Steven Crowder takes a stand against Conservative networks

[Zachowon]

Basically, he is looking around for somewhere else to go as he is leaving the Blaze.
It is assumed he talked to DW and the contract he breaks down is from them.
He breaks down how you lose control over your own name and brand. All social media except personal are owned by the company.
You get penalties if you miss a day.
If you don't reach your qouta you get heavy fees. Lowest was 100k for a day, monthly is 250k and yearly is 1 million.
You get chucnks of your money taken out if you are controversy that makes you get demonitized. So bowing to big tech.

And states he will start his own network if he can get people to join under him that want to nit be restrained by strict contracts.



Oh, and 5 to 7 ad reads a stream. He usually does one so...yeah

 

[Bacle]

Damn, I wish I was surprised by what Crowder said it is like behind the scene in the 'BigCon' media sphere. He put into words a suspicion I've had about certain 'conservative' comentators who seem like they are most conservatives for religious and financial reasons, not because they value what the youth of the movement want.

Not surprised the contract seems to be from DW either; Shapiro seems to care more about 'controlling' the base and not rocking the boat, rather than addressing the issues that matter.

 

[Zachowon]

Damn, I wish I was surprised by what Crowder said it is like behind the scene in the 'BigCon' media sphere. He put into words a suspicion I've had about certain 'conservative' comentators who seem like they are most conservatives for religious and financial reasons, not because they value what the youth of the movement want.

Not surprised the contract seems to be from DW either; Shapiro seems to care more about 'controlling' the base and not rocking the boat, rather than addressing the issues that matter.

Well yeah. Crowder has always been one to rock the boat.
Makes me feel bad for Brett cooler and her show on DW knowing what she has to put up woth.
Crowder has basically been independent wothout being that. He has always been for the viewers. Not for himself.
So this is not unexpected.
Steven was trying to find a new home and got fucked so he is taking a stand.
Plus fuck 5 or 6 or 6 ad reads.

 

[The Whispering Monk]

I caught this about 5 minutes after he posted it. Pure happenstance on my part.

Sad...well, disgusting really, how the 'networks' attempt to control the 'talent'

I'd support a 'network' started by Crowder with the intent to enrich ALL participants.

 

[Zachowon]

I caught this about 5 minutes after he posted it. Pure happenstance on my part.

Sad...well, disgusting really, how the 'networks' attempt to control the 'talent'

I'd support a 'network' started by Crowder with the intent to enrich ALL participants.

He has no filter. Unlike Alex Jones Crowder only speaks on things he can for sure back up with facts ND the like.

He will definitely be the most transparent network

 

[Rocinante]

Crowder absolutely should start his own network.

I would sign up.

 

[gral]

Not surprised the contract seems to be from DW either; Shapiro seems to care more about 'controlling' the base and not rocking the boat, rather than addressing the issues that matter.

It's rather telling people in... paleoconservative(for lack of a better term) Telegram channels use him as the example of a gatekeeper.

 

[Zachowon]

Crowder absolutely should start his own network.

I would sign up.

He probably will.
Dude is the biggest name in conservative media.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Most people thought it was Daily Wire from the beginning. Others suspected it was maybe Fox News.

But its Daily Wire apparently.



They posted an hour long response video where they apparently go over the entire non-binding Term Sheet (it wasn't a contract) meant to open negotiations with Steven Crowder. The initial offer was $50 million dollars for 192 episodes (ie four episodes a week, plus four weeks of vacation) in a four year contract with the possibility of $25 million more for an extra two years.

 

[Zachowon]

Most people thought it was Daily Wire from the beginning. Others suspected it was maybe Fox News.

But its Daily Wire apparently.



They posted an hour long response video where they apparently go over the entire non-binding Term Sheet (it wasn't a contract) meant to open negotiations with Steven Crowder. The initial offer was $50 million dollars for 192 episodes (ie four episodes a week, plus four weeks of vacation) in a four year contract with the possibility of $25 million more for an extra two years.

So...Steven is still right

 

[Husky_Khan]

So...Steven is still right

If you consider withholding facts as not being part of being completely honest.

For example lets say:

Employee: This contract says I will lose $100,000 an episode if I'm sick or suffer an accident.
Employer: Contract is worth $50,000,000 over four years, with 192 episodes a year. He can produce multiple episodes in one day, or on Fridays to make up for Sick Days or to have other days off. Any disability will be covered by a pro-rata fee.

