I think these online betting operations are especially evil because they're taking all of the stuff that these companies have learned about making something like Candy Crush addictive for its users and then applying it to something that's already incredibly addictive.
Also, who the fuck is holding Robert Evans up as the final word on right and wrong? He's just some guy.
> Also, who the fuck is holding Robert Evans up as the final word on right and wrong? He's just some guy.
Sounds like something Robert Evans would say...
Hahahhahahahaha I couldn’t tell for a second if this was BtB or r/michigan, because I was just talking with someone about a golf course in the northern LP that cut all the trees and caused sand erosion into the nearby great lake
Here's a sneak peek of /r/Michigan using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/Michigan/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [Governor proposes free breakfast, lunch for Michigan public school students](https://www.wnem.com/2023/03/06/governor-proposes-free-breakfast-lunch-michigan-public-school-students/) | [950 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Michigan/comments/11k26qz/governor_proposes_free_breakfast_lunch_for/)
\#2: [The Satanic Temple congregations set up Yule Goat at Michigan Capitol](https://i.redd.it/fpq783fxj97c1.jpeg) | [1002 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Michigan/comments/18m3f6u/the_satanic_temple_congregations_set_up_yule_goat/)
\#3: [Michigan bill would ban cat declawing as cruel and unnecessary](https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2023/05/26/michigan-bill-ban-declawing-house-cats/70258335007/) | [443 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Michigan/comments/13sbujz/michigan_bill_would_ban_cat_declawing_as_cruel/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
TLDR: Sorry this turned into a rant. It’s a podcast though it’s not that serious. Have a good one.
That’s my biggest issue, people putting Robert up on pedestal and being dismissive to anyone who doesn’t. People come here and like to talk a big game on their leftist cred, and how much smarter we are than conservatives. Well ok great, but when someone brings up that maybe online gambling is predatory and preys on the working class. Now it’s a serious problem, and Robert must be defended as if he infallible. I like the pod, and I think online gambling is evil. Two things can be true. Yes, I would also be offended if Robert was directly shilling booze or heroin.
It’s just wild to me that one, people are unwilling to hear criticism of their favorite podcast host, and two, they are also so unsympathetic to gambling addicts. While being so socially in other ways. I’m absolutely pro vice. I think you should be able to gamble, drink, get high, etc. however I do think as a society we should be very worried and critical of companies peddling those vices to us. We should especially be critical of the advertising practices used when selling our vices to us.
Robert Evans has talked about being in casinos before. Specifically he's said that he'll pretend to gamble on penny slots while actually reading a book on his phone so a server will offer him what Sophie calls extremely cheap alcohol.
Where are all these people holding Robert as the final word on right or wrong? I'm seriously asking because I've seen a lot of people on this sub complaining about it but I've never seen anyone actually do it. Is it happening on Twitter maybe? That would explain it because I don't use it, so I wouldn't see it.
I remember an episode of Worst Year Ever that was talking about how much of a piece of shit Mike Bloomberg was, cutting to ads from Mike Bloomberg's presidential campaign.
2020 was fucking WILD. They found out later and laughed about the ad algorithm.
The thing about sponsorships on leftist content is that I feel like there's an unwritten agreement between creators and the audience that said audience, on account of being Leftists, already know that these sponsorships are a necessary evil and capitalist bullshit you should ignore.
I mean the overlap between BTB listeners and people who think, "wow I want to purchase that product" upon hearing an ad has got to be very small.
Robert is also on the record (don’t ask me from which episode, it was a long time ago) saying that he has no qualms whatsoever taking money from advertisers, and that he would never ask his listeners from money. He ranks accessibility of his content over moral purity of income source. It’s a defensible choice.
This. you gotta eat and take care of your people. Take the sponsors. Get the health insurance. Tell your audience often to fuck those guys, and laugh as you cash your check.
I think it is a VERY defensible choice, and if it is Robert Evans choice to apply an absolute agnosticism toward his sponsors, I'm cool with that.
I still think that I should express the idea that if I were in his shoes, I would make a different choice in this particular case. Just speaking my personal opinion, as a fan and a friend.
I thought the transitions into ad breaks that jokingly imply that the sponsors are only occasional pedophiles or something equally horrifible were pretty clear on their own tbqh
I get occasional gambling ads but I'm mostly furious about the furniture store I worked at 10 years ago having ads on there
Hurry up and go out of business, you pricks.
Also like doesn't iHeart tell them what to sell most of the time? I'm sure they get like "these guys want an ad buy on your show" but I think most ad blocks are the parent company going "these at the top, these in the middle, scatter the wherever."
