Gamers Nexus alleges LMG has insufficient ethics and integrity

[Lurker_Letum]

29 minutes ago, m9x3mos said:

Like I already said, it would have been polite for him to do it but not required. 

It would have been a similar bs response that Linus put in his post. 

And if he gave the similar BS response then GN could of put that in the video and commented on it. GN stood to only gain.

[bandainamcofan]

5 minutes ago, Lurker_Letum said:

 GN Failed at this by getting non-public information from only one side. This is clear in them getting something as simple as the dates wrong for when billet labs found out about the auctioning.

An incorrect date isn't fundamentally altering the point that the item was agreed to be returned and sold anyway. It doesn't mean that this is some huge ethical violation. 

8 minutes ago, Lurker_Letum said:

GN failed at this by again not giving both sides of the story for Billet Labs

The key fact of the report is that an item was sold at an auction and they had agreed to return it. LMG doesn't even dispute this. It still isn't an ethical violation.

 

9 minutes ago, Lurker_Letum said:

    No correction on incorrect information about billet labs situation

 

See above.

 

9 minutes ago, Lurker_Letum said:

    Do I even need to comment on this one? It's been talked to death at this point.

 

And you've been wrong about it the whole time. 

 

10 minutes ago, Lurker_Letum said:

The videos border on yellow journalism though I wouldn't take it that far yet.

Hyperbolic nonsense. You're not interested in having a discussion, you just want to discredit GN. I won't be engaging with you further. Have a lovely day.

[The_Mole]

Hey @LinusTech

As someone working in the business (IT, not YT) I saw stuff like that happen a couple of times, already - just with less publicity and with varying levels of actual foundation.

 

With that said, even in your own videos it has been coming through that people work lots of hours at your company, sometimes even at night or during weekends and that the team wants to decrease quantity in order to increase quality. Please listen to them.

 

While I do understand that some of your employees are your friends, not all of those ~150 people are. No one has 150 real friends, even if their social media profile says different. I also understand that you consider LMG your lifework. It is most probably, but it isn't the lifework of your employees and this is something you seemingly forgot. I guess that Steven's video was a necessary wake-up call at this point, even if I might not agree with everything he said.

 

Then there's Madison's thread on Twitter. The fact that she posted the Glassdoor review a year ago and that some of her points are validated - again - even in your own videos, backs at least parts of her description and tempts the reader to believe it as a whole. Therefore, I think this should be addressed - within your legal possibilities, of course.

 

Now, with the "exit interview" that was posted here in mind, there might be something constructive that I can add from the common practices here in Germany. I know, that the work culture is vastly different at each of our places respectively, but I want to introduce you to a measure that is common practice and backed by law here, that can improve things dramatically:

 

The work council

 

This board is elected by the staff and it normally consists mostly of base-level workers. Any regular employee can run for that office and while it is not forbidden for middle and upper management members to do so, it is usually frowned upon due to a possible conflict of interests. The council is elected every 4 years, and at a company of your size it would consist of 7 members. The employees are presented a list of candidates and have one vote per seat. Council work is not paid extra, the time spent simply counts as normal working time.

 

One of its most important tasks is to ensure that standards and regulations are observed in the company. It can veto decisions at any management level that go against said standards or regulations or employee rights, no matter whether they are self-imposed or dictated by law. It is allowed to organize strikes and appeal to the labor court if the employer does not stick to their contractual or legal duties. In addition, the workforce elects it to represent their interests vis-à-vis the employer by negotiating an operating agreement. It is normally (but not necessarily) backed by a union and also negotiates wage agreements that include regular daily/weekly working hours to ensure that salaries are reasonable and equal work gets equally paid.

 

As this can occasionally lead to heated disagreements with the employer and/or management, it must be ensured that work council members can perform their duties without fear of losing their jobs. Therefore, they are granted special protection against dismissal. That means, a council member can only be fired if all other council members agree, unless they have engaged in particularly serious misconduct. This includes for example: unlawful behavior, racist or xenophobic activities, gross assault or attacks on work colleagues as well as mobbing or sexual harassment.

