One thing you might not have considered (at least, at the time you made this video), is that most of the negative comments on YouTube are poorly thought out, and often vulgar, like the one you quoted earlier.
People, and YouTubers especially, are not interested in asking hard questions. Their just interested in how much attention they can draw to themselves with regard to their distaste of a person. Their intention is not to provoke thought, their intention is just to provoke.
PLEASE DON'T READ THIS you will die in seven days if you don't post this comment on 10 videos in the next hour. if you do, tommorrow will be the best day of your life
Yep like Ron Paul, hes brave enough to take on any debate anytime anywhere because he knows that no matter what you ask him, he can answer with honesty and conviction instead of having to think how to hedge & haw to cover, confuse, or change the subject
re: your update. Great to hear from the Huckabee campaign, but Huckabee's video response after his week in the You Tube Spotlight did not evidence any commitment to a dialogue w/ the TUBE community. Far from it. It could have been filmed without watching any if his video responses. Huckabee gets an F for his spotlight moment. In fact, many of the candidates are treating this as nothing more than a commercial... by the way James F%^% you, you %#^@, $%@$ 4%#$.
All that I can say is that I'm much more likely to vote for the candidate who encourages an open exchange of all ideas--or, shall we say, "conversation."
P.S. James... be sure to distinguish between the videos posted by the candidates and re-posted or saved by someone else. You said Mike Huckabee disabled comments on his video about not needing the IRS. That was completely wrong. The video has hundreds of comments and in fact Huckabee has even put out video responses to some of the comments.
Good point. I sent positive comments to the Huckabee video and they didn't get posted. You are quite possibly correct about watching for "re-posts". I suppose the lack of a desire for dialogue goes both ways.
wow, James...your first good video. I've noticed the same thing especially with Hillary. The Internet should be about the free flow of conversation and thoughts...censorship does not have a place on Internet.
In regards to your update, I think candidates should allow information about opponents in the comments. If people start spamming about how great an opponent is it might even backfire and make people not want to hear about the other guy anymore. It also looks more honest for the candidate who's video the comments are on. Like you said, open communication. That's what we want and expect.
I think that candidates should definitely allow all comments, with the exception of "this is not a chain letter"s, and overtly vulgar comments. Optimally, the candidates would post a response comment or video to showcase the fact that they are willing to deal with everybody, not just the people who agree with them or say nice things about them. If these "civil servants" are going to censor us, maybe they're not the right person for the job of representing us.
Referencing the last point in your video's description, I've noticed that at least one person replied to Hunters "who's your hero?" video with the answer "Ron Paul."
FINALLY! Thank you so much James for finally dealing with this. Mitt Romney has a staff that's running around deleting all negative comments and it comes across as petty and mildly fascist. You will be the hero of the 2008 election. Can't wait to see you posting from the primaries!
Great video, excellent points. My thoughts exactly. I considered my comment on Hillary's video to be pretty benign but it never got approved. I think most haters probably dropped out of school which is why their comments are often unintelligible aside from the profanity that they know how to spell.
Please don't post this comment. One technical concern that I have is that when you lean back from the camera your facial tone turns green. It is a bit distracting and detracts (slightly) from your presentation. Hope you take this in the manner it what intended.
I'm under the believe that God chooses not to stop me from doing "good" and so I don't question why he doesn't stop other people from doing "bad". Um... filtering out legitimately negative comments is a kin to saying "My mind is made up don't confuse me with the facts" or "I'm shallow and can't take people not liking me" or "I have enough time or a paid staff to filter out tons of bad comments so it look like every one likes me" In some cases it's deplorable.
I agree and was aware of that too. I don't think it is right ( or being open-minded and listening to the youtube community ) when the candidates youtube staff either will not allow any negative based comment ( removing racist/vulgar comments acceptable ) or any comments at all. Does not sound like the candidate supports "listening to the american people". Well put, James.
I think your dreaming if you think politicians are going to change for YouTube. Hillary Clinton probably took the best approach by mocking the medium where she is unpopular and focusing on raising money. Only the mini-coffer candidates are interested in the buzz they can generate on YouTube.