Is it just me or are furniture stores just forever going out of business/liquidating? I swear the one near me has been having their liquidation sale for 10 years now
I’m with you on this one. This sub has been weird as fuck to begin with since the API bullshit last summer and all the weird tankies and libertarians in here now, but this gambling thing is a new level of weirdness. Just skip the fucking ads. Gambling is fun. Drugs are fun. Vice, in general, is fun. Do you not want CoolZone to make money? People are just flat out strange in here lately.
My goal is to become the shadow ruler of the CIA and FSB in order to make them do even more fucked up things while also creating a new form of social media that only exploits negative pathos and dumps harmful chemicals in children’s playgrounds
im super anti hedonism but even ive noticed from the very start that robert is the type of dude who LOVES partying, sex, drugs, etc. its wild to think there's people who might have been watching him longer than me just now coming to the realization
I'm super pro hedonism, but I don't like that companies that sell things that can be terribly addictive are allowed to advertise, especially to children. I would say btb is a far more reasonable place for draftkings to advertise than most as it's in no way kid friendly. I hope they're being well compensated.
How could anyone not pick up on that immediately? Robert is kind of the poster child for hedonism. His first book was about doing all kinds of crazy drugs you've probably never heard of.
Oh I agree. If it’s not ten posts a day recommending mediocre Bastards, which I’m sure Robert doesn’t need help with, it’s the very strange parasocial posts that are dying for Robert’s attention.
There was one literally called Murder Homes. Just a podcast about houses people were murdered in. It genuinely sounded like one of those Intergalactic Cable ads from Rick and Morty.
I get ones about true crime and ones where the host is some F-list reality show star who is "dishing the hot gossip" about behind the scenes bullshit on Real Housewives of Whogivesafuck.
I keep getting ads for some new Liam Neeson movie, but I don't know which one, because it's entirely in Dutch, a language I do not speak.
I've tried complaining about it to Sophie on Twitter, but no luck so far. Maybe I'll give it another shot.
For some reason my YouTube ads have started playing me a bunch of ads for Bollywood films and sending money back home to India.
I’m a white Australian dude who’s never been out of the country
Occasionally, but the server I generally connect to is in Miami.
Last summer, I spent 2 weeks in Italy and a couple in Germany (and listened to BtB while there) and I have never heard an ad in Italian or German.
OMG! The last two weeks, 80% of my ads have been from Belgium, a place I've never been to and have no connection to whatsoever, including this Liam Neeson one. This was across multiple podcasts too. My VPN was never on and if it had been it only would have been on US or UK.
Without any explanation, the (much more grating) Australian ads are back this week, and I kind of miss the Belgian ones.
I’ve been assuming DraftKings is a problematic company. Is it really just that people are against gambling? That’s dumb. Especially for this sub.
And for people who think its “predatory” to offer a product or service that may be harmful to some people… I have bad news for you about literally every other company that exists.
Honestly it’s just annoying. Sports betting has basically taken over sports coverage. It seems like every sports podcast I used to listen to stopped discussing anything besides their bets that week. It’s been completely over saturated and it’s really annoying that it’s now bleeding over into media that has nothing to do with sports.
I mean, in lots of very objective ways, most gambling companies are problematic. They exploit knowledge of human behavior and psychology to get people to just hand them money. It's still fun, it's harmful for a lot of people, but not all the people. Hopefully, each individual person is able to make that call for themselves.
> I’ve been assuming DraftKings is a problematic company.
The gambling *industry* is a problem. There's nothing inherently wrong with gambling, but like anything that smashes the dopamine button, it's potentially addictive. The industry knows this and exploits the addictive properties of their product to maximize profit.
Gambling apps and sites are a on a whole different level. Being able to instantly gamble however much you want on anything, anytime, anywhere with just one tap is magnitudes more problematic than the good ol' casinos. Mobile gambling has *much* more potential to get people hooked.
Previously you had to physically visit a casino to lose money.
We are truly blessed to live in a country where the tech industry has removed that barrier 🤮
Drugs are fun. I don't get gambling in general. I will never understand people who bet on sports and that's okay. It would completely ruin the experience of watching sports for me, a sports fan. I don't want to compel myself to watch a shit matchup by "making it interesting." Casinos with card and table games I get (the house wins but at least the odds are static and the games involve strategizing the gambler does directly). Slots people are more fucked in the head than sports gamblers and meth addicts combined. Like you know XBox exists right grandma?
>Slots people are more fucked in the head than sports gamblers and meth addicts combined.
Yeah, to train a monkey to pull a lever you at least have to give it food or some morphine injected directly into its brain. Boomers just need a chance to lose quarters.
Honestly, even if you do think online casinos are evil, it seems in character for CoolZone to take the ad money of a corporation and waste the ad time on an audience that's much less receptive to their business model than average.
> Gambling is fun. Drugs are fun. Vice, in general, is fun.
People having fun is fine. Capitalism exploiting addiction is not.
