what does g think of unbox therapy?

I don't.

>>57855735
Normie hipster shit. So probably popular on modern /g/.

>>57855735
Who?

>>57855735
>GUYS NEW IPHONE CASE LOOK AT IT
He used to be better, but like most techtubers he's declined to clickbait.

>>57855826
>Take things out of a box
>Techtube

>>57855842
Tablet babbies consider ecelebs that unbox and read the back of the box as tech professionals.

>>57855735
He sold out to become a personality instead of a product showcaser. Everything he shows off on videos are the same things that companies show off on their own videos. Its almost like they pay him to basically act in front of their product.

>>57855881

no its actually honestly because companies found out that nerds and their IT babble scare away their customers thats why Apple only hires hipsters

>>57855735
if he does more review more dubious chink shit or kikestarter projects
then its good

better than the most "tech" youtubers i guess, less shilling

Not as good as Austin Evans to be honest.

unironically...

who?

>>57855735
illiterate normie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rrrKEYY6Kg

>>57855735
Official /g/ E-Celeb Tier List

Wendell>Paul=Steve=Lisa=PCper team=Jayz>Raj=Logan=Linus n Pals>Barnacules=Kyle=Austin

Literally /g/ Tier
Qain

Consumerism Tier
Brownlee>Lewis>Philie

Just stupid unboxing channel with no good reviews.

shit music taste
serious cringe factor

Pretty much just an adversitement channel

>>57856955
This

>>57855735
Irritatingly dimwitted. Hypes every product in the exact same way without ever getting into details about the product. For people who know nothing about tech.

His videos are all over my suggested videos on YT. His thumbnails are all just pictures of the product pasted next to a picture of him making a retarded face.

>>57857151
>His thumbnails are all just pictures of the product pasted next to a picture of him making a retarded face.

That's how most 'personalities' seem to do their thumbnails.

>look at me REACTING, this is going to be INTERESTING I swear

>>57855970
>Heyyyyyy guys this is autism

Successful shill

>>57855735
what keyboard is that

>>57855735
never watched him but i have filtered his thumbnails from showing up on my youtube

Hypercapitalist whiney millennial, who doesn't have real skill. It's modern advertising, sure, but it's pretty terrible to promote ethically. People should buy based on need, not "oooooh LEDs, I need to update GPUs and phones annually."

>>57857374
The manufacturer's name is on the spacebar.

File: 1480972345664.jpg (266KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 1920x1080px

>>57857601

>>57857739
>>57857601
>unbox therapy but shilling makes his left hand grow

>>57856217
I don't know any of these

>>57857739

can you also make his nose bigger?

>>57856217
Switch the Logan group with the Barnacles group and make Linus in between them.

>>57858041
>Barnacles
Lame and fat consumerist. Boring stuff.

>>57858041
>>57858078
Barnacles is knowledgeable but rarely makes videos

Logan does need to be reworked though

>>57855735
annoying
I'm not interested in his keyboards

>>57858078
He actually has a background in tech unlike Logan who was just a presenter for Tigerdirect.

>>57858508

is Logan even doing tech vids anymore? i remember buying my first nvidia graphics card for crysis like 10 years ago after seeing his unboxing

>>57858544
Not really, he went more for general gaming/ nerd culture after ruining TS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_iw5-7U_KA&feature=youtu.be&t=2m09s

>>57855785

first post best post, sage goes in options

>>57858544
>>57858635
Still reviews stuff here and there, goes under Crit TV now, lost almost all patreon money and most of the community because most people were there for wendell

I still want a Sabertooth 990FX board though

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1i7Y9G_S6SU&t=3s

a good fit for the current state of this board

>>57855735
Super fucking annoying

something he did specifically pissed me off, but i forgot what it was. in any case, i blocked his channel from showing up on youtube in my browser.

his video channel is just that — therapy for people who want to see shit unboxed. it's like he's tapping into a population that genuinely feels an endorphin release when they open new shit. it seems, to say nothing of the gross unstated sponsorship relationship he enjoys with all of the companies that send him shit, like he's exploiting some basic psychology of people in a really negative way.

maybe it was the corporate thing. like he basically never talks about the fact that he's sponsored by all these companies, and passes a lot of these things off as a "review" of some sort, when a much more sober viewing makes it really obvious that he's just acting as a showroom for companies that want their products seen by compulsive shoppers who lust after arbitrary tech shit.

>>57860172
>g into a population that genuinely feels an endorphin release when they open new shit. it seems
you do realize that's the majority of this board right?

>>57855735
He reviews all the stupid shit you don't care about so others won't have too, I guess.

