supply of adremecrome.
I actually think the lack of cost might be part of the problem for it. A correction costing a noticeable amount of money makes it more easy to believe that they are trustworthy because they spent actual resources. An unnoticed correction on a clickbait story that is probably going to not be read much anymore after the initial airtime was probably weighed to have no effect. It’s just poor ethics meeting a business decision. The lack of cost would also mean less need to vet what your saying leading to more problems.
@@notreal5135 so a correction would need a monetization scheme, equal to or better than the original clickbait story. The internet is broken...
Vice consistently chases the headlines but when there's correction, they never follow up
Not defending Vice, but this is the behavior of all mainstream media.
Sad thing is that VICE had good stuff back in the day. Then they went wacko Edit. The Hermit Kingdom series is a good example
vice is fine, their documentaries seem pretty good 👍
at least theyre not fox news lying about voting machines then refusing to correct it for millions of dollars lmao
@@iceinkVice is garbage.
Vice was like having a cooler older brother, who ends up on drugs and stealing from your parents. They were awesome when they first started and went way downhill fast.
Yup, so many media entities these days feel like good friends that became drug addicts and criminals.
Hope your brother is doing okay. 😂
I remember that they used to be the best, raw, unedited live coverage of events without commentary, people on the ground showing what was going on.
Overnight the company changed, it was back in 2014 when they were doing the reporting on the Invasion of Crimea, they went public, got their own network television channel, and suddenly within weeks the whole news network sucked. I still followed them for awhile, but it was like watching a good friend get their soul sucked out in real time.
It really is. Great analogy
And in an ironic twist, it was actually because they _stopped_ doing drugs and became a trust-fund elitist.
The thing about news oulets (no matter their political bias) is that everything they say sounds believable right up until they cover a topic in which you're an expert.
Problem is. Even basic knowledge in a topic is enough nowadays.
Yep. That right there, because if they get something you KNOW is wrong then how can you trust that the material about things you don't know so much about isn't equally wrong.
You don't need an expert for majority of it anymore, it's pathetic
Also known as the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect:
"Media carries with it a credibility that is totally undeserved. You have all experienced this, in what I call the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. (I refer to it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.)
Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.
That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I'd point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn't. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia."
- Michael Crichton
the same happens with chatGPT :D
I remember back in the day when vice did documentaries and their reporters actually risked their lives.
Right? That's the VICE I remember as well - can't believe what they morphed into...
@@Martin-dg7it Sometimes I wonder if the whole vice going under was part of the plan. "I don't like what these people are saying, let's buy them." Imagine having so much money that when a news company says something you don't like, you can just buy the company and make it fail.
Am I crazy here?
We watched them go to north Korea in history class
Amen!
vice were never truthful. their so called risk is all rubbish.
Excellent video, very well-stated. Especially the part about nutcases getting credibility because of mainstream truth holes. Very frustrating.
I hope to see one day the reaction of VICE when they realise their 500000th article on drugs, sex, and blatant lies doesn’t make money
@@dukeburger5embarrassed Squirtle face.
vice when they realize "fentanyl overdose epidemic" isn't getting the views it used to
I'm pretty sure they were originally founded as a magazine. Which would make sense as to why they'd write the same article over and over again if it's meant to be skimmed in the waiting room.
But where will I go to get the latest information on Venezuelan transgendered ketamine dealers?
@@KidCorporate I have been concerned about this, as well. WHERE will we find this kind of journalism ? Maybe the "new" fox network will pick up this mantel... they got an open time slot.
Hey Louis, I owned a website that Vice bought. You know what they did to it? Ran it into the ground with poor content, lots of ads, and links to the rest of their brain dead empire of sites. I didn't shed a tear yesterday, either!
Vice failing is almost as awesome as Buzzfeed and Gawker going the way of the Dodo.
All the sensationalism should fall off the cliff.. There's still MSM or "What we want you to think tonight" doing it.
I hope that Vox would be on that list.
Ha ha. FOX INVESTED IN VICE. Yes they did
how about newsmax and daily wire? :)))
@@iceink Don't know much about them, aren't they subscription based? I don't have enough time in the day to watch UA-cam. Speaking of which, this platform is going to fail eventually; the aggregation of data that's growing exponentially can't be a viable buisiness model.