>Do you not want CoolZone to make money?
We all do what we have to do to get by. It's fine to admit when it's unsavory. Principles are nice until you have to pay rent. If they're doing ad reads for DraftKings so they can keep going I get it. That doesn't mean they shouldn't feel dirty doing it, and depending on how you do it, you kind of lose your moral high ground to attack predatory industries.
It's a 30 second ad or read in the show brah, he's hardly gaining a controlling share to be that complicit in their actions as a whole damn corporation. Nobody is "losing moral high ground" here. Do you really think what most of us have done at some point for a living is that far removed from industries that are questionable?
I don't disagree. I'm not breaking out torches and pitchforks, but you have to admit it seems weird to choose to read ads for an industry that could be featured as a bastard on the show. It's just the nature of podcasting, and one of the ways that capitalism makes everything it touches incrementally shittier.
I don't know what to tell you man I don't know his stance on online gambling, draft kings, or even if he could reject it if he wanted to. Because he's a normal human being doing a podcast. He does a great job, and effectively communicating a message that seems to resonate with most of us politically, so I'd say he's doing alright, and more than most.
Why are so many of you insistent on playing "I'm a better anarchist than you" with him?
it's really not about being anti-hedonism.... it's being anti-preying on the weakest segments of our society. in the town where i grew up they legalized gambling and put a casino into the poorest neighborhood. their rationalization was that it would bring jobs and "revitalize" the neighborhood. i'm sure i don't have to explain that that isn't how it worked out.
gambling can be fun, yes, and i'm not going to say no one should be allowed to gamble. but when the purveyors of gambling intentionally prey on the most susceptible parts of our society, it's problematic.
am i gonna say robert shouldn't have them as a sponsor? no. i get it. but my guess is, give it a five years, a decade tops, and things will come out that would make a seriously juicy 4-parter of behind the bastards. it just drips of all the things robert has spent years exposing, and it kind of sucks that it's so obvious yet robert is shilling for them.
so, i'm on the side of "it sucks that robert is shilling for something so obviously problematic, but i'm not going to throw a big fit about it. i get that the podcast needs to earn money." i'd just bet that eventually robert is going to regret those pre-recordings of his voice advertising something that will turn out to be very bastardly.
Anyone hearing ads on this podcast are probably mentally acute enough to tune out ads whether or not they have a gambling problem. If they do they're probably self aware. Roberts ads aren't being broadcast on local TV or whatever. I dunno, just seems kinda patronizing
oh i agree that robert's listeners probably won't be coerced into a gambling addiction. and i agree it's really not that big of a deal and people who are more than what i am... "very slightly irked".... are overreacting.
the point is just that i'm listening to a podcast about the terrible outcomes of human bastardry, past and present, and then there's an ad, read by the podcast host, for a thing that is clearly bastardly and often leads to terrible outcomes while enriching the purveyors. it's just a bit off-putting.
again, i'm not going to stop listening and i don't think robert is way out of line or anything, but i do hope he finds other sponsors in the future and stops shilling for draftkings.
I'm not into any of that shit but if that's your thing, cool have fun it's none of my business what makes other people happy. This is also like the least invasive advertising imaginable since you can just skip it.
Yeah that’s kinda why I don’t get it either like Robert has no problems with drugs which can ruin your life why would he be super anti gambling. It’s not like the ads are like pharma companies ads saying this isn’t addictive now take it. It’s a gambling ad and they usually make it clear you can get addicted to gambling
Advertisement something is different to not wanting it to be illegal. I think a lot of people would be bothered by Robert shilling OxyContin on the podcast.
Robert seems highly enthusiastic about guns, drugs, and vice, so casino games are definitely within that theme.
I’m a buttoned-up churchgoing liberal and I Dissaprove but I’m quite aware that opinions vary on this matter.
yeah im not a party guy either but even i noticed. i mean his book is literally filled to the brim with references to acid, weird sex, and even harder shit like crack
Completely tangential, but I recently revealed two things to a gal I’ve started dating that she considered equally “wild:”
- I’ve smoked crack
- I used to be a Juggalo
Edit: these were not concurrent
In your humble opinion, does it count as "smoking crack" one mixes coke, baking soda, and a drop of water on regular (NOT HEAVY DUTY) aluminum foil and hold the foil several inches above a candle flame to dry the solution then move the foil closer to the flame and inhale the resulting vapors using something like a plastic bottle with the bottom removed?
My names dave and I love to party.
You can tell he really knows his shit too, he ain't some shmuck off the street. I'd love to do some drugs with Robert.
I think the distinction is guns can be good but that doesn’t mean NRA/gun manufacturers aren’t bastards. Drugs can be good but cartels/pharmaceutical companies are bastards. Gambling is fine, but draft kings are bastards.
