Gamers Nexus alleges LMG has insufficient ethics and integrity

[Im_a_Rhinoceros]

5 minutes ago, dynastes said:

You being a ham sandwich would actually explain a lot to be honest

 

Bad jokes aside, the question of whether or not Steve is a journalist is completely irrelevant to the discussion actually. Finding angles to attack him on, however many you find, does not change what Linus did wrong in this situation and what has been going wrong at LMG. In fact, Steve could be a professional clown and these issues would still persist.

 

  

 

Again with the double standard ... everything Steve reported on, was publicly available information, too - he just pointed it out to his viewers. Wouldn't logic dictate then that no ethical violations have been committed by GN here, because I could have found out about all of this by myself?

I’ve said repeatedly that LTT has fucked stuff up. 

 

But it can also be true that the GN video has fucked stuff up too. They are the ones that like to cosplay as these objective reporters of facts while a) inserting editorial content throughout the videos b) have massive conflicts of interest in the subject to the videos c) stand to financially benefit substantially from the story and d) have also fucked up similarly before and failed to fix the problem appropriately.

 

The whole reason we are down this rabbit hole is Steve and people on here claiming he is some sort of saintly reporter without reproach when the issue is clearly much more nuanced than that.

 

The sad part is that you can guarantee that there will now be videos the next time GN fucks up again (and they will) even if LTT takes the high road and doesn't touch it other channels will. Steve made himself and GN part of the larger story, which was his entire point.

[mikaelus]

6 minutes ago, LinusAuctionTips said:

Take a moment to read this. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

 

Defenses to Defamation

Truth – To be defamatory, a statement must be false. Truth is an absolute defense to a defamation claim.

Opinion – Only statements of fact can be defamatory. Statements of opinion are not. For example, saying that Kevin stole money from the collection basket on two occasions is a statement of fact. Saying that Kevin is a "thief" is an opinion, though courts and juries may interpret it differently depending on how they feel a reasonable person might take it. The line between fact and opinion is often blurry and can depend on the circumstances.

Absolute Privilege – Statements made in certain contexts are subject to an "absolute privilege," a complete defense to defamation. In other words, in some situations, you can lie. Examples include statements made by legislators on the floor of the legislature and statements made between spouses.

Qualified Privileges – Some statements are subject to a "qualified privilege," which recognizes that you may have some right to make a false statement in some cases. For example, published reviews containing fair criticism of books or films are subject to a qualified privilege, as are statements made to warn others about potential danger.

Retraction – A retraction is a public and formal withdrawal of a previously made false statement. Although you can still sue the speaker for defamation, the retraction lessens the actual harm done by the false statement and reduces the amount you can recover for the civil wrong.

And this is an absolutely false interpretation which would be struck down in court if it was proven that Kevin is not a thief (though even your quote qualifies that definition as open to interpretation by courts). Even if you state that something is an "opinion" of yours that doesn't immunize you from defamation as long as that statement can be proven or disproven as factually true or not true, which would give rise to defamation claims.

 

In fact, you don't even have to make an explicit statement of fact but do as little as impute something that isn't factually true about another person to be liable for defamation, even in American courts.

 

You clearly need to do more than a five second Google search.

[SirCadvan]

4 minutes ago, TheSilverSpade said:

I am genuinely shocked at just how many people are holding Linus accountable 

I agree, as a board member Linus "could" have been better... but I believe he has been blind-sighted. Right now he needs distance and to put this in rearview mirror.

 

[jooroth18]

2 minutes ago, Gncsmd said:

Idk bro I’m not the one who said it applied to me.  So does it?  Does the shoe fit?  

Just stop making generalizations in this thread. There are MANY people who are legitimte LTT fans who are sad to see this happen. We are doing this because we want change to happen. We want LTT to do better, and sometimes you need to give a firm hand.

 

luke has at times expressed his disagreements with linus vocally. Are they still friends? Yes. 

 

 

People can criticize out of care, not just malice.

[Rix_77]

I just want mommy & daddy to stop fighting..

[LinusAuctionTips]

1 minute ago, mikaelus said:

And this is an absolutely false interpretation which would be struck down in court if it was proven that Kevin is not a thief. Even if you state that something is an "opinion" of yours that doesn't immunize you from defamation as long as that statement can be proven or disproven as factually true or not true, which would give raise to defamation claims.