I hereby bid $100 for the Vice UA-cam channel.
I really admire you, Louie, the fact you can actually reference you past videos from years ago and you’re still standing up as the justified corner of the internet. I admire also the way you always ask for feedback from people. We really do need honest people like you in office.
It's hilarious that Louis, as an activist, has far more journalistic integrity than Vice "journalists" who aren't supposed to be activists!
Integrity is an overhead that most media can't afford anymore. Proper reporting is time intensive and they barely pay journalists as it is. That's on the readers who gravitate towards free content to some extent not everything can be advert supported. For what its worth I'll miss Vice for the documentaries some of which were quite entertaining.
You are being reasonable. I agree that news needs to be corrected when they make a mistake, and not in small print on page 8.
BREAKING NEWS!
Our news were broken, but we fixed them. And we also finally used the tag correctly.
like fox news with dominion voting and not reporting about the nazi supreme court conservative?
Yup, bang on about the false narrative for hours on end on primetime, barely spend a minute mentioning the correction in some off hour news.
Exactly why I can't watch any of the news on TV these days. Horrendously wrong about xyz, minor correction months after the damage is done, or double down. It's all so tiresome.
I had a family friend who was interviewed for a Vice article tell me the following after I posted a link to the article.
"The info in that article was stolen...guy ripped me off, misquoted, coloured RCMP version of what happened" and "I gave him all the facts and he chose to glamorize it instead."
I've been leery of their reporting ever since.
That's pretty much modern journalism lol. They are desperate for money it's just fact.
Vice was really cool 15 years ago, the moment they started to consider themself news was the end.
Simon was ok
Shane was a lunatic but an entertaining lunatic. I've watched his North Korea trip hundreds of times lol,
Thanks, Pickleman! 😘
Vice went downhill when Gavin McInnes, one of the three founders, departed in 2007 - 16 years ago.
@@brassmule to be fair, Gavin McInnes also went downhill, when he departed 16 years ago ;)
Agreed. Used to be very entertaining back then when it had a more "guerilla news" feel to it . Today's (well yesterday's Vice now) Vice looked NOTHING like it did back then.
You are perfectly correct. And this is how things should be done. On the other hand, considering integrity and validity of other media outlets, the alternatives to Vice are even worse...
I watch this guy Louis for one reason. He has this amazing ability to swear at just the right time. Doesn't swear too much. Doesn't swear too little. Just nails it every time and he has me cracking up.😂😂
Verbal Diarrhea is a plague in society. Swear words mean nothing if used often. If I ever drop the f bomb.. it's not just a flutter but a damn nuclear hurricane and my friends and family know it.
he really does
😂😂
This is exactly what I have been saying for years. To operate a news media, one needs to have all members of the team working for truth. Everyone at all times, without personal biases. Occasionally everyone gets something wrong, but they should admit the errors with the means proportionate to the original story. What usually happens here is that the corrections get hidden or they don't happen at all because the reporters/news outlets are too arrogant to admit they were wrong. This is just childishness to the max. And this is exactly what drives people to embrace fake media. Regular media creates the demand and temptation for fake media.
"And this is exactly what drives people to embrace fake media. Regular media creates the demand and temptation for fake media." Exactly! This is especially true when people look to fake news (or extremely biased news outlets), it's because it's all twisted and only shades of truth, so people think 'we can't trust any of it, at least these guys are saying something different!'
In having to do more research (because) we can't trust the single one (or 2) we used to be able to trust, we need to find a range of sources- which is likely to lead us to looking into less reputable sources...
trust is hard to gain and easy to lose. it's very valuable and it makes me really wonder why people nowadays so easily throw away their credibility. I don't agree with everything you say but I value your input because you present all the facts.
*Well said. ✓*
The less you're allowed to question something, the more skeptical you should become.
You can't poke holes in the truth.
There's a dutch saying that roughly translates to "Trust comes on foot but leaves by horse". Louis is someone I would trust not to fuck me over but go for the win:win deal..
fox news
Yup, big entities these days are far too quick and reckless when it comes to destroying their public trust to push an agenda.
It's a really shortsighted strategy, going all in on the quick win while losing everyone in the long term.
