Respectfully, they found a niche and they rolled with it. I do mildly criticize the hyperbole but I accept its something that helps get clicks which id rather they get than basically all the alternatives.

This is true to some degree. But at the same time, these are all still a bunch of white guys who happened to be born into the wealth needed to create their channels in the first place, so it’s more of which group of rich white dudes is getting the clicks.

And if that’s the way they want to roll, it’s really none of my business nor concern. Go with it. But just don’t claim that you’re objective and independent when watching about three minutes of your coverage proves otherwise.

The products are whatever, sometimes I’m glad to hear about whats big and they tend to take on decent quality offerings that I may act on at some point, most of the podcasts and outlets I follow have to do some form of advertising but they all make it fun or minimally intrusive so again I accept that as a function of doing business and being able to continue their work.

I have no problems with advertising. They have to make money too. But there’s a difference between “Here’s a word from our sponsor” and letting the ad run vs. claiming to like and use a product they’ve clearly never heard of while they’re reading off a script with all of the acting talent of a first grader in a school play. And to some, it begs the question of if they’re willing to peddle this crap and lie to me about it in the process, what else are they lying about to generate revenue?

I’m sure we couldn’t disagree that the legal analysis and breakdowns are top-notch and quite deep. They’ve made me, a non-lawyer or law student utterly fascinated with the law and how it can all go wrong and where it upholds what it should where it matters

Oh, this I agree with. Once you dig through the clickbait and hyperbole, the information is quite good. But you’ve got to dig through more than you should have to to get there.