Sam Hyde

For those who didn't bother watching until the end, Idubbbz films himself squatting at 1:06:30. Only problem is, it looks like he's only squatting 130lbs, nowhere near 200lbs.
View attachment 2945896
Yeah those look like Rogue 45lb bumpers, and I don't think anyone makes bumpers in 100lb (there is such a thing as a 100lb. plate though). That would make the squat 135, which is really pathetic, broads can squat 1 plate, children squat 1 plate, small to mid-size animals squat to poop. That's not even a bodyweight squat for anyone who's not a midget (or a girl). Faggots got his shoes off like he read some homo tutorial, shoes off is gay most people who hoist real weight wear low tops or lifting shooz. Doesn't matter if you're doing 1 plate may as well be wearing high heels.

This dude is cringe as fuck also I really don't like his beady eyes. He should do testosterone for a 12 week cycle to start.
 
E: I also feel like idubbz could have easily used all the shot content to make a mockumentary style video after the prank was revealed, or have it be some other type of project instead of just admitting defeat on his primary purpose nad making himself look like a chump
If idubbbz was smart, and knew it was a joke when he finished filming, he could have made a pretty entertaining documentary where he plays the whole thing straight and at the end just runs the "It's all a bunch of crap" clip with him closing on something like "Does it really matter if you know who Sam Hyde is beyond being Sam Hyde?"
 
After seeing the comments on Ian's video & the new ones on Sam's, I'm kind of surprised how many people are open to the trolling on display. It's pretty cool that Ian framed the video so as not to spoil it. He took his viewers on the same ride he went on, so credit is due there. Sam's version didn't really showcase how invested Ian was in Dani & it wasn't obvious how much he was buying into the whole charade in general. Good on Ian for admitting he fell for it. Some people are blaming what seems to be a perceived failure of the doc on Ian not getting exactly what he wanted from Sam for not being genuine. Sam may have been in character 90% of the time, but there were moments when he expressed honestly to Ian that he was just trying to make the funniest product possible, so I would argue you can say he actually was being real in the end.

I don't think Ian approached this in good faith & here's a few reasons why:

The little lecture Ian gave on the "Circle of Irony" essentially explained that meta-irony is saying something you really mean, but the context making it seem like an ironic statement.
He also explained during the video that it wasn't intended to be a hit-piece. When Sam asks during the interview if he's being punked, Ian says "You're getting punked, I'm gonna make you look like an asshole, which isn't hard" while playing it off as a joke & shows the meta-irony slide from his lecture onscreen for a split second. He does the same after saying he turned his hate for Sam into a passion for film-making.
He basically ends up contradicting & exposing himself, going by his own definitions.

Lighting from Sam's POV
2.PNG

Lighting from Ian's POV
5.PNG
6.PNG
It might seem insignificant, but to me it's a reminder of how subtle manipulation can be. Also how important it is to have your own receipts.
Most relevant to the discussion, is it shows a level of deceit which isn't zero. Based on Sam's footage Ian also excluded some of Sam's more articulate answers during the interview.

Another funny thing is that Ian presented his reason for bringing up their first interaction during the interview as a "reveal" during the one-on-one, and described it as something Sam "didn't know" when alone with his camera & expressing his reasons to his audience for waiting to bring it up until the interview. Just seems like an inconsistent narrative. Oh and even if all that is inconsequential, all it takes is Ian showing Sam donated to the daily stormer to nail him in a coffin. I'm sure Ian is fully aware of this. Either way for me this has been a pretty interesting, if moot event.
 
Isn't meta-irony more about the viewer's own bias than the performer's?
I don't care to label every type of social interaction but I never heard the word "bias" only "context" during his lecture. If your point stands then fair enough but I don't think it negates my point. I'm going on Ian's definitions. Ian says that meta-irony is intertwined with sincerity. So when he says something & shows a "meta-irony" slide over his words, based on his own explanation it seems he's being serious, but the context which he says it makes it seem like a joke (in his own words). I think he said it's "sooooo confusing" as a way to give his audience an out to not think about it too much, like giving them permission to check out & just take his word for it
 
Isn't meta-irony more about the viewer's own bias than the performer's?
That's what I would think. Ignoring for a second how gay it is to explain the general idea of irony in a YouTube video, I've never bought that meta-irony concept. It's been around for a few years and it almost always seems like an excuse to either accuse comedians of secretly implanting the racism virus into the brains of their fans, or, with the people who embrace it, a way for dumb edgelord grifters to feel like they're more powerful and have more of an effect on the world than they actually are/do. It's pathetic either way.

Basically, if someone sincerely agrees with a bit it works like itardz's "meta-irony", if someone is against the idea of the bit but finds it funny it's irony, and if someone doesn't give a fuck about culture war faggotry at all it's just entertainment. Nobody seems to understand context anymore
 
That's what I would think. Ignoring for a second how gay it is to explain the general idea of irony in a YouTube video, I've never bought that meta-irony concept. It's been around for a few years and it almost always seems like an excuse to either accuse comedians of secretly implanting the racism virus into the brains of their fans, or, with the people who embrace it, a way for dumb edgelord grifters to feel like they're more powerful and have more of an effect on the world than they actually are/do. It's pathetic either way.

Basically, if someone sincerely agrees with a bit it works like itardz's "meta-irony", if someone is against the idea of the bit but finds it funny it's irony, and if someone doesn't give a fuck about culture war faggotry at all it's just entertainment. Nobody seems to understand context anymore
I agree it's nonsense. I'm trying to shine a light on Ian's hypocrisy, he can't even adhere to his own definitions. Most likely another indicator it's all bullshit
 
Ian says that meta-irony is intertwined with sincerity. So when he says something & shows a "meta-irony" slide over his words, based on his own explanation it seems he's being serious, but the context which he says it makes it seem like a joke (in his own words).
The more expanded definition I've seen with writers is meta-irony is something that lacks context from being obscured, lost, not created with any or just the joke itself is the context, and with no true context the only thing left is the viewer's bias aka perception. Its a mirror.
But then again this shit is so new there isn't a concrete definition.

One could argue that the context of Ian's definition is that he is too retarded for a coherent definition, or that he is trying to subtly smear Sam with his faggy definition.
 
I agree it's nonsense. I'm trying to shine a light on Ian's hypocrisy, he can't even adhere to his own definitions. Most likely another indicator it's all bullshit
The more expanded definition I've seen with writers is meta-irony is something that lacks context from being obscured, lost, not created with any or just the joke itself is the context, and with no true context the only thing left is the viewer's bias aka perception. Its a mirror.
But then again this shit is so new there isn't a concrete definition.

One could argue that the context of Ian's definition is that he is too retarded for a coherent definition, or that he is trying to subtly smear Sam with his faggy definition.
You're both definitely right here. He doesn't stick with it, so it basically looks like a first year sociology student babbling about abstract shit he doesn't even understand. "Meta" implies self-referential, maybe in the sense that there's irony to the fact that an ironic comment was even made. It could be like, knowing that using some 90s ironic phrase is cringey, but saying it because of that. Or, it's just the self-effacing thing DelusionTree describes.

Either way, it sure as hell wouldn't be just using an ironic tone but saying your real feelings to "keep getting away with it". Some theorycels who don't even read do use it that way online though. I wonder what gay Twitter circles Ian is running in now to parrot their nonsense?
 
Back