Yea, I used to enjoy VICE until the Naomi Wu (Sexy Cyborg) story came up. When she made some very clear boundaries for VICE's mini-doc featuring her, some rules that, one, were very reasonable, two, do not detract from the doc, three, could seriously put unessecary and even dangerous attention on her, and four, VICE AGREED to omit those few things. Except when the article came out, it had everything there, including everything she was told would be left out.
When I saw how much MORE popular that terrible VICE article was than these other articles talking about how scummy VICE is, that was it for me. It seems since then, they have not changed at all, they are more of a National Enquierer in video format, rather than a 'news agency'. They profit off of exaggerating the truth, exploiting people, and shock value. Which is unfortunate, since I know there are some genuinely good reporters there who are actually trying to do the right thing and trying to grow and be ethical reporters.
You are not harsh, the US has a serious issue with the way they consume media labelled as 'news' and it has really screwed things up. It is imperative that anyone claiming to be a news outlet have that integrity whether that is good/bad/indifferent to their biases.
This reminded me of when Marc Cohodes came out with the information that showed FTX was fraudulent. He gave the information on a silver platter to Bloomberg. They refused to run with it because they were afraid to lose access to SBF.
Shades of Harry Markopolis. He tried to alert authorities to Bernie Madoff and his shenanigans. No one would listen and that's what Harry called his book.
SBF =Super Best Friend?
J/K
Its amazing, this guy here. I remember watching Louis when his channel was all about repair, watching him fix a computer, while mesmerized and fascinated with all his technical talk that I never understood.
And now he has these talks about business, NYC which I guess you can call politics, and right to repair.
I'm still just as interested in his channel and also now actually understand everything that he is saying, and so far I have agreed with him on everything despite being an independent thinker.😆
I really do like what he is saying, and he's not boring either.
Now with Vice, down with any media that lies! One time and their done in my book!
I will not tolerate being lied to. Lies are the first step in manipulating people into doing or not doing things, and maybe in a certain way sometimes too, especially from a lying media with an agenda, whatever that agenda may be.
They really rely on the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect, huh?
That's when you read news about something you know a lot about, realize how they're wrong about absolutely everything, then turn the page and believe the news is right about the next topic because you don't know much about it.
It's how the media as a whole operates.
And our current government leadership.
"Oh, things aren't like that! That didn't happen, believe me not your eyes!"
I 100% agree. It takes exactly one unretracted lie for me to distrust a news organization.
Nobody prints retractions anymore. It's crazy. Insincere UA-cam apologies appear to have more integrity. At least they kinda acknowledge that they made a mistake even if they don't believe it.
It's pretty sad when "we are sorry that others think we made a mistake" is too much to hope for.
Yeah I see far more corrections and apologies from alt news youtubers than major news networks these days.
New York times makes changes 6 months later and says nothing that they did
They are still producing terrible news reports that are wrong and slanderous. They also won an Emmy recently for a terrible news report
Is it the Japan one? I’ve seen it. Absolute dogsh*t. They’re full of sh*t and so is Emmy. US-based “news” tended to be just sensationalism of things they didn’t know.
Vice seemed like a good thing until they did the mistake of stepping into an area where I had some expertise.
Suddenly I did notice that their "documentaries" were a bit biased and had a lot of errors in them, so you are right Louis, they do screw up.
The problem is that you have to invest a bit more time to see the full truth of it all, which makes the value they bring, less than the work you have to put in for yourself, and that is not good.
Of course, the contract they sent you, sort of also highlighted what a scummy outfit they were.
Just so you know this is the case with ALL mainstream news media. The moment they start talking about things you know very deeply about, you will notice that it's mostly if not entirely garbage. This doesn't change when they talk about things you don't know so much about, you just don't notice it as much. Science reporting has been basically a joke for a long time because science is an area where factual accuracy is important and known, but they do no better on any other subject.
They become another murican leftist propoganda outlet.
Loved picking up Vice magazines at my local record shops in early 2000s. Anything after the HBO buy out was always questionable.
Media has been corrupted. They have been used to support certain ideologies and rewarded for that support. This has led to the degradation of journalism itself and the standards which were once upheld as the bedrock of that profession.
Stop being anti-Semitic.