No, but the candidates youtube staff shouldn't dis-allow or restrict all negative-based comments. It shows ignorance on their part--racist/vulgar comments I can see not posting, but it looks like they don't care what america says about their campaign.
I agree about Hillary's mocking the unpopularity medium where she was singing the national anthem and her campaign song--she is the only candidate who has displayed they have a sense of humor.
Now that's a solid commentary. Dead on. I absolutely concur with some of your candidate observations. There are definitely candidates who are allowing their campaign staff way too much influence. Or are simply afraid of the people. One or the other.
Agreed! Nothing makes me more upset than when a presidential candidate doesn't allow comments or deletes my comments when I (respectfully) disagree with them. If I'm not mistaken Gravel, Kucinich, and Paul are the only ones that don't require approval. There might be others as well but the 'top tier' aren't open with it.
Well, I don't know why the Huckabee staff approved my response, when I was pretty critical of the Mr. Huckabee. Why allow critical video responses and not allow any comments at all?
candidates should mostly ignore negative comments, unless they're substantive criticism. the main thing candidates are failing in, especially hillary clinton, is simple communicating with anyone on here. even if she talked with only a few supporters, it'd be an improvement. total agreement with you.
Also, as long as the negative comments aren't vulgar or simply off topic rants, regular negative comments can give an opportunity for both the candidate & supporting commenters an opportunity to really make their point & by doing it with facts & class, they can turn that negative comment into a very positive score for their side.
James, I loved the ominous forest fire scene! Though it's still tame compared to the raging fires of political hand-to-hand combat!
I think if the comment is negative, but respectful, then they should respond. Ignoring challenges to their position could be taken as admission that they can't really support their view. If, however, the comment is disrespectful, then I wouldn't give it the dignity of an answer, but rather ignore it. I'm tired of people, on all sides, being rude, just because they feel they are right. If you are right, then you should be able to support your view without being a jerk.
you stink....... BAD
hockeystar093 7 months ago
hate your face
contact1araya 11 months ago
Try posting a NEG. comment about Obama.
conservitgirl 2 years ago
Every Obama video I've tried to comment on has been the same way. Every comment on the page says something along the lines of, "you've got my vote."
Might as well stamp a FOX / CNN logo on the page if you're not going to allow for all forms of feedback IMO.
Codad 3 years ago
One thing you might not have considered (at least, at the time you made this video), is that most of the negative comments on YouTube are poorly thought out, and often vulgar, like the one you quoted earlier.
People, and YouTubers especially, are not interested in asking hard questions. Their just interested in how much attention they can draw to themselves with regard to their distaste of a person. Their intention is not to provoke thought, their intention is just to provoke.
DigitalJediMaster 4 years ago
You said it.
typhonsentra 4 years ago
HAHAHAHAHAHA omg i laughing so hard right now!!! YOOOOOOUUUUUU RUUUULELLLE!!!!!!!
chuntoon007 4 years ago
actually one of the better videos oh youtube keep at it
jhottie07 4 years ago
Ron Paul 2008!!
lisadseeker 4 years ago
Whats up with the Ron Paul followers on youtube? give it a break guys...
IBringAMessage 4 years ago
I think you are really smart and I like your videos!
claudiamilhano1 4 years ago
better to allow no comments than only the good ones. at least it doesn't create a false image.
bedsidetrash 4 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PLEASE DON'T READ THIS you will die in seven days if you don't post this comment on 10 videos in the next hour. if you do, tommorrow will be the best day of your life
brownlife13 4 years ago
VOTE RON PAUL 2008!!
spread the word :)
MrHypocrite 4 years ago
Love it. Thank James.