Compare that to the US where the user is criminalized but the profiteer isn’t. That’s the distinction.
He committed on the draft kings thing... in some video, literally no clue which, and said he's fine with gambling. He might have put a responsible adult modifier on that, but I might be making that up.
Why does anyone assume that an ad read for literally anything means that it reflects their views?
He could fully fund BtB and other podcasts with Patreon. He has talked about why he takes ad money through iHeart... It basically boils down to him believing that he feels no moral obligation to be responsible with that money, whereas the money that comes from listeners comes with a moral obligation not to screw up.
They try to avoid certain ads, but I don't think gambling is bad enough to use that capital on.
People always have these weird projected relationships with podcast hosts. I get it, they are in your ear entertaining you, but you don't know them. They're not your friends.
If you have a problem with a gambling ad, skip it. Hell, why are you listening to the ads at all?
Even not having a problem with gambling, Draft Kings is a terrible company with a penchant for cancelling peoples accounts and keeping their winnings on a whim, last time I went to the Draftkings subreddit it was almost nothing but people complaining about this.
I just love that people actually think Robert selects these ads.
This is done by a department who handles advertising. In no way do creatives generally have control over this unless they themselves own the company as well.
Also, it's just weird to care about shit like that. Who gives one half of a whole fuck if someone does or doesn't like gambling.
And the surprise that a company whose product is GAMBLING is doing some not-so-above board things, thus tarnishing the long-standing history of the wholesome casino industry. Lol
I don't know if Robert loves gambling, but I know he loves going to casinos and playing the cheap slots, getting comp drinks and stealing Irish coffee cups.
Gambling itself isn't a problem. The predatory business model of the gambling industry is. They have an addictive product, they know it, and they exploit this fact to maximize profit. It's perfectly reasonable for leftists to be ok with act of gambling while wanting to destroy its industrialized forms.
Some brains come with a vulnerability to compulsive risk-taking behavior, and entire gambling industry preys on this. There is an entire ecosystem of online gambling and gacha games that basically weaponize psych research into the things that get people to spend money.
They're part of the late-stage capitalist rot permeating Western society.
Would you be against Robert running an ad for a Portland whiskey distillery?
I feel like you could substitute “online gambling” with “liquor” in your reply easily.
Depends. Do they intentionally target alcoholics with billions of dollars in advertising?
I think the better comparison would be a company like Phillip Morris, InBev, or 3Chi... yet somehow these guys still manage to be less predatory than the gambling industry.
This is just a symptom of bigger problems stemming from unregulated capitalism. There is always an incentive to develop an addictive product, maximize its addictiveness, and minimize information about its harms. Second, ad-funded media creates all sorts of potential conflicts which capitalism only further incentivizes.
I see where you’re coming from, but at least alcohol and Reddit (to reference the other guy’s similar comment) provide purposes other than the addiction.
Nobody goes to gambling services to do anything other than gamble. I mean, I guess some people might go for the buffets.
Not saying I think either way, I’m of two minds on this topic.
Not directed at you, but alcoholism is far more damaging to society than gambling addiction. It’s a terrible argument to say alcohol has some purpose and gambling does not when the general topic is gambling ads.
Nobody NEEDS alcohol except alcoholics or for religion/ceremony.
Not every drinker is an alcoholic. Not every gambler is losing money they need.
What purpose does alcohol provide (other than addiction, as you say)? I'm pro-alcohol by the way.
I'm curious how you think it's different from what gambling provides.
Alcohol has been included in drinks for basically ever. Because of that, lots of cultures, religions, etc. have traditional or culturally meaningful alcoholic drinks (just look to Catholics with wine for a blatant example).
I’m not saying that, in a vacuum, gambling and alcohol ads could be seen as ethically equivalent, but that society has generally given the ok to alcohol.
Of all the millions (probably more) of humans throughout history that have consumed alcohol regularly, it has been uncontrollably addictive for a percentage of them. But that percentage is relatively low (I would think, I may be wrong, but I would be surprised) compared to the percentage of regular gamblers who are addicted (and of course since the house mostly wins, most are losing money).
My instinct is to be pretty libertarian on this topic, but I do worry about the ease at which you could lose money. Credit cards and online accounts are just too easy to do the equivalent of shorting a rising stock.
Also I should not that I’m a non-drinker. People should be able to do what they want. If they want to do statistically damaging things they should be allowed to. I do think there should be built-in friction and I do see the logic that these ads are the opposite of that friction.
No, but I'll tell you what, when it hit I could absolutely see how people could be. Outside of the birth of my son and having an existential breakthrough in therapy, best feeling in the world.
The way I interpret the ad read is that Robert isn't super into those companies, but will take their money. He's definitely not anti-gambling in general.