I think you're level of integrity puts you head and shoulders above almost any U.S. "news" organization, and sets you apart in the most positive way possible. You acknowledge your biases and don't let them cloud the truth. Thank you for all you do sir. (Note, I specified U.S. news organizations as I'm an American and haven't really experienced news organizations from other countries so I have no way to judge them accurately.)
When Vice on HBO premiered it blew me away with their coverage, I hadn't seen reporting like that before. Unfortunately they fell from grace after just a few years and now when I see an article from Vice it usually isn't even worth even reading the headline.
It seems that Vice suffered some form of self sabotage with Shane abandoning his role and everything being hands off to "traditional" media execs who proceeded to have no idea how to run it.
That style of reporting still exists, it's called Vice News and they have a channel on UA-cam. The show itself moved to Showtime where it continues and their television network has a show as well called Vice Special Report that's dedicated to investigative journalism.
@@vaxick it’s total garbage.
@@vaxick I opened Vice News front page and the headlines are indistinguishable from MSNBC and CNN's front pages.
@@vaxick Vice News is all propaganda. They can't fail fast enough. Good riddance.
I just subscribed, and this was the 3rd video I have seen by you. I have been screaming all of this to everyone for 3 years now. Keep it up, fix your own stuff if you can, if you own it you should not have to keep paying for it.. remember LYVE? total BS, Best Buy, APPLE, Vice..smh! You are awesome! Keep it up!
Journalism became entertainment, bought and paid for whatever interest group that organization thinks gets them ratings a long time ago. I quit treating them as a source of fact-based data the first time that I had real-world data that contradicted their story. Each outlet has failed that test for me, from local newspapers to national news channels, from Fox to CNN. They are good to get an initial hey, maybe I should look into this, but most of the time the facts are counter to what their story is, sadly.
It has always been that way, they used to save the hijinks for what they felt was important and pretend to be doing something useful. No more though, they preach to their choir
To be honest Vice has also largely turned to activism. Facts have not mattered to them for a very long time already. Good riddance I would say...
@@M167A1 Obscure and obfuscate. Lie and cover up. Push agendas and propogandise.
It's not a bug it's a feature.
It's not incompetence, it's by design.
Yup, mainstream news is worthless in this day and age, it's all agenda fueled bias.
Always been sensationalist and agenda driven - the difference is now you can more easily dig for the facts and question it where 40 years ago you just had to accept whatever they said as gospel. That's what the war on "misinformation" is all about really. Shutting that down and going back to the days when you just had to accept whatever CBS says as the truth unquestioningly.
No, you're not going too far. I am 100% with you and i believe that no matter what "side" you're on people want honesty no matter the narrative. The mainstream media has lost the trust of many they will never get back in their good graces including myself. Thank you immensely for what you do "man yelling in the camera" 😂
"To be wrong, and to be carefully wrong, that is the definition of decadence."
- G. K. Chesterton _A Miscellany of Men_ (1912)
I think people who try to push a side are often afraid of how weak their side could be with openness and honesty prevailing.
Damn vice went from playing basketball in North Korea to bankruptcy
Years before that, they snuck into north korea. Some of the best stuff I've seen ever posted. Mocking NK, sneaking out photos, etc. Then, years later, they went back as "friends"... playing basketball... now its just sad trash, playing for scraps.
Gun markets of Pakistan, Karachi, sneaking into North Korean labor camps in Russia, warlords of Liberia. I really liked the “old” VICE.
Back when Vice went undercover in NK, it was run by a different guy not someone who probably loves Kim Jong-un like the one who took over
@@speedy11131that gun market was in Peshawar, not Karachi.
It's kind of the same thing though? Doing dangerous journalism in North Korea requires exactly the same kind of political dogmatism, which would also cause you to have a publishing bias. People who are level headed and not extremists wouldn't want to fuck around in North Korea.
I actually have a fundamental understanding of random people saying "fake news." It really comes down to a lack of accountability.
Independent and alternative news are some of the best and most honest I have seen. And that includes you, Louis. The mainstream are the ones getting 90% wrong or a lie of omission. They all deserve to go under, not just second rate news like Vice.
Exactly. I have seen far more honesty and integrity among alt news sources than I have from mainstream news sources these days. Heck that isn't even limited to major and political news, take something as stupid and inconsequential as video game journalism, I have found many youtubers to be far more trustworthy than any of the big websites out there. It's like the big entities are always trying to please big interests and sponsors.
