General GunTuber thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Pocket Dragoon said:
True, but a sponsorship isn't the same as monitized videos, which is what I often hear the word shill being used to describe. And again; why should it matter if an online content creator allows 30-second mass-produced ads (like Raid)? Or review products from certain manufacturers (i.e. Springfield), bought with their own money?
Click to expand...
I think a lot of it comes down to the idea of selling out and there's also a strong undercurrent that a sponsorship removes some of the fair and impartial nature of a review or test. I'm not gonna say what my opinion is on the matter but I think that's where most people come from.
 
Pocket Dragoon said:
By this point, isn't the same true for the rest of the big-name guntubers? Excepting those that are big enough that they don't need to shill, or have income outside of their channel that isn't tied to their online presence.

Any proof of that, or just a guntuber's word & the current community consensus? And again, the word doesn't have any meaning anymore; the same as "grooming".

This also touches on the weird personal connections people develop for their favorite guntubers & brands.

Maybe it's just me, but I remember a time when most everyone on screen was paid to be there; excepting probably witness interviews on the afternoon news, and it was incredibly naive to assume otherwise.

I just don't understand why it matters it matters so much, aside from being ego-related or some form of virtue signalling.
Click to expand...
Pretty much all of his own-channel videos (others are right, TFB's different) are best described as 'brutally fucking honest', in ways that would get you excluded from most 'free shit for videos' rounds. It's part of the autism.

And I'm old enough to remember old TV too.

My personal preferences (and hence 'why it matters') are to have as little performative bullshit in a video as possible. If you have goofy-ass production values to your video they better be something good. Particularly I don't want to have smoke blown up my ass about how the latest micro 9 off the conveyor belt is TOTALLY GROUNDBREAKING, A GAME CHANGER.

Speaking of production values and probably not shilling, what do you all think about Gunthots? They're goofy and their videos are pretty stylized but they kind of hit the mark.
 
Mikoyan said:
Speaking of production values and probably not shilling, what do you all think about Gunthots? They're goofy and their videos are pretty stylized but they kind of hit the mark
Click to expand...
I've posted some gun thots stuff in the past but I'm not a big fan. Just not interested in people complaint about gas port size.
 
Pocket Dragoon said:
True, but a sponsorship isn't the same as monitized videos, which is what I often hear the word shill being used to describe. And again; why should it matter if an online content creator allows 30-second mass-produced ads (like Raid)? Or review products from certain manufacturers (i.e. Springfield), bought with their own money?

It's the usage of the term that confuses me, and why/how people get so invested.
Click to expand...
I don't think I've ever heard anyone describe a monetized video as "shills"... People have to make money after all.

Somebody being a "shill" isn't that complicated, just somebody that is hyping up something or promoting it when they otherwise wouldn't in return for money or favors.
 
Rent Tin said:
I don't think I've ever heard anyone describe a monetized video as "shills"... People have to make money after all.

Somebody being a "shill" isn't that complicated, just somebody that is hyping up something or promoting it when they otherwise wouldn't in return for money or favors.
Click to expand...
I think most guntubers (and youtubers in general) don't really give a shit about being called "shills" for running ads or doing sponsored content. So long as they do their due diligence with full disclosure (which some have failed to do in the past), they're in the clear, and they assume their audience knows that. It's a job like any other.

The ones that get really worked up over it tend to be the ones with ideological hangups about "creative independence" (or "capitalism", if they're really stupid), and that's on them. You might even see them deliberately demonetizing themselves and refusing any kind of funding outside of crowdfunding or direct audience donations. Of course, they rarely address the fact that being completely beholden to one's audience for their income means they also have to please said audience at all times, and you can't go around going contrary to their opinions, so instead of being a corporate bitch you become a public bitch. And I'm not sure which is worse.
 
Last edited:
Corn Flakes said:
The ones that get really worked up over it tend to be the ones with ideological hangups about "creative independence", and that's on them.
Click to expand...
There is one guy that is anti sponsorship for ideological reasons that I will give a total pass to and that's Project Farm.

If you've never seen a Project Farm video he does direct comparison product testing, typically for tools and hardware store stuff, and he puts multiple brands against each other head to head in a series of scientific studies to see who makes the best product. The reason he refuses sponsorships and insists on only buying products at the store is because he doesn't want to run the risk of a manufacturer going through a batch and selecting the best example of their product to send him, he wants the buyer experience of going to the store and rolling the dice on product control.
 
Sleazy Car Salesman said:
There is one guy that is anti sponsorship for ideological reasons that I will give a total pass to and that's Project Farm.