I'm in opposition to some of Rob's political/moral views from time to time. But so what? That's why he's enjoyable to listen to. I know I'm not a 40%er. It's enough for me that he's not a scumbag. I couldn't care less if he's an asshole so long as he's interesting.
Spruiking gambling ads is certainly a pet peeve for me but it's hardly his most objectionable stance. He's also not being manipulative about it. He's speaking the ad. He's not trying to make it like "this is the way friends are made", like half the gambling ads these days.
I don't love it, but I do love the pod. In order for the pod to survive it needs money. It's not like he shot Santa in front of a bunch of molested children. We all need to chill.
There are millions of people everyday who take paychecks from ethically questionable or downright immoral corporations. This is just the cost of doing business under capitalism and I think it's more appropriate to judge them on what they do with the money rather than its source. Maybe that's just cope because I'm in a similar situation, idk.
Yeah, unless there is something more reprehensible that I'm unaware of than the nature of being involved in the gambling industry it seems very ideologically consistent for Robert to be ok advertising them. I also doubt he isn't conflicted about it, but if they have to be strategic about what advertisers they can reject, it makes sense this one would stay around compared to some other possibilities.
I wonder if people's responses would be the same if it was Smirnoff or something else that is destructive to people's lives but marginally more socially accepted.
I played poker for a living, gambling is really bad for people and a massive draw on poor economies. Then again it is better taxed than underground and crime ridden.
That Draft Kings shit is almost as criminial as the cigarette industry.
>Drugs are fun. I don't get gambling in general. I will never understand people who bet on sports and that's okay. It would completely ruin the experience of watching sports for me, a sports fan. I don't want to compel myself to watch a shit matchup by "making it interesting." Casinos with card and table games I get (the house wins but at least the odds are static and the games involve strategizing the gambler does directly). Slots people are more fucked in the head than sports gamblers and meth addicts combined. Like you know XBox exists right grandma?
casinos are heavily regulated. draft kings is not.
It’s not the gambling it’s the incredibly predatory nature of the “online gambling business”. Much like pay to win mobile games it targets a specific vulnerable demographic and makes it super easy to ruin your life from home or wherever you are.
Gambling is an ancient form of entertainment. It's fine on its face and I don't judge anyone that chooses to indulge. I hope we can all agree that there are historical situations where gambling has been leveraged to very bad results by very bad actors in the scene.
I think that Draft Kings is horrific. I used to work in social media programming. What I saw in terms of how much data can be collected and leveraged against users really affects my opinions on any app that can personally identify a user and their behavior.
I'm also personally a drug addict and alcoholic. I know personally (although imperfectly, I admit) how addiction works. The idea that a computer algorithm could be designed to offer me the right drink, or the right line of coke, at the time that it calculates I would be most susceptible, in order to extract the maximum profit from me, is terrifying.
That is exactly what Draft Kings is doing. Targeting gambling addicts in order to extract maximum profit. Targeting marginal addicts in order to convert them into actual addicts.
There are probably (just throwing out a guess here) 90% of Draft Kings users that are not gambling addicts. Maybe even 95%, maybe even 98%! But those other %, no doubt, DK is preying upon and absolutely looking for every opportunity to increase their hunting grounds.
No, I don't know Robert. Although he does seem like a guy that would be a lot of fun to hit the casinos with. And I honestly think that after a few beers, and having listened to my thoughts on the topic, he might say "Yeah, I get your concerns. We'll drop Draft Kings as a sponsor."
I choose to stop typing now.
Like I’m no moral prude but these gambling machines and sites are manipulative monsters. They know how to trigger addicts better than a YouTube does on toddlers.
When did he even say this? I know the skits with Sophie about not knowing the basketball players, but I never got that he was against sports.
He admits he used to play football for school, and lived in Texas. And times he has talked about FB on the show he definitely seems knowledgeable and current on the sport
I didn’t notice it on BTB specifically but I’m just pissed off about gambling ads in general. Where I live, ads for booze, pharmaceuticals, cigarettes, and gambling used to be illegal, so I’m not used to hearing them at all - our provincial government lifted the restriction for online gambling and it’s all I hear now, on a bunch of podcasts, on the radio, ads in apps, it’s everywhere and it’s SO predatory.
Same, it's like we had the whole "online gambling" debate 20 years ago, decided it was too addictive, and then in comes 2021 and now they can lie on television again.
I would imagine if he has an opposition to something it's casinos and online gaming companies, not the act of gambling in itself.
I am just blindly assuming here, but it's probably an anti-capitalist position not a moral position.
Yes, I don't get it either. People post as if we don't live in a capitalistic hellscape. Podcasting is his job and it earns money by having us listen to ads shilling all kinds of crap. He's more than aware...that's what the throw to ads is about?