 

In the event that a member leaves the company or steps back from the office, candidates that were not elected are treated as substitutes in order of received votes. Should there be no substitutes left, a new election will take place. During the election process, the dismissal of a council candidate must be postponed until a quorate council was formed, that can then approve by simple majority.

 

The part about employee rights works in both directions, however. The council may as well order that the employer dismisses or transfers an employee who has engaged in the above stated serious misconduct.

 

The council together with the operating agreement, which will become part of the employment contract kills two birds with one stone:

 

1. If things as described by Madison happen and unequivocal evidence is presented to the council, the offender must expect not only to be immediately dismissed but also, if applicable, to face criminal charges - regardless of their position.
2. Management decisions like "quantity over quality" can be vetoed by the council if they do not meet standards that were previously set in the operating agreement. This helps to erase failures "by design" when management got out of touch and addresses the things pointed out in Steve's video.

 

As you are not bound by any laws as far as I know, none of the above is written is stone for you. You can develop the details with your staff as it suits you best. I tried to outline the most basic things as they are done here, so you have something to start from and I sincerely hope to have given at least some inspiration when it comes to setting things straight again.

 

Best Regards.

[alexmack]

49 minutes ago, MrStebe said:

You make a fair point, and perhaps I was a little harsh to frame it in a way that makes it look like Steve did it exclusively for the views.

 

There probably was an element of wanting the rising tide to raise all ships, and there was probably also an element of "this will be great for the channel". Steve's clearly an intelligent guy, so there's no way this thought didn't cross his mind.

 

Although I disagreed with elements of the first video, had he left it there I'd probably have said nothing about it.

 

The follow up video after Linus' first, frankly terrible response, was what lead me to doubt the intentions of the original piece. This second video was nearly 12 minutes of what came dangerously close to mudslinging. 

 

The community knew Linus' response was bad, the outrage was already well underway. The second video did nothing but pour fuel on an already burning fire, and to me, take away from what otherwise would have been a fairly reasonable piece of criticism 

 

Yea, that second video was less than ideal, and monetized. He probably should have given that one more time in the oven.

[4bettingrags]

6 minutes ago, The_Mole said:

Hey @LinusTech

As someone working in the business (IT, not YT) I saw stuff like that happen a couple of times, already - just with less publicity and with varying levels of actual foundation.

 

With that said, even in your own videos it has been coming through that people work lots of hours at your company, sometimes even at night or during weekends and that the team wants to decrease quantity in order to increase quality. Please listen to them.

 

While I do understand that some of your employees are your friends, not all of those ~150 people are. No one has 150 real friends, even if their social media profile says different. I also understand that you consider LMG your lifework. It is most probably, but it isn't the lifework of your employees and this is something you seemingly forgot. I guess that Steven's video was a necessary wake-up call at this point, even if I might not agree with everything he said.

 

Then there's Madison's thread on Twitter. The fact that she posted the Glassdoor review a year ago and that some of her points are validated - again - even in your own videos, backs at least parts of her description and tempts the reader to believe it as a whole. Therefore, I think this should be addressed - within your legal possibilities, of course.

 

Now, with the "exit interview" that was posted here in mind, there might be something constructive that I can add from the common practices here in Germany. I know, that the work culture is vastly different at each of our places respectively, but I want to introduce you to a measure that is common practice and backed by law here, that can improve things dramatically:

 

The work council

 

This board is elected by the staff and it normally consists mostly of base-level workers. Any regular employee can run for that office and while it is not forbidden for middle and upper management members to do so, it is usually frowned upon due to a possible conflict of interests. The council is elected every 4 years, and at a company of your size it would consist of 7 members. The employees are presented a list of candidates and have one vote per seat. Council work is not paid extra, the time spent simply counts as normal working time.

 

One of its most important tasks is to ensure that standards and regulations are observed in the company. It can veto decisions at any management level that go against said standards or regulations or employee rights, no matter whether they are self-imposed or dictated by law. It is allowed to organize strikes and appeal to the labor court if the employer does not stick to their contractual or legal duties. In addition, the workforce elects it to represent their interests vis-à-vis the employer by negotiating an operating agreement. It is normally (but not necessarily) backed by a union and also negotiates wage agreements that include regular daily/weekly working hours to ensure that salaries are reasonable and equal work gets equally paid.

 

As this can occasionally lead to heated disagreements with the employer and/or management, it must be ensured that work council members can perform their duties without fear of losing their jobs. Therefore, they are granted special protection against dismissal. That means, a council member can only be fired if all other council members agree, unless they have engaged in particularly serious misconduct. This includes for example: unlawful behavior, racist or xenophobic activities, gross assault or attacks on work colleagues as well as mobbing or sexual harassment.

 

In the event that a member leaves the company or steps back from the office, candidates that were not elected are treated as substitutes in order of received votes. Should there be no substitutes left, a new election will take place. During the election process, the dismissal of a council candidate must be postponed until a quorate council was formed, that can then approve by simple majority.

 

The part about employee rights works in both directions, however. The council may as well order that the employer dismisses or transfers an employee who has engaged in the above stated serious misconduct.

 

The council together with the operating agreement, which will become part of the employment contract kills two birds with one stone:

 

1. If things as described by Madison happen and unequivocal evidence is presented to the council, the offender must expect not only to be immediately dismissed but also, if applicable, to face criminal charges - regardless of their position.
2. Management decisions like "quantity over quality" can be vetoed by the council if they do not meet standards that were previously set in the operating agreement. This helps to erase failures "by design" when management got out of touch and addresses the things pointed out in Steve's video.

 

As you are not bound by any laws as far as I know, none of the above is written is stone for you. You can develop the details with your staff as it suits you best. I tried to outline the most basic things as they are done here, so you have something to start from and I sincerely hope to have given at least some inspiration when it comes to setting things straight again.

 

Best Regards.

This is wasted effort. He. Doesn't. Care.

 

Don't let the crocodile tears fool you.

[The_Mole]

5 minutes ago, Checkraisingallday said:

This is wasted effort. He. Doesn't. Care.

 

Don't let the crocodile tears fool you.

Here, he needn't care as founding a council is a decision of the employees - he'd have no say.
There, he might be overruled by his new CEO.

 

And finally: At least I tried.

Edited August 17, 2023 by The_Mole
corrected typo

[throwawayManMode]

They pretty much have to cancel the WAN show this week right?

[_Hexenhammer_]

21 hours ago, OuterMarker said:

With regards to "journalism" and ethics... Steve was not required to talk to Linus ahead of time before posting the video. In journalism, you only contact the subject if the evidence you have is from third parties or if you think the subject of your piece might give you a good quote. The bulk of Steve's criticism was directly from LTT videos, so there was no need for Linus to comment on videos his team approved or direct quotes from Linus on the WAN show.

 

 

Wrong, when you do an investigation or talk about someone, you always let them know up front and ask for a comment/quote/replay.

Look, even Kotaku the masters of Yellow Journalism do it, when they post their "investigations" about some stupid liberal non issue, they always have a paragraph at the end" We contacted so and so and here is their official replay"....

Or "we contacted so and so, waited X days, got no replay and decided to post the article anyway".

 

Its basic journalism, you must let the people know and ask for their comment, to have THEIR side of thing, doenst matter if you know them or you never seen them.

Gamers nexus was spot on and had VALID arguments, but he missed an opportunity to be professional about it.

 

Because now it looks like a HIT piece

 

 

[bandainamcofan]

1 minute ago, _Hexenhammer_ said:

always let them know up front and ask for a comment/quote/replay.

It is not an always thing.

[Lurker_Letum]

27 minutes ago, nyanbinary said:

Never heard of this guy but he seems decent at reporting things unbiased. GN should take notes.

[Forbidden Wafer]

5 minutes ago, Checkraisingallday said:

This is wasted effort. He. Doesn't. Care.

 

Don't let the crocodile tears fool you.

Most issues can be worked on. If they are, I'd say it's enough. Reputation got damaged regardless of what they do now, IMHO. 

 

Still wish them to succeed, because I definitely want to see more whole room watercooling level stuff, mineral oil PC, etc. 

 

Just don't want to see them completely screwing up small teams, like they did with Billet. 

[m9x3mos]

11 minutes ago, throwawayManMode said:

They pretty much have to cancel the WAN show this week right?

I don't think they will. They brag about their steak of consecutive shows and I don't think Linus will let that drop. 

They will probably just repeat what was already said and ramble and refuse to talk about things in more detail. 

Maybe add some of the plans from now to Friday but that is what I think they will do. 

[_Hexenhammer_]

7 minutes ago, bandainamcofan said:

It is not an always thing.

In their exmaple list of reasons why not, nothing comes close.

 

You can still do the right thing for the wrong reasons.

To show that you honest and just want LTT to get better, but he made it look like he just want to kill competition.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bandainamcofan]

Just now, _Hexenhammer_ said:

In their exmaple list of reasons why not, nothing comes close.

 

You can still do the right thing for the wrong reasons.

To show that you honest and just want LTT to get better, but he made it look like he just want to kill competition.

Nothing comes close?

Quote

a person’s comments may already be in the public domain

Public youtube videos.

Quote

it may be inappropriate to contact the person

Because Steve and Linus know each other, it could be viewed as improper to give his friend's company preferential treatment by contacting them.

[Charlotte_in_Shinbashi]

As a very long time LTT-viewer, that GN video really was a bit painful to watch. I don't care about the small misstakes that happened. But hearing about those big misstakes that SHOULD have been caught at one point... makes you really lose a bit trust in the reviews. But the worst thing was the Billet Labs situation.

After all that I was eager awaiting Linus' response. And his forum post was extremely disappointing tbh.

After the latest video, I hope this all get's resolved and they come back as a better company. I don't really want to take of my ltt-pin from my bag and remove the stickers from my laptop. I like their merch, but if every time looking at it leaves a bad feeling...

[atxcyclist]

20 minutes ago, throwawayManMode said:

They pretty much have to cancel the WAN show this week right?

Considering the amount of repetitive, angry, cringe, and hate-filled comments brigaders would make, I wouldn't blame them if they did.

[IHAVOKI]

1 hour ago, Lurker_Letum said:

I get pissed when journalist from NYT, CNN, The Sun, Forbes, Fox News, etc, etc report without reaching for comment. Steve wants to be a big boy journalist and has said so many times. So why should I treat him differently.

 

Along with that he has consistently shown to reach out for comment. So yes. Why the fuck should LTT be treated differently. That's a really good god damn question. Why is Steve not showing LTT the same courtesy as the shit bag Noah Katz?

 

And why do people think the outreach is Steve personally calling Linus and discussing things? Often the email goes from business email to business email. So the email should of went from team@gamersnexus.net to info@linusmediagroup.com and worded something like this.

----------

Dear LTT Team.

 

My name is Steve - I am a reporter for Gamers Nexus, a youtube channel based in North Carolina, where I am creating a video about technical errors in your videos along with a developing situation between you and Billet Labs.

 

In regards to the technical errors *Details I want comments about*

 

In regards to the situation between you and Billet labs *Details I want comments about*

 

I can be reached at *Contact info*

 

My video is schedules to go up at *Date/Time*. Please note this date and time are firm so please get back to me regarding any comments by *Date/Time* so that I have time to add these details to my video.

 

Sincerely,

 

*Signature*

---------

Alright 2 minutes of thought and I already have something more professionally done up then what GN did. Super simple to not be biased in the email. And you give them a deadline to respond and don't let them try and weasel out of it.

 

In short it's really fucken simple and takes no time at all. A big complaint from Steve was Linus not wanted to spend a few hours to get things right then Steve in a massively hypocritical move won't spend 10min to send an email. And 100% he has a nice email template to ask for comments that far outshines the basic shit I just did up. Just 0 excuse.

100% percent agree with this comment.  Yes there is no obligation legal or otherwise why GN needed to reach out to LMG, LTT, or Linus, but how about a little common courtesy like basically here at GN we don't give a flying fuck what anyone has to say as long as you listen or read and always believe everything thing we say I have no faith in GN anymore 0 integrity. It doesn't matter if you shit on any company even if you know the parties involved personally or collaborated with them. I, we aka Steve will shit on you and give no nevermind on the ramifications of what we put out whether LMG answers our (GN) questions or not.  I'm no fanboy of LTT or GN. I've watched both for ideas on my two PC builds this year. I think there are faults on both sides. And people rush to judgement for the sake of drama.  Steve really only did this to help uh totally utter BS he knew the firestorm it would create and low key gaslighted LMG, LTT, and Linus.  Was the mono block issue handled good no, did Linus rush his first comment out yes. I probably would have too. I'm human so is Linus I would have felt blind sided by the video just like anyone else it's hard to come up with a perfect response in the heat of the moment. Steve still could have got his point across with sending these questions and let LMG respond then the video piece would have some contextual sense it really doesn't it just really leaves a bad taste in my mouth.  I enjoy Linus, Jake, Riley and the rest of LMG on screen talent. I really enjoy GN Steve and his crew, but Steve knew what would happen as did I and he gave no fucks just look at me I'm the good guy here don't blame me. I feel you don't have personal integrity on this matter. Whether it's Newegg, Asus, MSI, Noctua, Gigabyte, and LMG you should give them a chance to answer your questions then put thier responses out. You said you don't have too Steve, but it makes you look bad also. I hope this media space can recover for LMG, and GN's sake.  Everyone took a hit on this If GN gained subs based on drama and LMG lost subs then it's lose lose all around.  

[Lurker_Letum]

1 minute ago, bandainamcofan said:

Public youtube videos.

Billet Lab was not public info. This has been explained to you.

1 minute ago, bandainamcofan said:

Because Steve and Linus know each other, it could be viewed as improper to give his friend's company preferential treatment by contacting them.

An email from one public email box to another would have sufficed. No need for Steve to personally contact Linus. This has been explained to you.

[bandainamcofan]

Just now, IHAVOKI said:

common courtesy

That could be viewed giving LMG preferential treatment and thus an ethical violation. GN did not act unethically in this situation. 

[JeffreyLF]

23 minutes ago, throwawayManMode said:

They pretty much have to cancel the WAN show this week right?

I bet it will still go on unless they say otherwise beforehand, as it's not really a normal production video. It might not be how the WAN show normally is however since they claim to have stopped all production temporarily. If it does go on I bet it will be about the situation and then maybe a few topics/merch messages.

[Lurker_Letum]

2 minutes ago, bandainamcofan said:

That could be viewed giving LMG preferential treatment and thus an ethical violation. GN did not act unethically in this situation. 

GN has a past history of reaching out and therefore not reaching out showed different treatment. This has been explained to you.

 

Also as per code of journalistic ethics Diligently seek subjects of news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing. This has been explained to you.

[IHAVOKI]

4 minutes ago, bandainamcofan said:

That could be viewed giving LMG preferential treatment and thus an ethical violation. GN did not act unethically in this situation. 

Agreed, they should do it equally to all parties they research and or call out for issues. If they GN only reached out too let's say Newegg and never any other entity it could look like bias towards just Newegg but this is not the case GN Steve cherry pick. 

[_Hexenhammer_]

5 minutes ago, bandainamcofan said:

Nothing comes close?

Public youtube videos.

Because Steve and Linus know each other, it could be viewed as improper to give his friend's company preferential treatment by contacting them.

You misunderstood their example.

They mean the comment is already in the public domain, but when the video came out it wasnt yet.

 

And you misunderstood the second one too.

[nasir91]

Too many LTT bootlickers in this thread. As a dude who has been following LTT since the NCIX days I can tell you that Linus has changed a lot, consequently this is also reflected in how LTT has changed too.

 

I think what tipped the scale was when he started selling his own merch.

[atxcyclist]

8 minutes ago, Lurker_Letum said:

GN has a past history of reaching out and therefore not reaching out showed different treatment. This has been explained to you.

 

Also as per code of journalistic ethics Diligently seek subjects of news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing.

 

These posters cannot be bothered to watch GN's old videos and confirm that Steve does in fact contact people he's doing expose's on. They also talk about there being no 'legal requirement' or whatever for a company to reach out, as if that changes Steve's own self-imposed process where he does. My guess is that these people are just jumping on the drama train, they had basically zero investment in the content from either LMG or GN, but they saw this drama linked somewhere and wanted to jump into the fray.