Shills and Whores in Linux "Journalism"

Grab your Popcorn

2 Likes

Or don’t. :man_shrugging:
No point really giving this trash more views.

3 Likes

What’s so trash about it? Lunduke had a fundraiser to join the W3C. What did he do with that? When he was working at Suse, shilled Suse to oblivion. As soon as he left Suse, he acted like they never existed.

Got some context to add, or opinion to add to the video? Would be useful for a better discussion.

5 Likes

Because Crying SHILL & WHORE, JOURNALISM! and sprinkling in a few words of opinion isn’t exactly holding up to the journalistic standards he sets out in the video for others to abide by.

Hypocrisy at it’s best.

7 Likes

How is saying what he did with Suse an “opinion”? That actually happened.

Because it’s unreferenced and he doesn’t provide/demonstrate it in the video. It’s just banter.

If I where to do this video I’d get a sample video of Bryans behavior over time pre and post suse to demonstrate the talking point.

That way other viewers can get an idea. The whole presentation of the video is also appalling though.
Nothing says shilling for yourself more than having the channel name across the entire video the entire time. :thinking:

If you want an honest observation you will get it here. I have no qualms speaking my mind.

See AdoredTV for an example on how to effectively light a fire under an issue.

Was that in reply to me? I was asking for your opinion on the subject and the video you posted, as you just posted the video and not much else around it to discuss…

1 Like

So you expect me to prove that by linking every video Lunduke made after he left Suse so everybody can scrub through them to look for references to Suse?

It’s just good practice to backup big claims one makes, with presented big evidence.

4 Likes

When was the last time you heard Lunduke praise Suse?

Oh or was it your video? in which case, thanks for the context :smiley:

In either case, I agree with @catsay that the video lacks the relevant context and sources, I get it’s not meant to be journalistic and is a rant video. But it suffers the same fate as Lunduke in that it says things that aren’t immediately verifiable because the relevant sources aren’t provided.

I imagine I probably align with the views of the video quite a bit, i’ve not been a fan of Lundukes content especially recently. I have asked him about specifics he’s brought up, for example the HTTPS stuff, and when he’s given facts that don’t align with what he says he ignores it or doubles down and calls the people calling him out hysterical. (in the HTTPS case he did the latter and doubled down with the mis-information he was trying to spread). It’s definitely a theme, at least more recently.

But that example is why it’s important to provide good context and good evidence of claims, even if they are obvious, you got to back up your words so they can be stood by, the alternative is you end up with what some of the things Lunduke has said, false but spread as truth and shutting people down when they call you out on it. Which is bad for everyone, and bad jounralism, which if Lunduke is trying to be such, he’s bad at it.

7 Likes

Amen!

Exactly where I stand.

Also my point of view on Lunduke:

How would expect one to cite a source of a lack of something after a date?

Also how do you stay calm ranting about Lunduke? I could write a short rage book about how a lot of his content I think is harmful and why, but maybe that would be to far :smiley:

2 Likes

The video itself demonstrates lack of it. Find the cutoff date, (last/earlier video where praises are done) then point to the next where it’s mysteriously and ominously missing.

Searching video subtitles downloaded via youtube-dl for all his videos mentioning SUSE in that context in this case is how I do it. Do it for other things too.

2 Likes

Also of note, had I known this was your video I would not straight have called it trash off the bat after watching it.

But the clickbait title and how these topics are generally handled got me quite annoyed as it fell into a number of standard potholes i’ve mentioned above by now.

2 Likes

Lundukes videos provides good sources for evidencing his poor journalism and Twitter for his un-professionalism when it comes to the mis-information he has spread.

The HTTPS videos are the perfect example in this case because it’s 90% a technical issue and one he is wrong on with almost every statement he has made on the subject, some possibly by sheer ignorance, but some seem willfully false and deliberate. Because of it’s technical nature almost every piece of what he says can be sourced to what’s actually true in RFCs and technical documentation as well as well established security practices.

Despite him being wrong on the subject, he doubles down and makes several other videos where he has a go at the people who called him out and essentially insists he’s right.

I mean, I’m not even sure you can argue he just didn’t know the facts, it takes 5 minutes of research to understand the basics of HTTPS. edit: which is a good argument for the poor journalism, he can’t even spend the time to research the subject then he should not be talking about the subject and “my opinion” doesn’t count as a sufficient disclaimer for not doing the work.

3 Likes

Then the failure to simply admit he was wrong for once and adapt, but instead to carry on pretending was possibly the worst aspect of it.

I’ll see if I can dig those up.

EDITING:
Ok this reddit thread is a good starter:

Here it started:

12 Feb 2018

Here it went full potato and he ate his poop:

16 Apr 2018

2 Likes

He has that video, then a follow up, then I think a third? then a recent one on why his site doesn’t use it (note, his argument here is also rubbish)

1 Like