@@jjay350 this is because youtubers by en large, live and die by their audience. The audience is the most important part for them.
Mainstream media, and secondary media, live and die by sponsors and their political connection. The audiences trust is not as important to them as pleasing their backers is.
@@Erowens98 Can't argue with that.
You are a journalist, Louis. You seek out information, collate it, and present it. That's journalism. It's impossible to present information without biases, as the necessary act of deciding which information to present or not present is rooted in bias and creates bias. Beware of anyone claiming they have no bias, because it just means they're concealing their biases and trying to frame their narrative in a favorable way.
"Shout the lie, whisper the retraction"
2 things I'd like to point out:
1. Opinionated style news is only in the US. In Canada, you can only present the facts when doing the news. Opinions are not allowed as a journalist here. I remember Fox News was sued around the year 2000 and there defense for lying in the article, was that the first amendment allowed them to lie.
2. For news articles online, when there is an error in the original article, news organizations with integrity will update the original article with the updates at the bottom of it, as well as updating the original article to point out what was updated. This is not a newspaper where once it is published, it can't be updated.
Nobody should trust corporations. People can only trust people. And that's exactly the problem with the whole concept of a corporation.
Corporations are owned and run by people. There are trustworthy and non-trustworthy people. Not all (nor even most} people should be trusted by anyone, while trustworthy people make trustworthy corporations. I have no idea what the "concept of corporation" has to do with trustworthiness. Except that oftentimes a corporation is able to give even better assurances for the trust than a single person could. But that is, of course, to be assessed for each individual case to be trusted.
People can only trust God.
@@TheSimoc If you don't know what the concept or a corporation has to do with trustworthiness, you can't be helped.
I'm sure in the USSR there were many inherently trustworthy ppl, just as in the US government, the CCP, Pfizer. Heck, even Walter White was a trustworthy person in season 1.
As said, if you cannot understand the logic of organisational structures and institution to incentives, accountability, and liability, you can't be helped. Take care. 🙏🏻
@@wreagfe maybe you're the one that can't be helped. I shall name one corporation right now that I trust like 90% of, assa abloy. As far as I can tell apart from bolt cutter resistance, their cheapest walk is superior to even the most expensive thing you can find here in Canada or the US, and again as far as I can tell that is one of their original designs from over 100 years ago.
They don't make wild or outlandish claims they just present the facts as they are. And I know other corporations exist that are like this. Don't paint with too broad of a brush
@@the_undead you're still lost idiot and I don't feel like explaining it to you, good luck
The other thing is that publishing that information doesn't even make the journalists look bad to a reader with even half a brain cell. If I understand correctly, the information was previously inaccessible, meaning that they published the information that they had access to. And its not hard explain that. What's a lot harder to explain is "hey we didn't think you should know this even though its about a case we already covered and its information that completely changes the meaning of the case".
I remember an airsoft youtuber having VICE paint his hobby in a bad light and used barely any footage they gathered. It was opinionated to all hell, though, I'm going from memory, and I can't be bothered looking back into it, I might be completely wrong lmao.
I know they did that with some WW2 reenactment groups a few years ago, but it wouldn't surprise me if they went after airsoft LARPers too. They just love misrepresenting people.
@@Calvin_Coolage People with an agenda love to misrepresent.
@@Calvin_Coolagecause they don't have better things to do other than shit on people or other people's country.
One of your finest videos, Louis. Articulate, accountable and honest as always.
Hi Louis, a great post as always. As an aside, I am from the UK, and as I was watching, an advert for reMarkable 2 popped up. I was thinking to buy it for my son to use at work. It looked great and the price at £279 wasn't bad. Then I noticed that after the free year's subscription ended you have to pay £2.99 a month to be able to continue using the device. Not a great sum but what if they then decide to put it up to £10 a month or more. As you keep saying, we own nothing except a pice of junk if we don't pay up.
Wow, Louis gets more based with every new topic he covers
They used to have great journalists and wonderful documentaries. Sadly those times are long gone.
Or maybe you got older and more rational.