>>57860238
of course, but it's also the majority of people. we're trained from a pretty early age to like shiny, new things. we like the smell of a new car even though that smell is the toxic chemicals they use to adhere the upholstery together.

you don't see black friday stampedes just because of /g/. that's all of us.

so unbox therapy taps into a large population, but that doesn't mean what he's doing is good or ethical.

>>57858033
BANNER THIS

>>57860500
>you don't see black friday stampedes just because of /g/. that's all of us.
earlier, before peak traffic, there was less focus on consumerism on this board and much more focus on working with hardware, maximizing price to performance, customizing for the sake of having fun and programming

but yes, consumerism is a cancer that has spread across the masses and it's easily understandable why.
People's lives are completely empty. They're much less mentally and emotionally developed than previous generations and like you said have been trained to get pleasure from consuming. If you took away many people's possessions (even relatively cheap things like laptops, phones) they would have nothing to turn to. Their escapism enabling device would be gone and so would the status of owning it. Since their existence is a shallow one they would suffer from serious mental effects when losing their ability to consume. This is the psychology transformed into applied marketing that has placed us where we are in the modern day.

>>57860867
>earlier, before peak traffic, there was less focus on consumerism on this board and much more focus on working with hardware, maximizing price to performance, customizing for the sake of having fun and programming
i've been here since before 1MGet and people were bitching about apple threads, bitching that /prog/ didn't get enough traffic (or arguing that that was a good thing), and we were dealing with shitty tripfags and all that just the same as we are now. things are a little worse, but mostly it's just faster.

and i don't take quite the nihilistic view you take. you sound like you're railing against capitalism, but honestly capitalism is the reason most of us can spend a lot of time on 4chan vegetating in front of our computers. doing research doesn't make carrots grow faster or cows grow bigger. i'm not contributing anything to food production in any even loosely connected way. but the fact that someone's willing to pay the guy (who's willing to pay the guy)+ who's willing to pay me to publish research papers means that i can go back to one of those guys and buy steak and carrots because i did research about computers.

somewhere along that line of guys paying guys is a lot of advertising and marketing. some of it is literally just "hey, i'm one of the guys that sells carrots. buy carrots from me" and some of it is "wow these carrots are so great they'll make you see better in the dark (maybe, not really)". that's all part of the deal. people need to want to buy stuff for money to eventually get to me. if our economy only operated on basic human needs, it definitely wouldn't support me doing research, and i definitely wouldn't have the free time to sit around and read and post on 4chan. and i doubt most other people would, either.

the thing that bothers me about UT is the exploitative feeling of it, and the disingenuous way he characterizes himself.

It's like a modern version of those "as seen on TV" programs

>>57855826
What did you expect? The original enthusiasm wears off and then the motivation is money from views (which clickbait helps increase).

>>57860941
>you sound like you're railing against capitalism
I have nothing against capitalism. I'm simply mentioning a side effect. I am in no way suggesting that an alternative like socialism etc would remove any problems. I understand how it might sound that way but I wrote that post purely as an observation not using any sort of political background as a logic base. Everything you wrote makes sense and that is definitely a core advantage of capitalism. It's just that I do think that consumerism has lead to a meltdown of culture and personality. From my perspective, this is a depressing outlook on the future

>>57860867
>peoples lives are completely empty

you're either completely projecting or a cynical neackbeard

Nothing has changed regarding the content of the average persons life except an increase in communication and marked increase to the access to information. If you think people "back then" were any more fulfilled than they are now, you have a serious case of false nostalgia. People were just as empty and vapid as they are now, groups of friends still hang out and do interesting things, people are learning more and having very diverse and educated opinions. People wouldn't kill themselves if you took aware their computers, they would complain then adapt.

Consumerism and Americansim has gripped this world since Coca-Cola and McyD's went public and proliferated. So your "waahhh, the modern western culture everybody in it is stupid but me" mentality is false and naive.

Shit is still Fucked now, but that doesn't mean that it is any different or more consumerist then it was 30 - 40 years ago.

>>57860941
>the thing that bothers me about UT is the exploitative feeling of it, and the disingenuous way he characterizes himself.
yes but wouldn't you say that this has become the norm at this point? Most people wouldn't even think twice about what he's doing.

>>57860949
god, that's really apt. it definitely has this slimy feel of QVC/the home shopping network

>>57861097
>, people are learning more and having very diverse and educated opinions.
You're overestimating the average intelligence of "people". You spend your time in some closed pseudo intellectual circlejerk and think the whole world is one big progressive festival full of intellectuals learning things and bettering themselves daily due to the advent of technology. This sounds like some liberal social ad that a megacorp would dump to further muddy people's eyes while in reality typical people live like animals. The easiest way to see the true nature of things is to see how people live in any major city. The average person was more intelligent and socially advanced before """""technology"""". The problem is that people associate intelligence with muh "I know so much" when in reality intelligence is a much more abstract ability that is very rare. Being a code monkey, using the internet, running through some obscure processes is not intelligence. Very rarely is anyone actually intelligent in the sense that they have an independent capable mind capable of creation and progress. Can you blame "technology" on this? No. Technology is a tool and you can not blame a tool for the improper handling of a user. "Technology" in the modern sense is much more about fashion, entertainment, and consumerism than it is about constructive use. This is the truth for the general population, not whatever slanted view you have from a gated community

>>57855735
Worse than NCIX tech tips.
And that's saying a lot.