 

In fact, you don't even have to make an explicit statement of fact but do as little as impute something that isn't factually true about another person to be liable for defamation, even in American courts.

 

You clearly need to do more than a five second Google search.

prove that it would fail. You are making assertions to that fact. Show me caselaw. I'll wait.

[JoshuaScholar]

1 minute ago, dynastes said:

Well, emotional investment runs hot on this one.

 

I'll admit it myself, the whole thing pisses me off so much, because I am emotionally invested into LTT's content. I still fail to see, however, how this attachment can blind people so much to obvious facts. Trying to discuss whether or not Steve's a journalist, for instance, is so utterly besides the point, it's actually spectactular.

I so don't care about any of this.

 

As things stand, if you want an accurate deep dive into hardware you watch Gamer's Nexus, and no amount of money spent at LTT is gonna make them deserve the level of trust that Steve's competence deserves.

 

Meanwhile Linus is upset because he drew a target on some kids backs and then made the mistake of saying when he was really thinking when he completely flubbed his bullying and looked as bad as he deserved to.  Oops, he admitted that accuracy costs money and so he's not in the business of being honest or fair!

 

Oh no!

 

Linus thought he could live in front of a camera 24/7 and just feel his way to high entertainment value and making money hands over fist - but funny thing, those goals are the exact opposite as ones that go along with putting millions of dollars into a new lab.

 

I have a feeling that the real problem is that YouTube doesn't REALLY churn up enough money to support a business this size and gaming the algorithm results in absurdity!

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, Heiro said:

I find it interesting/concerning that Linus last visited the forum 11+ hours ago. I know he has a family but if it were me, and my entire community were this concerned about something I had done, I would be reading this as it developed, trying to understand what the mood was and preparing myself to respond.

 

it seems he has already decided (as per his response) that he’s done no wrong and that the opinions here are not worthy of his time.
 

perhaps I’m just wired differently and my little company is 1/20th the size of LTT (if that) but if we ever have an issue, my customers are always able to contact us and even if I can’t reply to them each directly, I try to give updates based on the general comments being made. 

 

Quite the contrary. Pretty sure Linus does not make great decisions under stress. It would be in the beat interest of the community, and himself, to step back from this, and work for that matter, and carefully gauge his feelings and response. 

Hasty responses does no one any good, with examples existing in this very thread. If from what little I’ve gotten from Terran is an inference to the sort of leader he is, I’d wager he’d have probably told the same to Linus as well. 
 

On a positive note, the engagement is quite strong. Even if there’s a lot of negativity, people also care as well. The worst thing that can happen to LMG, is for people to stop caring at all. The most scathing form of hatred being cold indifference (IE, if I don’t like someone enough, or have little enough faith, I just stop watching. No need to dedicate further energy beyond this point.)

 

So long as people care, there exists the opportunity to move past this, and dig himself out of the hole he got himself into. 

The next Wan Show should be interesting. 

[Im_a_Rhinoceros]

 

8 minutes ago, LinusAuctionTips said:

Take a moment to read this. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

 

Defenses to Defamation

Truth – To be defamatory, a statement must be false. Truth is an absolute defense to a defamation claim.

Opinion – Only statements of fact can be defamatory. Statements of opinion are not. For example, saying that Kevin stole money from the collection basket on two occasions is a statement of fact. Saying that Kevin is a "thief" is an opinion, though courts and juries may interpret it differently depending on how they feel a reasonable person might take it. The line between fact and opinion is often blurry and can depend on the circumstances.

Absolute Privilege – Statements made in certain contexts are subject to an "absolute privilege," a complete defense to defamation. In other words, in some situations, you can lie. Examples include statements made by legislators on the floor of the legislature and statements made between spouses.

Qualified Privileges – Some statements are subject to a "qualified privilege," which recognizes that you may have some right to make a false statement in some cases. For example, published reviews containing fair criticism of books or films are subject to a qualified privilege, as are statements made to warn others about potential danger.

Retraction – A retraction is a public and formal withdrawal of a previously made false statement. Although you can still sue the speaker for defamation, the retraction lessens the actual harm done by the false statement and reduces the amount you can recover for the civil wrong.

 

Higher Burdens for Defamation: Public Officials and Figures

Our government places a high priority on allowing the public to speak their minds about elected officials and other public figures. Compared to private figures, people in the public eye get less protection from defamatory statements. They also face a higher burden when attempting to win a defamation lawsuit.