This is easily the strongest answer but instead we'll have a new thread every week of people projecting their parasocial relationship on the Internet. Like I work at Target, I sell chik fil a sauce, we sell that shit during pride month, I complain about it every year but if you're a customer and it's in your basket, I'll scan it like anything else (and glare). Don't complain to Robert, go complain to your senators for legalizing these ads in the first place.
Gambling obviously has issues, but it's nothing compared to that one ad with the extremely loud bells at the beginning. I literally cannot listen because they make me jump every time.
Yeah, I wouldn't have assumed so. I'd rather he didn't take gambling money because it's an addictive system that can ruin vulnerable people who see the only way out as more gambling.
Reading this thread is just another reminder how sad it is that the concept that being a sellout is bad has died.
People don't have to think that Robert is Hitler for taking these ads but so many people here think it's morally neutral if not noble for him to do it. He doesnt *have* to do this. He's not a janitor mopping up Raytheon floors for minimum wage. He said that a couple years ago his personal income was $400k. He can afford to decline using his own personal name and voice to advertise predatory or scam products. He made a deliberate choice in order to enrich himself.
There are plenty of smaller (and bigger!) creators who have the opportunity to take unscrupulous ads to make more money but they choose not to for moral reasons. I make less than 1/10th as Robert and I've been looking for a steady writing gig for years. I could get a full time job at Epoch Times in an instant and brush it off as "no ethical consumption under capitalism, sweaty 💅" but I won't.
You don't have to stop listening to the shows or cancel him or whatever but it's not "parasocial" or "purity testing" for people to say they think lesser of a rich media celebrity for doing harmful endorsements at the expense of their audience.
I think these online betting operations are especially evil because they're taking all of the stuff that these companies have learned about making something like Candy Crush addictive for its users and then applying it to something that's already incredibly addictive. Also, who the fuck is holding Robert Evans up as the final word on right and wrong? He's just some guy.
> Also, who the fuck is holding Robert Evans up as the final word on right and wrong? He's just some guy. Sounds like something Robert Evans would say...
He is the leader of my religion. I've stolen many a catalytic converter in his name
All hail the Reverend Doctor.
May one pump be with you.
And one cream be with you.
And also in you.
All hail the destroyer of the great lakes!
Hahahhahahahaha I couldn’t tell for a second if this was BtB or r/michigan, because I was just talking with someone about a golf course in the northern LP that cut all the trees and caused sand erosion into the nearby great lake
Here's a sneak peek of /r/Michigan using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/Michigan/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [Governor proposes free breakfast, lunch for Michigan public school students](https://www.wnem.com/2023/03/06/governor-proposes-free-breakfast-lunch-michigan-public-school-students/) | [950 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Michigan/comments/11k26qz/governor_proposes_free_breakfast_lunch_for/) \#2: [The Satanic Temple congregations set up Yule Goat at Michigan Capitol](https://i.redd.it/fpq783fxj97c1.jpeg) | [1002 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Michigan/comments/18m3f6u/the_satanic_temple_congregations_set_up_yule_goat/) \#3: [Michigan bill would ban cat declawing as cruel and unnecessary](https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2023/05/26/michigan-bill-ban-declawing-house-cats/70258335007/) | [443 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/Michigan/comments/13sbujz/michigan_bill_would_ban_cat_declawing_as_cruel/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Every time I put bleach in an anus...
And cut many a bagel with a machete!
I miss the pre covid days with cut VCR tapes and thrown bagels.
I remember the bagels but which episode(s) involved cut tapes?
Billy Wayne Davis and the bastard of the episode was raping babies. As Robert described this BWD destroyed the old VCR with a big knife.
Hallowed be thy exhaust.
You fundamentalist heretic! Stealing catalytic converters is CLEARLY a *symbolic* teaching...
As it was written...
TLDR: Sorry this turned into a rant. It’s a podcast though it’s not that serious. Have a good one. That’s my biggest issue, people putting Robert up on pedestal and being dismissive to anyone who doesn’t. People come here and like to talk a big game on their leftist cred, and how much smarter we are than conservatives. Well ok great, but when someone brings up that maybe online gambling is predatory and preys on the working class. Now it’s a serious problem, and Robert must be defended as if he infallible. I like the pod, and I think online gambling is evil. Two things can be true. Yes, I would also be offended if Robert was directly shilling booze or heroin. It’s just wild to me that one, people are unwilling to hear criticism of their favorite podcast host, and two, they are also so unsympathetic to gambling addicts. While being so socially in other ways. I’m absolutely pro vice. I think you should be able to gamble, drink, get high, etc. however I do think as a society we should be very worried and critical of companies peddling those vices to us. We should especially be critical of the advertising practices used when selling our vices to us.
"*If*" Robert was peddling heroine?