vnRock 4 years ago
Yep like Ron Paul, hes brave enough to take on any debate anytime anywhere because he knows that no matter what you ask him, he can answer with honesty and conviction instead of having to think how to hedge & haw to cover, confuse, or change the subject
Wolfsheim23 4 years ago
re: your update. Great to hear from the Huckabee campaign, but Huckabee's video response after his week in the You Tube Spotlight did not evidence any commitment to a dialogue w/ the TUBE community. Far from it. It could have been filmed without watching any if his video responses. Huckabee gets an F for his spotlight moment. In fact, many of the candidates are treating this as nothing more than a commercial... by the way James F%^% you, you %#^@, $%@$ 4%#$.
davisfleetwood 4 years ago
Good point James
jab2ur 4 years ago
All that I can say is that I'm much more likely to vote for the candidate who encourages an open exchange of all ideas--or, shall we say, "conversation."
vulpix 4 years ago
P.S. James... be sure to distinguish between the videos posted by the candidates and re-posted or saved by someone else. You said Mike Huckabee disabled comments on his video about not needing the IRS. That was completely wrong. The video has hundreds of comments and in fact Huckabee has even put out video responses to some of the comments.
jeffr1982 4 years ago
Good point. I sent positive comments to the Huckabee video and they didn't get posted. You are quite possibly correct about watching for "re-posts". I suppose the lack of a desire for dialogue goes both ways.
cphine 4 years ago
wow, James...your first good video. I've noticed the same thing especially with Hillary. The Internet should be about the free flow of conversation and thoughts...censorship does not have a place on Internet.
jeffr1982 4 years ago
In regards to your update, I think candidates should allow information about opponents in the comments. If people start spamming about how great an opponent is it might even backfire and make people not want to hear about the other guy anymore. It also looks more honest for the candidate who's video the comments are on. Like you said, open communication. That's what we want and expect.
majestia19 4 years ago
James thanks for the youtube seminar on etiquette (authentic 2-way communication). Regards, STL
souptloop 4 years ago
I think that candidates should definitely allow all comments, with the exception of "this is not a chain letter"s, and overtly vulgar comments. Optimally, the candidates would post a response comment or video to showcase the fact that they are willing to deal with everybody, not just the people who agree with them or say nice things about them. If these "civil servants" are going to censor us, maybe they're not the right person for the job of representing us.
HoneyBeeATX 4 years ago
Referencing the last point in your video's description, I've noticed that at least one person replied to Hunters "who's your hero?" video with the answer "Ron Paul."
dcolarusso 4 years ago
I DOnt Hate You james You Rock.
RedPinPoint 4 years ago
FINALLY! Thank you so much James for finally dealing with this. Mitt Romney has a staff that's running around deleting all negative comments and it comes across as petty and mildly fascist. You will be the hero of the 2008 election. Can't wait to see you posting from the primaries!
drooski 4 years ago
I just featured this vid on my channel.
majestia19 4 years ago
Great video, excellent points. My thoughts exactly. I considered my comment on Hillary's video to be pretty benign but it never got approved. I think most haters probably dropped out of school which is why their comments are often unintelligible aside from the profanity that they know how to spell.
majestia19 4 years ago
Please don't post this comment. One technical concern that I have is that when you lean back from the camera your facial tone turns green. It is a bit distracting and detracts (slightly) from your presentation. Hope you take this in the manner it what intended.
lrudo 4 years ago
I continue to enjoy your videos. Your commentary seems thoughtful and from the heart.
lrudo 4 years ago
Very good points, worth repeating. Censorship on video's just might say something about the candidate themselves.
beckweth 4 years ago
Right on beckweth!
HoneyBeeATX 4 years ago
great video and excellent points. disagreement with respect is good and vital to our system.
coffeedude65 4 years ago
I'm under the believe that God chooses not to stop me from doing "good" and so I don't question why he doesn't stop other people from doing "bad". Um... filtering out legitimately negative comments is a kin to saying "My mind is made up don't confuse me with the facts" or "I'm shallow and can't take people not liking me" or "I have enough time or a paid staff to filter out tons of bad comments so it look like every one likes me" In some cases it's deplorable.
lund777 4 years ago
really good points there. Plus, candidates who allow open comments get more respect.
sferb 4 years ago
I agree and was aware of that too. I don't think it is right ( or being open-minded and listening to the youtube community ) when the candidates youtube staff either will not allow any negative based comment ( removing racist/vulgar comments acceptable ) or any comments at all. Does not sound like the candidate supports "listening to the american people". Well put, James.
skylarportland 4 years ago
I like your new background. Better than a green screen.