Dark side of the ring was their Only good ine
@@VV-nw4cz No, I guess you didn't see them when they would follow both sides of polarizing topics to give both perspectives and left it up to the viewer to decide which side to be on. It was real journalism back then. Long before the sensationalism, clickbait and before HBO bought them out.
@@GROGU123 exactly this. Long ago.
@@GROGU123 Yup, entities like HBO recklessly destroy integrity.
I'm glad you're talking about the problem with selective reporting and omitting facts, I absolutely agree with you on it!
I watched VICE a long long time ago when I still had cable. Always found it weird why all the people reporting HAD to be in the story every single time. Like they were the star of that story, not the story itself. Then they lost me when I watched a show where I kept getting vibes of reefer madness from them and knew they were just bs. After that, every time I heard someone quote VICE as a source, I lost respect for them and usually after they quoted VICE a few times as their news source, I just stop following them cause every single time the story didn't pan out or was highly misleading. So good riddance to seeing their downfall.
Also- Louis, you are a journalist now. You would be really successful at it as a primary profession and right-to-repair and repair in general can be your hobby that gives you joy. Or not. I just trust that you're giving accurate information, and that if you find out something else you will let me know. That is integrity.
Yes they should!
I’ve watched a lot of vice content. As I came across videos in my area of expertise, mental health, I noticed quite a few inaccuracies. It was illuminating for me in the same way this was for you.
All media does this now. Every day, all day. Maybe they always did, but now it's easier to see it with a Google search if one is so inclined. Take nothing at face value unless you personally witnessed it.
It is mostly easier to see. The myth of a golden age of journalistic integrity is a narrative that is entirely contrary to historical reality.
It also sucks when one 'journalist' writes an iffy article and then other 'journalists' cite that initial article while adding additional wrong/fake/twisted information.
Edit:
Cite, references or uses the initial article as a base for the new article/report.
If you like that, you'd LOOOOOOVE academia...
I love tuning in every once in a while to see the state of your scratching post, or I guess lazy boy.
Not sure why I got this on my feed but I am happy it found me. Great point about media agencies that selectively present news. I love your kitty co-presenter!
Talking about shitty companies is among the most entertaining topics on this channel eheh
It's arguably one of the best things to see on UA-cam, PERIOD, because they should ALWAYS be called out.
His entire channel is literally just "Capitalism is absolutely awful, we should apply a bandaid maybe"
It's kinda wild just how little thought is given to replacing the cause of the problems...
@@kristoffer3000 Cause he wouldn't profit from it. Dude just profits from being an outrage/rant channel more than his actual business.
@@kristoffer3000 I'm kinda glad he's humble enough to not want to change the entire system...
My grandparents were killed by the secret police as a side effect of this "quest for an alternative to capitalism" so it's probably a good thing he doesn't pretend to have infallible solutions.
@@robertstan9733 So your grandparents were Nazis?...
It all falls apart on them when people find out that a "news outlet" starts to hew closely to "popular narratives" instead of providing nuanced stories for which they take responsibility. I've noticed that in the "news" scene, stories are getting a LOT more black and white, good vs. bad. Reality often begs to differ.
Yes Louis. The job of any journalist is to investigate and uncover THE FACTS and then to present them to their audience without fear or favour. You have the 1st Amendment backing you for as long as you tell the truth.
The problem is they think how the story should end and when the story end up different, they don't publish the truth anyways.
1st amendment is a joke you don't actually believe that nonsense do you lmao
Tell that to the journalists assassinated by the US gov. :)
@@iceink our ancestors fought to get their freedom, we have to fight to keep ours
I love your cat thought it was a couch pillow at first 😂
It's so sad to see VICE media fall from grace. I discovered them about a decade ago on youtube and i thought they were the best. i was like these are real journalists! went all over the world and covered things mainstream media cant and wouldnt do. i.e. sitting down and interviewing a cartel member right in their production plant in columbia making that white powder. crazy stuff. and now here we are.
I first came across VICE when after I heard Joe Rogan mention that cannibal dude in Liberia general Butt Naked back around 2015. Vice provided insights on the overlooked and wildly out there stuff. They then became infected by the woke virus who declared anyone they disagreed with alt-right, racist, -phobes, Nazis, etc. They perpetuated slanderous of many people and people caught on and got fed up. Hopefully this is a trend of more entities who've gone full-blown woke going full-blown broke.
