Should Pewdiepie censor his videos?
Debate Rounds (3)
First round acceptance
2nd round arguments
3rd round conclusion and rebuttals
I (con) will be arguing that Pewdiepie should not censor his videos
Pro will be arguing that Pewdiepie should censor his videos
Hoping you will accept my challenge ;)
As you said in your previous debate, it is the parents fault if they fail to teach their children that their are some explicit content on YouTube. However, this doesn't mean that YouTube or Pewdiepie should censor his videos because other people (like me) enjoy his unique humor and reaction to various games and videos.
His use of humor
Some could say that his language and his use of profanity could be offensive however many find it adds to his overreactions, thus adding hilarity to the situation. Although majority of people do not swear abusive and explicit language in public, we are already desensitized to abusive language and violence due to social media (ie Facebook and the news). So it is pointless to censor words that may be harmful to the public when the words themselves do not have much of an impact on people's life.
The Effects of Pewdiepie himself or Youtube censor Pewdiepie's videos
If YouTube censors Pewdiepie's videos, the range wide of audience he is entertaining diminishes dramatically as many mature viewers may be curious to what he is saying. Many viewers will also be deeply unhappy about YouTube censoring his videos. This may lead to groups on Google or other social networks demanding that the videos become uncensored. Therefore creating much unrest in the virtual community. As social media makes major issues like "Pewdiepie's videos being censored " snowball into a fierce dispute between the video sharing company themselves. If other video sharing companies (ie Vimeo and MetaCafe) heard about this information, they would jump at the opportunity to snag the most subscribed celebrity to upload his videos to their website in an effort to gain popularity on their website.
If Pewdiepie himself censors his videos a similar effect would happen on his YouTube profile which will be riddled with demands to not censor his videos. The amount of subscribers and viewers on his videos would greatly decrease therefore having a negative effect on his only source of income to support his girlfriend his 2 pugs and himself.
Wishing all the best to my opponent and may the best debater win. :)
Hahaha! I laugh at your stupidity. Prank vs Prank has censored their videos. I have not seen them suffer terribly after their decision to censor their videos. They still get their massive views and everyone enjoys their videos. No complaints of them, (from their fans) about their videos being censored. NONE. So what you said was ludicrous and invalid. You're thinking way to immensely about this.
Of course his mature viewers are going to understand what he's saying. If they've watched his videos long enough they'll know what he's saying. Trust me pal when I say it. You're starting to easily trap yourself and not realize your doing that. You're putting yourself into this area where you think it will happen this way, when it won't. And if it does, it won't matter.
Besides, it's not like like Felix can't go work at Google if he many subscribers. Who cares if Vimeo or MetaCafe jump to his side to gain their popularity? WHO CARES! It's not like his fans aren't going to watch his videos when he transfers to those video sharing companies. They hardly have any people on their websites. I'd loved to see Vimeo become popular and MetaCafe become popular. Wouldn't you?
Although my theory is a hypothesis, if there is any evidence that directly contradicts my argument above please present it in round 3. (ie present overwhelming evidence from various sources proving someone who has just censored their videos showed an increase in subscribers and views on YouTube) If you cannot provide evidence of this then you do not have enough evidence to
a) call my hypothesis ludicrous and invalid
b) question my intelligence
Although Prank vs Prank have censored there videos and still generate satisfactory revenue, their content targets a broader audience with adults and children alike being amused by their pranks. You cannot compare Prank vs Prank videos with Pewdiepie's videos because he sometimes plays games that are M and MA (Recommended for mature audiences 15+) The reason no one has complained about Prank vs Prank censoring their videos is because by censoring their videos it has benefited their profile by targeting a broader audience. If Pewdiepie follows Prank vs Prank's idea something similar to my theory will most likely happen. (again, present evidence in round 3 to contradict this claim)
Pro, my apologies if i failed to convey my argument across in round 2 but to answer your question in in the previous round "WHO CARES!". I'm sure YouTube would not want to lose their most subscribed person to some minor video sharing company. This is why YouTube has not censored his videos. Of course I would like to see Vinemo and Metacafe become popular but I would like them to earn their popular by presenting someone who has original ideas to become popular. Not just "riding" off YouTube's success by stealing their most successful video up loader.
"his mature viewers are going to understand what he's saying. If they've watched his videos long enough they'll know what he's saying" (Round 2 Pro) It seems that you are neglecting up to 2041 people who are just subscribing to Pewdiepie's channel hourly. (Sources viewed on Monday, 28 April http://vidstatsx.com...) It would be reasonable to assume that there would be some mature people within the 2041 people and many of them would be curious about what Pewdiepie is saying in his videos.
As this is the last round may I provide a rebuttal to one of the arguments that you may like to present in round 3. (it may be something along the lines of) "If Pewdiepie is playing M and MA games that gives him even more reason to censor his videos" As I said before many kids have easy access to this content but "it is the parents fault if they fail to teach their children that their are some explicit content on YouTube". (quote from Round 2 Con)
Based on my arguments Pewdiepie should not censor his videos for the following reasons: he has no obligation to and disastrous effects may be occur that will have a negative effect on his YouTube career.
You have no arguments presented in round 2 so am I right to assume that you have no arguments to present to the debate?
I can question your intelligence and it doesn't matter if I call your "hypothesis" ludicrous and invalid.
And I didn't say the video games he played had to be censored now did I? I said PewDiePie himself should censor what he says. ARE YOU EVEN READING MY ARGUEMENT? Probably not. Maybe just skimming.
This wasn't supposed to be a big debate, but you just had to go ahead and blow it. You know this debate won't work it your a true fan of PewDiePie so I am going to end this argument. It was just an idea. But I guess you thought it wasn't.
Now that we have things settled you and I will go our separate ways. (I'm hoping so). I appreciate you trying to be defensive on Felix's side, but let's be honest your 16, your not old enough to still understand things.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.