And if your paying a YouTuber $50,000,000 and they get banned from YouTube, there should be no penalty?

Oh we'll still pay Crowder the full amount... even if no one can watch him or be monetized by him on YouTube?

And keep in mind... This was all apparently negotiable and non-binding since it was an opening Term Sheet that Crowder apparently requested.

EDIT:

Apparently according to Jeremy Boreing, Steven Crowder responded with a counteroffer of $120 million over four years. No financial penalties for bans, demonitization, illness etc and the Daily Wire would also continue to market him and support him in finding sponsorships, infrastructure, technical support and paying for the production and marketing of any specials and documentaries that DailyWire might stipulate in the contract as well.

The DailyWire apparently declined the counteroffer and declined Steven's invitation to send another offer so Steven Crowder was apparently gracious about it at the time. This apparently happened back in September-October and than now in January Crowder apparently laid into Jeremy Boreing in a more hostile manner then he did on his show when he released the episode the next day apparently.

He also repeatedly stating it was an initial term offer, non-binding and negotiable and expected that if negotiations took place, Crowder likely would've gotten more money, penalties would've been reduced and required work days also shrink.

 

[Bacle]

If you consider withholding facts as not being part of being completely honest.

For example lets say:

Employee: This contract says I will lose $100,000 an episode if I'm sick or suffer an accident.
Employer: Contract is worth $50,000,000 over four years, with 192 episodes a year. He can produce multiple episodes in one day, or on Fridays to make up for Sick Days or to have other days off. Any disability will be covered by a pro-rata fee.

And if your paying a YouTuber $50,000,000 and they get banned from YouTube, there should be no penalty?

Oh we'll still pay Crowder the full amount... even if no one can watch him or be monetized by him on YouTube?

And keep in mind... This was all apparently negotiable and non-binding since it was an opening Term Sheet that Crowder apparently requested.

EDIT:

Apparently according to Jeremy Boreing, Steven Crowder responded with a counteroffer of $120 million over four years. No financial penalties for bans, demonitization, illness etc and the Daily Wire would also continue to market him and support him in finding sponsorships, infrastructure, technical support and paying for the production and marketing of any specials and documentaries that DailyWire might stipulate in the contract as well.

The DailyWire apparently declined the counteroffer and declined Steven's invitation to send another offer so Steven Crowder was apparently gracious about it at the time. This apparently happened back in September-October and than now in January Crowder apparently laid into Jeremy Boreing in a more hostile manner then he did on his show when he released the episode the next day apparently.

He also repeatedly stating it was an initial term offer, non-binding and negotiable and expected that if negotiations took place, Crowder likely would've gotten more money, penalties would've been reduced and required work days also shrink.

Look, the money matters less than the attempt to basically turn employed media personalities into slaves to, and products of, the whims of Youtube's leadership, and Leftist boycotts, by proxy, and the DW knows this is what their terms mean. The lines that were drawn (no discuss mRNA vax issues, no discussing election security/integrity issues, nothing truly 'controversial') and ad read requirement show a rather mercenary side to the DW.

Crowder strikes me as more genuine than Shapiro's people *face it, DW is Shapiro's show and baby, and frankly trying to push the penalties for demonitization, regardless of cause, is a very poor showing of attempting to walk the talk they supposedly stand for.

I wish it wasn't the case, but it appears the DW is another controlled opposition group, who just say the right words to fiscal Boomer-cons and the evangelical right to get them to play along with fucking over the conservative youth in the name of Boomer-con fiscal security and desire to 'return to tradition' in the evangelical right.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

 

[Seras]

I'm with Crowder on this one. I can respect DW for trying, but the big issues are still there. The 5 ads per show. The fact if he gets demonetized on youtube or other locations.

Crowder has already circumvented that with MugClub and other things. DW trying to say that they "Want to make money off this for the tens of millions we spend" is absolutely disingenuous IMO. The fact that they cater so much to Youtube and other spaces, spaces that already demonetize and have issues with Conservative media? Something is definitely wrong there.

Do I think this is some opsec by DW to 'get at' conservative spaces? No. I think it's just greed. Crowder went at it like DW did this to destroy conservative opposition, but it's far easier to attribute to greed than malice. DW wants that Youtube revenue. It wants Facebook money. It wants all the ad sponsors.