And I agree with everything you said. Even the 3rd grader jibe.
GuardianStealth 4 years ago
Dead on, m*r f*r!
berliita 4 years ago
I think your dreaming if you think politicians are going to change for YouTube. Hillary Clinton probably took the best approach by mocking the medium where she is unpopular and focusing on raising money. Only the mini-coffer candidates are interested in the buzz they can generate on YouTube.
wogsland 4 years ago
No, but the candidates youtube staff shouldn't dis-allow or restrict all negative-based comments. It shows ignorance on their part--racist/vulgar comments I can see not posting, but it looks like they don't care what america says about their campaign.
I agree about Hillary's mocking the unpopularity medium where she was singing the national anthem and her campaign song--she is the only candidate who has displayed they have a sense of humor.
skylarportland 4 years ago
Good job james
warandpigs 4 years ago
Now that's a solid commentary. Dead on. I absolutely concur with some of your candidate observations. There are definitely candidates who are allowing their campaign staff way too much influence. Or are simply afraid of the people. One or the other.
gary
gdstark 4 years ago
I like u.................
BenjiAYOU 4 years ago
James is a closet Ron Paul support, I can tell.
Chandlerbin2006 4 years ago
supporter**
Chandlerbin2006 4 years ago
thanks for posting the links to their vidoes, James!
evanschmitt2 4 years ago
Agreed! Nothing makes me more upset than when a presidential candidate doesn't allow comments or deletes my comments when I (respectfully) disagree with them. If I'm not mistaken Gravel, Kucinich, and Paul are the only ones that don't require approval. There might be others as well but the 'top tier' aren't open with it.
cujothekitten 4 years ago
Well, I don't know why the Huckabee staff approved my response, when I was pretty critical of the Mr. Huckabee. Why allow critical video responses and not allow any comments at all?
nanite1018 4 years ago
I hope the MSM picks up on the HRC screening.
kipesquire 4 years ago
"The medium is the message", James. Nice work all around.
rizzuto10 4 years ago
candidates should mostly ignore negative comments, unless they're substantive criticism. the main thing candidates are failing in, especially hillary clinton, is simple communicating with anyone on here. even if she talked with only a few supporters, it'd be an improvement. total agreement with you.
mysterywalker 4 years ago
great points
keep it up
hows my guy Ron Paul holding up
koch46 4 years ago
Great commentary here James.
jptrenn 4 years ago
Buck up, lil camper. I like you! And you're 100% right. YouTube is new media. They need to get hep to its jive.
ladyjade3 4 years ago
I think you're videos are always good.
TheoVanDerDeer 4 years ago
also Mike Huckabee was the only republican who actually approved my video response
TheoVanDerDeer 4 years ago
Also, as long as the negative comments aren't vulgar or simply off topic rants, regular negative comments can give an opportunity for both the candidate & supporting commenters an opportunity to really make their point & by doing it with facts & class, they can turn that negative comment into a very positive score for their side.
James, I loved the ominous forest fire scene! Though it's still tame compared to the raging fires of political hand-to-hand combat!
: )
RogCBrand 4 years ago
So, this is the first video of yours I've seen since subscribing after seeing your "1000 subscriptions celebration video".
I like it. You have an efficient, well put style. Your arguments are sound, and you keep it short. I'm up for more.
KarstenM 4 years ago
I think if the comment is negative, but respectful, then they should respond. Ignoring challenges to their position could be taken as admission that they can't really support their view. If, however, the comment is disrespectful, then I wouldn't give it the dignity of an answer, but rather ignore it. I'm tired of people, on all sides, being rude, just because they feel they are right. If you are right, then you should be able to support your view without being a jerk.
RogCBrand 4 years ago
I'll try to not be negative. Keep up the good work.
CoolLikeMiles 4 years ago