Absolutely 100% honourable on your part. The truth always presents itself in the end.
This is soo damn true about the trust thing. We had that happen here in Korea around 2019 when this big case came out Burning sun, the journalist covering it had their own agenda to boost their career had this crazy focus on one person who was a small fry in a huge problem and gave massive warning flags to all the big people way above this guys pay grade an easy way out by basically warning everyone it was coming, so they had more than enough time to clean house, set alibi's get "witnesses' and for themselves to dissapear. This led to a travesty of justice and unfortunately alot of idiots believing a set narrative and not paying attention to legitimate real facts presented by judges and police.
You make a lot of really great points for discussion here, Louis. I respect your diligence in journalism and the fact that you circled back to your own mistake to make your audience aware of it. There used to be more passion around the revision and correction aspects of journalism. If you look through old newspapers and printed media, there was usually a showcase for mistakes and a reward culture for readers who brought those mistakes to light. They weren't always "mistakes" either; sometimes it was just a higher fidelity understanding of the reporting. That vibe never made it to "Web 2.0". Perhaps with this new era we are entering using AI tools and more efficient communication platforms, we can revive an interest in promoting those kinds of activities.
Hey Louis. That person in your video is spitting facts. You should hire him. 😂
I think the persons last name is Rossman. I'm sure that is correct. NY know better.
Likes to tap the mic like a mad man XD You can not miss him.
This is why I love your channel. And Breaking Points. And others like that. It's good to know there are people out there that care about dignity and integrity.
I believe there should be laws requiring news agencies to publish corrections and updates the same size and on the same page that they carried the original story,
Well done mate. I’ve personally gone through similar things and absolutely agree with you.
Louis, you have more integrity than all the major news agencies put together. You’re biased, but you at least acknowledge it. You do your absolute best to tell an entire story, and are willing to admit when you’re wrong and also openly correct anything you got wrong. Keep doing what you’re doing.
It’s very rare to see someone in the public /media domain such as yourself with such integrity.
Anytime I see an article in the media that happens to touch on a subject that I happen to be an expert in.
It's amazing how often it's covered inaccurately.
I'm sure it's the same for most subjects. It's just rare it happens to overlap with your own skill set so most people assume it to be accurate until they experience this scenario.
Michael Crichton called this the "Gell-Mann Amnesia effect" after Nobel Prize winning physicist Murray Gell-Mann.
“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”
- Michael Crichton (1942-2008)
@@afpawlak Thanks, that's pretty cool.
it's 100% the case on all subjects. And yet people still treat them with credulity. When you see the media write some laughably stupid article about whatever you know well about, just know that they're the same way on science, geopolitics, economcis and any other subject you can think of. It's all BS pushing a narrative. The media is propaganda, it always has been and it always will be.
Louis, your integrity is incredible. Respect.
Vice used to be good during the Mcinnes and Shawn days. It's been trash for over a decade now.
Yeah, they were so good!
@@drastically143 And they used to have Nick Gavin and all the decent zines and underground comics.
nah
It would be cool if Gavin bought VICE out for pennies on the dollar and turned it into a truly independent and impartial outlet.
@@jzen1455 He probably could. It would be hilariously ironic.
Louis is probably one of the most genuine and fair people I've ever had the pleasure of "meeting". The way society, social media and news outlets work these days is shameful.
This is the INFORMATION ERA. The point of the internet is to share information, not fantasy novels on news outlets!
As a CPA, I experience a similar frustration and anger when the media (pretty much all of them) mess up financial reporting. Daily. They don’t know the difference between a budget deficit and the debt, which has huge implications in budget talks, inflation, and even national security. They don’t understand the difference between accrual basis and cash flow basis accounting, which explains why the Social Security “Trust Fund” could run out of money. Likewise for the difference between operational and capital budgets, which matter greatly in local and state fiscal health and defaults.
I don’t expect every reporter to be a finance major, but I do expect a national or global media organization to have an experienced editor who would tell their reporter, “Let’s run this past an expert before we run it.” Or perhaps they actually prefer their readers and viewers to be perpetually confused? One wonders.
"And why thats a good thing."
I appreciate you. Being a voice of reason, always. RIP Vice, you won't be missed.