The Supreme Court has ruled that freedom of speech limits a public official's ability to sue someone for defamation. When someone criticizes an official in a false and damaging way for something relating to their behavior in office, the official must prove the statement was made with "actual malice" and all the other defamation elements.

The U.S. Supreme Court defined "actual malice" in Hustler v. Falwell (1988). In that case, the Court held that the First Amendment of the United States Constitution protected certain statements that would otherwise be defamatory.

This meant that public officials could only win a defamation suit when the statement was published with the actual intent to harm the public figure. Actual malice only occurs when the person making the statement knows it is not true or has a reckless disregard for whether it is true.

Other people in the public eye, such as celebrities, must also prove actual malice to succeed in a defamation claim.

I’m a lawyer. Defamation of a public figure is one of the most difficult things to prove in a US Court. I don’t know what this source is, but NYT v. Sullivan is the first and most famous case on the subject you learn about in law school.

[Gncsmd]

1 minute ago, jooroth18 said:

Just stop making generalizations in this thread. There are MANY people who are legitimte LTT fans who are sad to see this happen. We are doing this because we want change to happen. We want LTT to do better, and sometimes you need to give a firm hand.

 

luke has at times expressed his disagreements with linus vocally. Are they still friends? Yes. 

 

 

People can criticize out of care, not just malice.

If the shoe doesn’t fit…carry on

[Drazil100]

10 minutes ago, TB_GB said:

 @LinusTech Surely you have the details of the winner of the auction so can you get in contact to buy it back and return it to its RIGHTFUL owners? And that it isn't a company that wants to run tests/clone it.

 

[Amp9k]

The BilletLabs part is the worst. And the fact that Linus lied about it here, makes it so much worse.

 

But when that is said; to all those who claim to be legitimately "angered" by this, you need to find something more meaningful to care about.

Sit back, relax, enjoy the shit posting and the backpedaling that's about to unfold.

 

[LinusAuctionTips]

1 minute ago, Im_a_Rhinoceros said:

I’m a lawyer. Definition against the public figure is one of the most difficult things to prove in US law.

 

I’m a lawyer. Defamation of a public figure is one of the most difficult things to prove in a US Court. I don’t know what this source is, but NYT v. Sullivan is the first and most famous case on the subject you learn about in law school.

You and I are in agreement.

[Im_a_Rhinoceros]

2 minutes ago, SirCadvan said:

I agree, as a board member Linus "could" have been better... but I believe he has been blind-sighted. 

 

Blind sided lol

[mikaelus]

1 minute ago, LinusAuctionTips said:

prove that it would fail. You are making assertions to that fact. Show me caselaw. I'll wait.

Even your very own citation mentioned that it at courts discretion to determine how that opinion would be reasonably understood by other people. Now, you may go through life saying that it's your opinion specific people are dishonest prostitutes at work, and I'd love to see you try to argue your case in court then  

 

But, I guess, some people will only learn from their own mistakes. Good luck!

[TheSilverSpade]

2 minutes ago, mikaelus said:

And this is an absolutely false interpretation which would be struck down in court if it was proven that Kevin is not a thief. Even if you state that something is an "opinion" of yours that doesn't immunize you from defamation as long as that statement can be proven or disproven as factually true or not true, which would give raise to defamation claims.

 

In fact, you don't even have to make an explicit statement of fact but do as little as impute something that isn't factually true about another person to be liable for defamation, even in American courts.

 

You clearly need to do more than a five second Google search.

I can’t sued because I think your an idiot.

Tell me I’m wrong.

[bandainamcofan]

1 minute ago, Im_a_Rhinoceros said:

The whole reason we are down this rabbit hole is Steve and people on here claiming he is some sort of saintly reporter without reproach when the issue is clearly much more nuanced than that.

I've never said that. I said he hasn't committed any journalistic impropriety in this approach.

 

1 minute ago, Im_a_Rhinoceros said:

GN fucks up again (and they will)

This is the actual point of his whole video, mistakes happen, and the consumers are potentially effected by this. How those mistakes are handled is important. Linus' flat out irresponsible handling of the Billet block review by saying it isn't an issue he did it wrong is a major consumer concern. His statements of saying he is unwilling to spend the money/time to do the test correctly while simultaneously wanting to be taken serious as a review outlet is a major consumer concern.