I do agree with Crowder about how stupid it is. Putting yourself into lockstep with youtube demonetization policy? A policy that changes and is enforced at a whim? Yeah I would be offended about that too. I would probably call DW traitors ect ect. I just also can see it's just greed. They want to become the new Fox network basically. but DW has to cater to the money in that case. Stupid.

It's all a shame. I liked some of the DW stuff, even if I don't watch any of their personalities or anything.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

Daily Wire Responds to Crowder on Contracts, Part 2 of Townhall Investigation

Tonight feels like deja vu. Yesterday, Crowder railed against an anonymous conservative media company with a contract that contained alarming terms. Today, the Daily Wire clarified that it was their c

rumble.com

Rackets is doing a live play by play of Boreing's pathetic response.

 

[Zachowon]

If you consider withholding facts as not being part of being completely honest.

For example lets say:

Employee: This contract says I will lose $100,000 an episode if I'm sick or suffer an accident.
Employer: Contract is worth $50,000,000 over four years, with 192 episodes a year. He can produce multiple episodes in one day, or on Fridays to make up for Sick Days or to have other days off. Any disability will be covered by a pro-rata fee.

And if your paying a YouTuber $50,000,000 and they get banned from YouTube, there should be no penalty?

Oh we'll still pay Crowder the full amount... even if no one can watch him or be monetized by him on YouTube?

And keep in mind... This was all apparently negotiable and non-binding since it was an opening Term Sheet that Crowder apparently requested.

EDIT:

Apparently according to Jeremy Boreing, Steven Crowder responded with a counteroffer of $120 million over four years. No financial penalties for bans, demonitization, illness etc and the Daily Wire would also continue to market him and support him in finding sponsorships, infrastructure, technical support and paying for the production and marketing of any specials and documentaries that DailyWire might stipulate in the contract as well.

The DailyWire apparently declined the counteroffer and declined Steven's invitation to send another offer so Steven Crowder was apparently gracious about it at the time. This apparently happened back in September-October and than now in January Crowder apparently laid into Jeremy Boreing in a more hostile manner then he did on his show when he released the episode the next day apparently.

He also repeatedly stating it was an initial term offer, non-binding and negotiable and expected that if negotiations took place, Crowder likely would've gotten more money, penalties would've been reduced and required work days also shrink.

See what Crowder is getting at is less then the money.
He is focusing on that conservative speakers are basically constricted to doing all those ad reads.
To be in lock step with Big Tech.
Basically are controlled opposition.

The money thing can be somewhat understandable but the issue with the demonitization and all that basically ruins any chance if actually bringing up points thay conservatives want too. If you do you get banned.


Hell, Jordan Peterson agreed with Crowder then deleted his tweet

 

[Sergeant Foley]

Basically, he is looking around for somewhere else to go as he is leaving the Blaze.
It is assumed he talked to DW and the contract he breaks down is from them.
He breaks down how you lose control over your own name and brand. All social media except personal are owned by the company.
You get penalties if you miss a day.
If you don't reach your qouta you get heavy fees. Lowest was 100k for a day, monthly is 250k and yearly is 1 million.
You get chucnks of your money taken out if you are controversy that makes you get demonitized. So bowing to big tech.

And states he will start his own network if he can get people to join under him that want to nit be restrained by strict contracts.



Oh, and 5 to 7 ad reads a stream. He usually does one so...yeah

Assuming his ego got bruised?

 

[Bacle]

Assuming his ego got bruised?

Maybe watch the video, and see what actually happened, instead of just making another bait post.

 

[Zachowon]

Assuming his ego got bruised?

No.
More along the lines that Big Conservative basically say "Don't upset people. Say what is ad friendly."
And so that means...you can't question the narrative.
So you disagree with media?
To bad

 

[StormEagle]

Maybe watch the video, and see what actually happened, instead of just making another bait post.

Almost all @Sergeant Foley and his “cousin” ever do is bait posting. Asking him not to bait post is effectively asking him not to post at all.

As to the Crowder situation…Eh.

Shapiro has always been a “centrist conservative” toady, always within the line of what’s ad friendly, so who knows? Maybe he just doesn’t like Crowder and sent him this opening offer to try to drive him off?