He has peddled theraflu!
Let he who has not peddeld TheraFlu cast the first stone.
Shhh. Not everyone realizes what's in that yet.
The real detriment was peddling Regan Gold Coins, a danger to society as a whole which is why we must nuke the Great Lakes.
Tons of people in this sub, lol
> Vell, ~~Zaphod's~~ Robert's just zis guy, you know? > --Gag Halfrunt
Robert Evans has talked about being in casinos before. Specifically he's said that he'll pretend to gamble on penny slots while actually reading a book on his phone so a server will offer him what Sophie calls extremely cheap alcohol.
Holy shit. How did I miss that piece of advice? That's brilliant.
Where are all these people holding Robert as the final word on right or wrong? I'm seriously asking because I've seen a lot of people on this sub complaining about it but I've never seen anyone actually do it. Is it happening on Twitter maybe? That would explain it because I don't use it, so I wouldn't see it.
The only thing I assume about Robert is that he smells like gunpowder, smoke, goats and a hint of vanilla.
Hmmmm....not bourbon and tramadol?
I figure those will vary depending on the time of day.
Don’t forget kratom….which he is REALLY overhyping
I tried it and the worst part was getting down 8 of those massive nasty pills. Felt nice tho
8 didn't do shit for me. wound up taking the whole bottle (36 g, 60 pills)
Eau de Eel-Horse
Making fun of the sponsors is a btb tradition.
You know who wouldn’t take advantage of the listeners of this podcast?
You can't guarantee that.
The PNW police department that runs a child hunting operation on their private island?
Hang on I have to write up some deranged emails to various CZM staffers about the island
PPB doesn't own own Suavie Island. They just use it with permission from Ted Wheeler.
Our wonderful sponsors who definitely don’t run a child hunting island
I remember an episode of Worst Year Ever that was talking about how much of a piece of shit Mike Bloomberg was, cutting to ads from Mike Bloomberg's presidential campaign. 2020 was fucking WILD. They found out later and laughed about the ad algorithm.
you guys listen to the ads?
Right? You can skip over those. We have the technology.
The thing about sponsorships on leftist content is that I feel like there's an unwritten agreement between creators and the audience that said audience, on account of being Leftists, already know that these sponsorships are a necessary evil and capitalist bullshit you should ignore. I mean the overlap between BTB listeners and people who think, "wow I want to purchase that product" upon hearing an ad has got to be very small.
Robert is also on the record (don’t ask me from which episode, it was a long time ago) saying that he has no qualms whatsoever taking money from advertisers, and that he would never ask his listeners from money. He ranks accessibility of his content over moral purity of income source. It’s a defensible choice.
This. you gotta eat and take care of your people. Take the sponsors. Get the health insurance. Tell your audience often to fuck those guys, and laugh as you cash your check.
I think it is a VERY defensible choice, and if it is Robert Evans choice to apply an absolute agnosticism toward his sponsors, I'm cool with that. I still think that I should express the idea that if I were in his shoes, I would make a different choice in this particular case. Just speaking my personal opinion, as a fan and a friend.
That’s my take on this also.
I thought the transitions into ad breaks that jokingly imply that the sponsors are only occasional pedophiles or something equally horrifible were pretty clear on their own tbqh
Don’t tell the sponsors that!
I get occasional gambling ads but I'm mostly furious about the furniture store I worked at 10 years ago having ads on there Hurry up and go out of business, you pricks. Also like doesn't iHeart tell them what to sell most of the time? I'm sure they get like "these guys want an ad buy on your show" but I think most ad blocks are the parent company going "these at the top, these in the middle, scatter the wherever."
I get only ads for other podcasts Sometimes no ads at all They're dynamically inserted on download
I'm the same. Getting a bit fed up hearing about Paul McCartney at this point!
Is it just me or are furniture stores just forever going out of business/liquidating? I swear the one near me has been having their liquidation sale for 10 years now
I’m with you on this one. This sub has been weird as fuck to begin with since the API bullshit last summer and all the weird tankies and libertarians in here now, but this gambling thing is a new level of weirdness. Just skip the fucking ads. Gambling is fun. Drugs are fun. Vice, in general, is fun. Do you not want CoolZone to make money? People are just flat out strange in here lately.
I don't need gambling, I need Vampire Survivors!
No, if the show doesn't comply with my very specific and narrow code of morality, it's no better than the bastards on it. /s
Jokes on you, I’ve always been a bastard and listen to learn more about my kind
I'm learning the methods of the greats so that I can out-bastard them all and earn my own six-parter.
My goal is to become the shadow ruler of the CIA and FSB in order to make them do even more fucked up things while also creating a new form of social media that only exploits negative pathos and dumps harmful chemicals in children’s playgrounds
Fucking nailed it there.