File: Screen Shot 2016-12-05 at 8.36.31 PM.png (184KB, 1308x706px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 1308x706px

>>57861099
i think there's a bit of a fine line on youtube that people consider it pretty wrong not to be upfront about sponsorship and things like that. like if a person is given a product for free, i've gotten the impression that others are critical of that person for not being upfront in their video. i couldn't point to a single video where someone calls another person out on it, though.

that being said, i honestly couldn't tell you what people consider "beyond the pale" these days. i feel really out of touch when it comes to issues of propriety.

Nilay Patel wrote a story on The Verge where he basically bitched for 500 words about the account @savedyouaclick, which cuts through bullshit clickbait titles with pithy answers to their retarded questions. Attached is an example. so nilay went off about how Vox wrote this excellent, magical piece about the sopranos and @savedyouaclick stole an experience from you, or some horse shit.

i called out patel for neglecting to disclose that the verge was owned by vox since this felt like one of those times that you're supposed to disclose shit like that (because a cynical reader might then infer that vox probably ordered one of their subsidiaries to write a takedown piece), and he basically called me a prude or something to that effect.

it's been 2 years and that shit still bugs me a little. not that he called me a prude, but that moment i realized some things i consider at least morally dubious are clearly not seen that way by others (not just patel, but obviously there was no outrage over it, so i assume nobody else really cared). if nobody gives a shit about that, then i definitely don't have my finger on the pulse.

File: Screen Shot 2016-12-05 at 8.47.20 PM.png (192KB, 1518x656px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1518x656px

>>57861382
yeah here's the piece about it. in retrospect it reminds me of trump having a meltdown on twitter whenever he feels someone has wronged him. it's an amazingly melodramatic response to a two-character tweet.

is this the guy that did a fake giveaway with iphones?

>>57861382
That's an interesting story and you did the correct thing to point out what you did. People would have cared a lot more if it was a more important topic so you're not that far from the pulse. Since it's just garbage click generating """journalism"""", Pootel probably felt that you were taking away from his ability to do his job of running garbage content on the garbage media service he works for.
We have reached the age where journalism takes tips from the fast food industry

>>57856217
Techyescity?

>>57861415
>melodramatic response to a two-character tweet.
he obviously is obligated to protect the media company he works for when he feels that there is something that takes away from the little quality that it has

Journalists also tend to have this romaticized view of their written works even when it's complete garbage

>>57861480
He made up for it with another 6s and S7 giveaway which was real, there was proof on dbrand's website. The reason he didn't finish the first giveaway is because scammers were coming in and trying to scam people and get info so he stopped


He's Canadian, I'm Canadian. We both almost live next to each other (Newmarket-North York) and he's alright. I liked most of his old stuff.

>>57861490
it's honestly really gratifying to hear that i'm not just some hyper-ideological nutcase about this, and that i was at least vaguely right to think this was something he should have called attention to. i think you're right that since this wasn't a super important topic people probably just didn't care that much, but i suspect that's why i've occasionally gotten the sense from youtubers that taking freebies from companies without being candid about it in their reviews (or in this case unboxing videos) is at least arguably, if not definitely, a gray area.

>>57861533
i mean i could also imagine him just being triggered by this all of a sudden, but the chances of that happening seem about as likely as a tiger busting through my third floor apartment front door and mauling me at 9:08pm

>>57861588
>youtubers that taking freebies from companies without being candid about it in their reviews (or in this case unboxing videos) is at least arguably, if not definitely, a gray area.
Usually, in the cases where people's revenue streams are directly related to the public image of their media (the journalist's article, the youtuber's video) they are quick to get defensive about it. This is especially true when the material has no substance and is already on a shaky foundation. Thats why they're touchy about these gray areas. Unboxings and psuedo journalism are already saturated and they can't afford taking a reputation hit

>>57861588
>i mean i could also imagine him just being triggered by this all of a sudden, but the chances of that happening seem about as likely as a tiger busting through my third floor apartment
yeah, the internet is a difficult place for some people, with all these opinions floating around that don't need to be watered down and converted into euphemisms