 

Continuing to complain about Steve's (nonexistent) ethical missteps is deflection from how serious the issues at LMG are.

[whiskaye]

On 8/14/2023 at 11:40 AM, schitzkrieg said:

If Steve just wanted to "help", he would have chosen a more private setting to tell these things to Linus/someone at LMG.

 

Edit: Not that I don't agree with a lot said here. Could have been handled better I guess. 

lmao you cant be serious 

[Waifu4Life]

Regarding that auction thing, not saying that company that made that block are lying, but question remains, what would Linus have to gain by trying to scam them? I get the feeling that there must have been some terrible miscommunication here.

[SirCadvan]

 

Took me 5 seconds... this is what a silent auction bid sheet looks like... so with out linus having to answer... Yes

 

[Zodiark1593]

4 minutes ago, Drazil100 said:

 

Tbh, I feel it would be prudent for Linus to buy back the block, and return it anyway. While it may be too late to alter public opinion here (and really isn’t the point), it would guarantee protection of the IP, which would be foremost on my mind. Even if the relationship is beyond the point of salvage, closing it out as best as possible would be the right thing to do. 

[LinusAuctionTips]

1 minute ago, mikaelus said:

Even your very own citation mentioned that it at courts discretion to determine how that opinion would be reasonably understood by other people. Now, you may go through life saying that it's your opinion specific people are dishonest prostitutes at work, and I'd love to see you try to argue your case in court then  

 

But, I guess, some people will only learn from their own mistakes. Good luck!

First you said it is an absolutely false statement (incorrect), then said it is up to the the court's discretion (correct). Which is it?

[SirCadvan]

1 minute ago, Im_a_Rhinoceros said:

Blind sided lol

jeezuz.. I am running on fumes here... perhaps that's a clue to go the f to bed

[Im_a_Rhinoceros]

2 minutes ago, Waifu4Life said:

Regarding that auction thing, not saying that company that made that block are lying, but question remains, what would Linus have to gain by trying to scam them? I get the feeling that there must have been some terrible miscommunication here.

There was an obvious miscommunication. There was 4 whole days between the last email from the manufacturer and when the GN video went out. Two of those were a weekend…

[dynastes]

10 minutes ago, Im_a_Rhinoceros said:

I’ve said repeatedly that LTT has fucked stuff up. 

Okay, that's good then. The thread moves so fast, it is hard to catch everything. My apologies.

10 minutes ago, Im_a_Rhinoceros said:

But it can also be true that the GN video has fucked stuff up too.

No doubt. To the actual issue here this is not relevant, however. GN did not force Linus to react as he did, after all.

10 minutes ago, Im_a_Rhinoceros said:

They are the ones that like to cosplay as these objective reporters of facts while a) inserting editorial content throughout the videos b) have massive conflicts of interest in the subject to the videos c) stand to financially benefit substantially from the story and d) have also fucked up similarly before and failed to fix the problem appropriately.

To be fair, Gamers Nexus has changed quite a bit in the hardware space by exactly their type of reporting. Still, you are of course entitled to viewing their approach to LTT's issues critically. What they critisized, however, they also have provided proof for. So in this specific case, much of what you say here, again, does not matter. Saying "You fucked up earlier, too!" does not take away from their right to point out issues.

10 minutes ago, Im_a_Rhinoceros said:

The whole reason we are down this rabbit hole is Steve and people on here claiming he is some sort of saintly reporter without reproach when the issue is clearly much more nuanced than that.

No, mate - the reason, we are down this rabbit hole, is that Linus reacted in the way he did. There didn't need to be an escalation like this. A preparation of a simple statement acknowledging the issues and laying out plans to alleviate them as well as an apology to Billet would have done everything necessary. What we got instead was an entitled, gaslighting, self-victimizing rant by @LinusTech. I will not lie, it is actually pathetic.

10 minutes ago, Im_a_Rhinoceros said:

The sad part is that you can guarantee that there will now be videos the next time GN fucks up again (and they will) even if LTT takes the high road and doesn't touch it other channels will.

And that will be fine. It is still not relevant to the present issue though.

10 minutes ago, Im_a_Rhinoceros said:

Steve made himself and GN part of the larger story, which was his entire point.

No, the point was pointing out LTT's misssteps. Of course that will bring in attention, that's just the nature of the beast. If you do not want people to see a video, however, you do not need to make it in the first place.