Ultimately this is probably a good thing. From what I’ve gathered of Linus he is a person that can recognize his mistakes, but only once you get past his stubbornness. His response saying they should’ve hit him up is kind of classic response. What could you have said really? Like GN is right that like almost every video has a pinned comment or on screen edit of a correction. And you know these companies are complaining. Yet it continues.
Having their audience put them to task will go a long way to making them recognize it is a bigger issue than individual videos. I’m really curious about the idea of Labs being able to actually test things publically in a way consumers haven’t been able to. (Give me more of transparency like digital foundry for games and Jerryrig everything for durability.) So they need to pull their shit together if they want to claim to be a data driven lab. Like accuracy is all that matters.
I think the ethical concerns section is overblown. LTT is almost harsh on their sponsors and I got a kick out of Linus starting the last video talking about Framework saying how he doesn’t actually use the Framework laptop as his daily driver at the time and complained about it.
It very much feels significantly more like incompetence than malice (not that I think any particular person at LMG is incompetent. The processes likely are however). Honestly LMG just probably grew way faster than any of their processes could scale.
Their production cycle seems to be more targeted at producing content, moreso than anything else, like integrity or correctness.
I’ve noted several errors myself, most of the ones I’ve seen are relatively minor, and mostly pedantic, but they’re inaccuracies nonetheless.
If LMG wants to move towards being more journalism and a reputable source of accurate information, which, from everything they’ve done recently (most notably the lab), they seem to want to be, then they need people to go and fact check everything, and scrutinize final products to ensure accurate information. Making sure that inaccuracies are caught and sent back to the beginning of the pipeline to be re-reviewed, and if necessary, re-shot.
They can’t keep doing things by the seat of their pants and hoping for the best.
My hats off to GN for bringing it to light, and hopefully some meaningful changes come from this.
The sponsor related aspects I feel they handle pretty well for the most part, they’re often critical of sponsors and I don’t get the feeling he’d straight up sell out. It feels like they’re putting out so much content across so many channels that they’re not able to keep up the accuracy / quality. That’s a fair point I think Steve raised and to see it fobbed off by Linus in his response is disappointing
Ultimately this is probably a good thing. From what I’ve gathered of Linus he is a person that can recognize his mistakes, but only once you get past his stubbornness. His response saying they should’ve hit him up is kind of classic response. What could you have said really? Like GN is right that like almost every video has a pinned comment or on screen edit of a correction. And you know these companies are complaining. Yet it continues.
Having their audience put them to task will go a long way to making them recognize it is a bigger issue than individual videos. I’m really curious about the idea of Labs being able to actually test things publically in a way consumers haven’t been able to. (Give me more of transparency like digital foundry for games and Jerryrig everything for durability.) So they need to pull their shit together if they want to claim to be a data driven lab. Like accuracy is all that matters.
I think the ethical concerns section is overblown. LTT is almost harsh on their sponsors and I got a kick out of Linus starting the last video talking about Framework saying how he doesn’t actually use the Framework laptop as his daily driver at the time and complained about it.
It very much feels significantly more like incompetence than malice (not that I think any particular person at LMG is incompetent. The processes likely are however). Honestly LMG just probably grew way faster than any of their processes could scale.
Their production cycle seems to be more targeted at producing content, moreso than anything else, like integrity or correctness.
I’ve noted several errors myself, most of the ones I’ve seen are relatively minor, and mostly pedantic, but they’re inaccuracies nonetheless.
If LMG wants to move towards being more journalism and a reputable source of accurate information, which, from everything they’ve done recently (most notably the lab), they seem to want to be, then they need people to go and fact check everything, and scrutinize final products to ensure accurate information. Making sure that inaccuracies are caught and sent back to the beginning of the pipeline to be re-reviewed, and if necessary, re-shot.
They can’t keep doing things by the seat of their pants and hoping for the best.
My hats off to GN for bringing it to light, and hopefully some meaningful changes come from this.
I wonder how much of that is because of how much they grew vs the production cycle as dictated by constantly feeding the yt algorithm.
The difference between putting out a video every day and putting out a video when it’s ready is a decision that each channel makes
The sponsor related aspects I feel they handle pretty well for the most part, they’re often critical of sponsors and I don’t get the feeling he’d straight up sell out. It feels like they’re putting out so much content across so many channels that they’re not able to keep up the accuracy / quality. That’s a fair point I think Steve raised and to see it fobbed off by Linus in his response is disappointing