>>57855735
>watching others unbox cool stuff
autism

>>57861627
the thing that's really bizarre is that i don't think anyone would be that put off if he just said
>hey guys, i'm just unboxing a bunch of devices and calling attention to all the cool shit about it. i'm not doing any reviews, and not really calling attention to the bad stuff, because bad stuff isn't that exciting from an unboxing perspective
>oh, also, obviously all of this shit is coming to me for free. so you know. there you go

either in his about me page, or in one video specifically about that topic, or even better (but i realize this is impractical) as a quick aside on every video (there are natural ways to talk about this stuff), then i would honestly have no problem with any of what he's doing.

i actually think there's possibly something really good in his channel, if he would just be more upfront about other stuff. i've talked to one or two people who seem to watch his videos as a cathartic release. like they're experiencing unboxing with him. i know it sounds like a weird pornographic thing, but if people are watching these unboxings and then NOT going out and buying this shit to get that sensation, then arguably that's a good thing.

i guess in some sense it's like arguing that rape and/or incest pornography is better than someone going out and doing it, but that's kind of a more incendiary thing to say.

>>57861901
yeah but if he included a statement like that it would be a complete turnoff to his sponsors and the future companies he works with

The marketing people that want him to unbox also want it to seem like he is personally recommending it otherwise the magic is partially lost

it's an advertising channel, whether its glorified to look like something more or not

As for people watching unboxings for catharsis, I wouldn't be surprised in the level of consumerism we live in. I have forced myself to move away from this approach to owning items for a long time

>>57862057
>yeah but if he included a statement like that it would be a complete turnoff to his sponsors and the future companies he works with
i could imagine him being like
>hey guys the folks at Logitech just generously sent me this amazing keyboard, so let's take a look at all the cool things it does!

and that's sufficient (for me, anyway) to avoid a reasonable interpretation that he's doing an even-handed review OR that he paid for it. like he could certainly be more explicit than that, but i vaguely remember some video being the straw that broke the camel's back for me, where he talked about the device in a way that left the door open for a reasonable viewer to infer that there wasn't a quid pro quo thing going on between the product's manufacturer and him.

i think it's possible to do advertising in an honest way that's not patronizing. i feel like advertising as it exists today has just devolved to scumbag status, which is a real shame, because it's developing the same level of social cache as used car salesmen. but imagine a used car salesman that only ever bought and sold cars that were in good shape, and who was honest and upfront about everything. people would still want to buy used cars, and the car salesman wouldn't have a reputation for misrepresenting products or otherwise screwing people into bad purchases.

but people don't bother to try to take the high road. and that's really disappointing.

>>57862171
>but people don't bother to try to take the high road. and that's really disappointing.
money will always dirty things
Advertising was always a dirty field, with psychological manipulation, creation of pseudo social status, and getting off with any lie that can pass in court if need be. It's only going to get worse as consumerism grows out of control

I find that the products I want find me. I rarely shop around because I am usually familiar with brands relative to my usage scenarios. If I find myself shopping around I would not make decisions based on any advertisement. Unboxings for me are only useful to see a product I'm already considering. I try to move as far away from consumerism as possible.

There's a video on an interview he did where he showed he has an entire room of the stuff companies send him hoping he'd review their product.

Not only he gets tons of free stuff, but also puts an amazon affiliate link to every product he reviews in the video description (makink money from anything those who click on it buy from Amazon within a day or so), plus the sponsorships, plus the YouTube money.

His show might be shit but you have to admit he's got a pretty good business.
Likely making millions with little effort (which is something he supposedly likes to do anyway).

I'm new to tech reviews.
just uploaded my new video


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xAU4fsCrYO0


hints and tips welcome

>>57855735
Bullshit

>>57855735
he unboxes shit, and probably makes a million a year doing it, so on that end, impressive.

Otherwise, there's zero anything techie about him. He's basically a modern day version of a door-to-door salseman.

I do watch him. He's fairly entertaining, and for 5 minutes I can see what's new on the market.

He recently did a 100 phone giveaway (50 iphones and 50 Samsung Galaxy). That was pretty cool.

>>57855735

>watching Tech Tubers

what are you, 12?

>>57855735

They're calling it 'therapy' now?

I want off the ride.

>>57863706
I am actually.
Can you please tell me what is a Tech Tuber?

>>57856217
Reasonable list.
I'd certainly put PCper above the ones you've listed as equal, but overall good.

>>57855735
He's ok for the occasional Kek but as many of you said he's a shill lord. The biggest problem I have is with the way he presents. All that stumbling, random pausing and anticlimactic emphasizing makes me cringe (but probably has to do with me working in marketing and selling sales pitches on the daily)

I like to watch him, but only for entertainment purposes. Let's be honest, Unbox Therapy isn't a relevant source of technology related content. Just a guy who advertises kinda nice stuff