If you've never seen a Project Farm video he does direct comparison product testing, typically for tools and hardware store stuff, and he puts multiple brands against each other head to head in a series of scientific studies to see who makes the best product. The reason he refuses sponsorships and insists on only buying products at the store is because he doesn't want to run the risk of a manufacturer going through a batch and selecting the best example of their product to send him, he wants the buyer experience of going to the store and rolling the dice on product control.
Click to expand...
That's not really ideological, that's a very practical concern if you're taking sponsorships on subjects you review and a lot of people do it like that. Nothing wrong with that. A lot of these people take unrelated sponsorships, though. Like, if you're a semi-alcoholic AKphile whippersnapper reviewing gun memes, a sponsorship from RAID: SHADOW LEGENDS might annoy the hell out of your viewers, but it keeps the lights on and doesn't put your credibility as a gun meme reviewer into question.

And you can always run ads if youtube is fine with it. Project Farm doesn't take sponsorships from 3M or the WD-40 Company, but he sure as hell keeps his videos monetized. And good on him for doing so.
 
Corn Flakes said:
That's not really ideological, that's a very practical concern if you're taking sponsorships on subjects you review and a lot of people do it like that. Nothing wrong with that. A lot of these people take unrelated sponsorships, though. Like, if you're a semi-alcoholic AKphile whippersnapper reviewing gun memes, a sponsorship from RAID: SHADOW LEGENDS might annoy the hell out of your viewers, but it keeps the lights on and doesn't put your credibility as a gun meme reviewer into question.

And you can always run ads if youtube is fine with it. Project Farm doesn't take sponsorships from 3M or the WD-40 Company, but he sure as hell keeps his videos monetized. And good on him for doing so.
Click to expand...
Got ya, I misunderstood the kind of people you were talking about.
 
Damn some of you are autistic about what constitutes a shill. Everybody's compromised to some degree. Just don't take any one person's opinions as gospel and youll be fine
 
Rent Tin said:
So which guntubers are confirmed/suspected shills and who is g2g? I'd love some channel recommendations as well.
I know IV8888 is a shill. Paul Harrel for sure not a shill.
Anybody want to add?
Click to expand...
To add some variety to the mix, AG Cast makes some good videos on 3d printed firearms coming from a beginners perspective. He recently did a video on ECMing barrels in his apartment.
 
So, with all the talk of the many guntubers and their nature as shills, what's the consensus for someone like Demolition Ranch? His videos aren't meant to be educational about firearms, they're just dumb fun. What do you guys all think of him?
 
Faggotty Rabbitty said:
So, with all the talk of the many guntubers and their nature as shills, what's the consensus for someone like Demolition Ranch? His videos aren't meant to be educational about firearms, they're just dumb fun. What do you guys all think of him?
Click to expand...
Loud, dumb and goofy. I don't care for his content but as far as I'm concerned he's harmless. I give him a lot more credit for starting VetRanch.
 
Faggotty Rabbitty said:
So, with all the talk of the many guntubers and their nature as shills, what's the consensus for someone like Demolition Ranch? His videos aren't meant to be educational about firearms, they're just dumb fun. What do you guys all think of him?
Click to expand...
I always thought he was obnoxious but I've always enjoyed his dumb videos of "lets see how many of X that Y bullet can go through" for mindless entertainment.
 
Faggotty Rabbitty said:
So, with all the talk of the many guntubers and their nature as shills, what's the consensus for someone like Demolition Ranch? His videos aren't meant to be educational about firearms, they're just dumb fun. What do you guys all think of him?
Click to expand...
Some people call him a faggot for not being overtly pro-2A but Garand Thumb once said he saw his channel analytics and DR is huge with children.
I can't even be bothered to watch his videos, but if we consider the positive impact he has on promoting guns without being political, he might actually be doing God's work.
There was some non-troversy a few months ago due to a feud between the Rising S and Atlas Survival bunker companies. He explained it on his side channel.

His "it's not gonna leak!" explanation is kinda retarded but the fact that he turned down a free bunker and instead paid another company to do it should mean he's not a complete sellout.
 
Faggotty Rabbitty said:
So, with all the talk of the many guntubers and their nature as shills, what's the consensus for someone like Demolition Ranch? His videos aren't meant to be educational about firearms, they're just dumb fun. What do you guys all think of him?
Click to expand...
I find him to be in the same realm as Baby Shark. The side of the internet where mostly children are.
 
Headstamp publishing friendship is Max popenker: OVER
Story of the Russian Avtomat: CANCELED by author
1644363319761.jpg

Yes, I am aware of the charley-foxtrot with the previously announced publisher of my English-language book on automata, and yes, this situation is strongly displeased with me, to say the least. The publisher has been made aware of this.
Accordingly, the fate of the book hangs in the air at the moment. I can't wait for its release in the nearest future. I will let you know when and where it can be published
Click to expand...
someone earlier wanted to know how the Azov thing would effect Ian's relationship with Max and here you go.

Any chance Ian had of doing anything in Russia is gone. He will never get into museums over there. He will never interview anyone from there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom