well since one of the most prominent billionaires in sports (or “sports entertainment”) was forced out of his families company he’s run for almost 50 years for sleeping with employees and then paying them off using company money …
Well ok he retired before he was forced out but I think that was a negotiated "leave before we dig up more dirt thing "
If Fulmer had been accused of sexual harassment or abuse, I would easily see why this level of outrage is directed at him (and I would agree with it). In fact that’s part of the reason I started this thread; I was wondering if there were allegations of this that hadn’t gone mainstream.
Exactly. To their audience base, in the business environment they inhabit, there is no alternative but coming down hard and making a Big Deal of how damn much the organization distances itself from and wants nothing to do with his conduct. If they did not, the people who count for keeping them in business – which is none of us who just know of them casually – would turn on them and they’d really be finished. As various examples have been raised, it does not have to be a crime for it to mean the organization is put in jeopardy and for not just corrective action but some serious public rending of garments and wailing lamentation to be demanded from the management.
Why would a Youtube troupe have a “base”?
That’s what I’m saying- even if it is performative, it’s absurd.
I’m not saying they should condone it or anything like that, but making such a big demonstrative deal out of it is something entirely else.
Is this a serious question? Of course they have a fan base.
Substitute audience, fans or simply subscribers of which they have ~9.7 million. 9.7 million people around the world have signed up by clicking a button to be notified whenever a new video is released. Those 9.7 million subscribers have to be at least somewhat catered to. These guys are entertainers and depend on keeping their audience engrossed and engaged. If enough people de-subscribe, they lose money (eventually).
Why do you think people watch the Try Guys? It’s not because they are teaching viewers valuable lessons or sharing interesting facts. The shows aren’t exciting.
People watch because they like the guys and either identify with them or want to know people like them. Over the course of many episodes, viewers form a relationship of sorts with the guys.
So when one of them cheats on his wife, it’s a big deal. Viewers no longer want to identify with him, they don’t want hang with someone like that. If the other Try Guys want to keep their viewers’ loyalty, they needed to dump Ned.
I saw a commercial featuring Blake Shelton last week. So apparently a company feels he’s acceptable as their celebrity spokesman. On top of his ongoing job hosting a reality singing show. But Shelton cheated on his first wife with a woman who became his second wife and then cheating on his second wife with a woman (and co-worker) who is now his third wife. He didn’t lose his job or apparently his audience.
Robin Williams cheated on his wife with the nanny who was working for them. But his career didn’t end. He kept making movies and tv series and is still fondly remembered.
Jude Law also cheated on his fiance with their nanny. He’s still making movies.
Hugh Grant cheated on his girlfriend. He kept making movies and still is working today.
Kevin Hart has admitted he cheated on his wife while she was pregnant with their child. He’s still making movies.
David Boreanaz admitted he was cheating on his wife. He continued making the TV series he starred in.
Ryan Phillippe cheated on his wife. He kept making movies.
Arnold Schwarzenegger cheated on his wife with their maid, who had his child. He was elected Governor and maintains his movie career.
Just to show it’s not a gender issue, Katherine McPhee, Leean Rimes, Meg Ryan, Jessica Simpson, Tori Spelling, and Kristen Stewart have all admitted they cheated on their husband. Their careers continued.
Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, John Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower, Franklin Roosevelt, and Warren Harding all cheated on their wives. And all of them went on to get elected President.
Prince Charles cheated on his wife. He was just crowned King of England.
So apparently cheating on your spouse isn’t necessarily the end of your public career. The usual course is a celebrity gets caught, then they do the talk show circuit and grovel about how bad they were. The public enjoys the drama and then forgives them.
So like I asked above, do we somehow have a higher standard for YouTube celebrities then we have for actors, singers, writers, and political leaders?
Some people are saying it’s different with Ned Fulmer because he had wrapped so much of his “brand” up with him being a devoted husband. Which raises the question; if it had been one of the other Try Guys who cheated on their partner, would they have been able to keep working?
Because those people are actors, singers, writers and political leaders. They all do something other than just try to project likability. Successful YouTube channels, many of them anyway, are extremely personality-driven. The concept of watching a few people sampling several different varieties of KFC entrees is not inherently entertaining. What IS entertaining (to some people) are likeable people you’ve decided they “know” amusingly riffing on trying several different varieties of KFC.
Likability is often everything for these cats.
That sounds weird. Nonetheless, it’s dramatic. It makes a lot of rock band drama look tame.
It’s not the root causes either; but rather the way they’re going about it and the level of excitement that this has engendered. And it’s generally not media-generated, like @Little_Nemo’s list. I mean, without the paparazzi and celebrity-news press, none of those things would have been news, even without some sort of firing from a show, etc…
But this Try Guys thing was apparently a big deal before SNL sent it up, and all from the bottom up; it wasn’t a bunch of nosey celebrity journalists finding it out, it’s regular viewers blowing it up.
I just can’t imagine being so invested in an internet personality that I’d care at all if anything happened to them. Or really a public personality of any sort, but especially an internet one.
Look guys, we get it. To y’all these are unimportant people doing unimportant things and why do we even have to hear about it and why in the world is such a big deal being made of this when other people have had similar problems and not made such a ruckus.
Heck, I agree they are unimportant people doing unimportant things. But that unimportant thing is their business, their livelihood and the basis for an online community with almost ten million participants. (more people than vote in the Florida gubernatorial election) Inside that online community, this is significant and they respond accordingly. Need I remind you of the issues with online communities’ reactions to things?
I am outside that community, so I can say “meh, whatever, you do you” and carry on without feeling the need to puzzle it out to my satisfaction.
Right now I would not be surprised if there’s a bunch of other small businesses or small public entities where some scandal has brewed and in some of them there have been sackings and public expressions of contrition and statements well-lawyered to the effect of OMG don’t sue us; and in others everyone involved is saying “I don’t want to talk about it! None of your business! We’ve dealt with it, get over it”; and in both cases that we have not and will never hear of. Because we are not the affected parties and it just so happens it doesn’t catch the right media attention beyond their respective surroundings.
Same here. Someone has a problem in their business, it’s a Big F-ing Deal internally so they treat it like that, and for some reason this one blows up in outsider public attention, when it could have been left to those who do care.
No, and I can’t fathom how you could possibly make that conclusion based on the words that have actually been used in this thread.
You are wrong that I said you were. The people being talked about are the Try Guys, it’s in the title, it’s in the OP, it’s pretty clear, really. No idea how you are managing to confuse yourself this much.
Yes, and we are talking about specific public figures. That you talk about some other public figures that cheated on their wives has nothing to do with this person who cheater on his wife.
Once again, Ned’s whole schtick was that he was a devoted family man. He lied to his friends, his co-workers, and his fans. This is not the same as finding that your favorite ball thrower or politician is cheating on their wife, being faithful to their family isn’t what they built their entire reputation on.
I’m really not grokking what it is that you don’t understand about this.
I’ve seen about 2 half shows of theirs when it came up in my feed, but I found it boring and saccharinely. I have no investment in them, I didn’t know about this scandal until this thread.
Parasocial relationships are a real thing. There is ongoing debate as to how healthy such one sided relationships are, but there is no debate as to whether they exist.
Exactly. The fans feel that he cheated on one of their friends.
As has been answered above, the Try Guys set a higher standard for themselves with the content they chose to create.
Probably not, as they are all shown as devoted family men, and that would be the same sort of betrayal.
Little_Nemo? That list you created. As soon as their scandals became public knowledge, I no longer went to their movies, or supported their careers. Some of them really had no effect, as I didn’t see their stuff before, but I don’t go see their movies or shows because they did what they did. Add in a bunch of other musicians that have domestic violence or SA charges, like Chris Brown, because I won’t support their careers either.
Cheating on your spouse is wrong. Its probably number 3 on my list of unforgiveable acts. And a lot of others feel that way.
I feel cheating on your spouse is extremely wrong. I would never cheat on my (hypothetical) spouse and I would consider it unforgiveable if my (hypothetical) spouse cheated on me.
But I don’t feel like I’ve been betrayed when somebody else cheats on their spouse. I agree what they did was wrong but they didn’t do it to me.
In fact I find it a little strange that some people seem to feel they had a relationship with Ned Fulmer, a guy they watched on the internet.
I’m the guy who wrote the title and OP and my subsequent posts so I feel confident I’m not confused by them. I’m also not confused by what other people have posted in this thread, even when I don’t agree with them. All the confusion I have experienced in this thread is connected to your posts so I feel you are the source of the confusion.
How would you feel if someone cheated on one of your friends? Would you remain friends with the cheater?
As I said upthread, parasocial relationships are a real thing. Especially on a channel like that, where the parasocial relationship is the main thing that they are selling. They want viewers to be a part of their family, to join them on vacations and even just daily slice of life.
Why did people get upset when they found that Milli Vanilli was lip syncing, why did they get upset when they found out that baseball players were juicing?
They felt betrayed, because the thing that brought them to enjoy that person was a fraud.
All I can say is that I’ve been as clear and concise as I can be, and I really don’t understand where your confusion as to who I was talking about could have come from.
How did anyone NOT know that they were all fraudulent, even at the time? AFAIK nobody actually thought these two French/German boobs were somehow singing phonetically like a couple of forty-something black R&B singers from the US. Everyone just assumed something shady was going on.
And Bonds/McGwire/Sosa were so much larger in their home run record chases than they’d been earlier in their careers that it was obvious that it wasn’t just good living and working out.
I felt about the same about those two examples as I did when I found out that one of a married pair of friends was cheating on the other- disappointed, but not surprised. It was a surprise, but not surprising, if that makes sense.
Right, but the question was not how you felt about it, but why anyone would care. And specifically in the OP, why his co-workers would care.
I mean, I don’t care, like I said upthread, I’ve seen maybe 10 minutes (generously) of their content, and it didn’t interest me at all. The OP wanted to know why his colleagues were upset.
I’m starting to think that this thread is less about trying to actually understand the people that are upset and why they are, and more about trying to show that they are wrong to be.
If it were the former, then post #3 is all anyone really needs to understand. It seems as though it’s the latter, as it appears people are working very hard not to.
Unless this is one of those, “Why do hoomans do those weird hooman things?” threads.