I hope you're having a lovely day too, Sir! o7
And keep up the good fight!
This is why I respect you mate. And when I have brought stuff for you to repair in the past I always trust people like you
Louis is a man of integrity, not everyone is. Good luck at keeping them honest, frankly, i think Louis is wildly out numbered.
Media literacy is hard and people don't understand nuance anymore (have they ever?) You could argue that the current media has groomed society to behave this way or you could argue that society has made choices through capitalism that has shaped modern media to be this way. Either way, it does not bode well for the apple logo screen story and I agree with your friend that the overall impact of releasing that story would have been negative. How should we solve this problem? I'm not sure but I don't think celebrating the death of one more media outlet helps. We have so little diversity in the space already.
For the USA the only hope is a multi-party system. As long as there are only 2 parties, the endless cycle of polarisation/lack of nuanced reporting will never end. One other way to depolarise/deradicalise USA would be if political donors would not be allowed to fund/invest/dictate political parties to such a large degree anymore.
I have no idea why i stopped getting your videos. I was damn sure i was a subscriber. Nwz.... subscribed again!
Vice as an organization is not the same organization as in 15 years ago but they still do great international reporting. Just yesterday Isobel went to Moscow to do an interview. She has done great reporting in Middle East, South Asia and now Eastern Europe.
Isobel did great work in Afghanistan.
Subscribed to your channel today. I appreciate honesty and integrity!
👍👍
Louis is not "popular" despite admitting mistakes, but BECAUSE he shows that he was wrong, how exactly he was wrong, when he was wrong.
When you admit to mistakes, on the front page, it creates an atmosphere of trust and integrity.
Credibility simply goes out the window when you refuse to correct mistakes that you and everyone else knows.
You are one of the only real person on the internet. I wish more people had your ethics.
now for vox, dailybeast, kotaku and polygon to follow hopefully.
Every coprate media with connection of Government loudspeakers should be bankruptcy.
maybe not polygon, simply for the actually good videos they used to make
@@42seven nah polygon can also f-off with their leftistim
@@42seven thats like saying g4 shouldnt have died because it used to be great, its just not the same
@@42seven I mean, Kotaku also used to have good articles...
I really admire your capability to to address or bring up topics from videos dating 5+ years ago
We have cat!!!! Thumbs up. Goodbye Vice Media. Go woke, go broke.
"everything I dont like is woke" are you tucker maybe?
@@riba2233 They were defintely the first of the woke.
@@riba2233 Woke is a racist, discriminatory, supremacist ideaology being forced into American culture through social engineering and corporate extortion. The only way you can support Woke and D.I.E. is if you are a Marxist Socialist Communist, where the Woke ideaology comes from, specifically from the Bulschovik idea of separating people to polarize and control them using divide and conquer through economic class warfare (Critical Race --> Critical Race Theory). Woke takes Critical Race (divide/conquer) by economic status and modifies it to divide/conquer by Race (Critical Race Theory). Welcome to school.
@@riba2233 It's a fascist world view, when you think about it. In the end, it comes down to "eliminate the woke"="all problems gone".
Integrity and principles.
It's not lying it's modern day journalism
Lying by omission.
Which is lying. Although that is not modern day, that is and always has been the majority of journalism.
HOORAY for you Louis, THANK YOU for being an honest man.
Vice was ok. Had some strange and interesting things. Never really paid attention to their news reporting. Thanks for the video Louis
Journalism should not just be "ok". If there are mistakes, they must be publicly disclosed and fixed. When you put something out to the public, you are responsible for it.
I must say, Vice is not alone here, but its a precedent
They had amazing documentaries very early on. The last years they went 250% woke to a point calling them crazy would be a compliment to them.
yeah it was good at first. Then followed the woke crowd and turned sour.
@@cloud-forge Pretty sure they _are_ the woke crowd. Except now there's people that get triggered over anything they think is "woke"
This - trust - is probably why, going back to the videos about SVB, why people ask you about things you may not know about. There’s such a lack of it with the media that people would rather ask you - someone they trust - even when you say you don’t know anything about the topic, rather than asking/listening to the experts who we should be listening to but no longer trust. Your opinions are now worth more than their facts for the specific reason you discuss here.