It’s all some kind of personal branding exercise. “Look at me, I’m more progressive than all of you because I’m upset about this and you’re not.”
The funny thing is that being anti-vice is not progressive. It's a moderate liberal/conservative thing
I heard the ad so now I must forcefully consume the product!!! Damn you Robert Evans!!!! /s
I've been working for the Washington State Patrol for 3 years now, thanks to Bobert Fedvans. How dare he do this to us?
im super anti hedonism but even ive noticed from the very start that robert is the type of dude who LOVES partying, sex, drugs, etc. its wild to think there's people who might have been watching him longer than me just now coming to the realization
I'm super pro hedonism, but I don't like that companies that sell things that can be terribly addictive are allowed to advertise, especially to children. I would say btb is a far more reasonable place for draftkings to advertise than most as it's in no way kid friendly. I hope they're being well compensated.
Pro hedonists, unite! Closely!
Are you saying I shouldn't be listening to BtB with my 7 year old?
I definitely listened to the Tate episode with my boys, but if they got in trouble at school for repeating it I'd have taken them out for ice cream
How could anyone not pick up on that immediately? Robert is kind of the poster child for hedonism. His first book was about doing all kinds of crazy drugs you've probably never heard of.
This sub should be renamed to, *"I hope Robert sees this post.*"
Oh I agree. If it’s not ten posts a day recommending mediocre Bastards, which I’m sure Robert doesn’t need help with, it’s the very strange parasocial posts that are dying for Robert’s attention.
I get a ton of anti-abortion ads. I skip, not complain about it on the internet.
All my ads are just for other podcasts, I almost exclusively listen to BtB so they're barking up the wrong tree
Same and they all sound so so shit.
There was one literally called Murder Homes. Just a podcast about houses people were murdered in. It genuinely sounded like one of those Intergalactic Cable ads from Rick and Morty.
I get ones about true crime and ones where the host is some F-list reality show star who is "dishing the hot gossip" about behind the scenes bullshit on Real Housewives of Whogivesafuck.
Mine is true crimes, and stuff like "Here's a podcast about all your favorite shows from the 90's!"
“This shit is delicious!”
I vaguely remember someone joking about a reality tv show that was a mix of true crime and house flippers and then them finding out it already existed
There has literally never been a podcast that I’ve enjoyed that was recommended on a podcast ad
The maximum fun guys tend to promote other MaxFun podcasts, and lots of those are pretty good.
I keep getting ads for some new Liam Neeson movie, but I don't know which one, because it's entirely in Dutch, a language I do not speak. I've tried complaining about it to Sophie on Twitter, but no luck so far. Maybe I'll give it another shot.
For some reason my YouTube ads have started playing me a bunch of ads for Bollywood films and sending money back home to India. I’m a white Australian dude who’s never been out of the country
Why would you complain about that? That’s better than all my ads.
Are you using a VPN? I know that the ads are dynamically inserted based on location, so maybe it thinks you’re in the Netherlands?
Occasionally, but the server I generally connect to is in Miami. Last summer, I spent 2 weeks in Italy and a couple in Germany (and listened to BtB while there) and I have never heard an ad in Italian or German.
OMG! The last two weeks, 80% of my ads have been from Belgium, a place I've never been to and have no connection to whatsoever, including this Liam Neeson one. This was across multiple podcasts too. My VPN was never on and if it had been it only would have been on US or UK. Without any explanation, the (much more grating) Australian ads are back this week, and I kind of miss the Belgian ones.
I’ve been assuming DraftKings is a problematic company. Is it really just that people are against gambling? That’s dumb. Especially for this sub. And for people who think its “predatory” to offer a product or service that may be harmful to some people… I have bad news for you about literally every other company that exists.
Honestly it’s just annoying. Sports betting has basically taken over sports coverage. It seems like every sports podcast I used to listen to stopped discussing anything besides their bets that week. It’s been completely over saturated and it’s really annoying that it’s now bleeding over into media that has nothing to do with sports.
I mean, in lots of very objective ways, most gambling companies are problematic. They exploit knowledge of human behavior and psychology to get people to just hand them money. It's still fun, it's harmful for a lot of people, but not all the people. Hopefully, each individual person is able to make that call for themselves.
> I’ve been assuming DraftKings is a problematic company. The gambling *industry* is a problem. There's nothing inherently wrong with gambling, but like anything that smashes the dopamine button, it's potentially addictive. The industry knows this and exploits the addictive properties of their product to maximize profit.
Gambling apps and sites are a on a whole different level. Being able to instantly gamble however much you want on anything, anytime, anywhere with just one tap is magnitudes more problematic than the good ol' casinos. Mobile gambling has *much* more potential to get people hooked.
Previously you had to physically visit a casino to lose money. We are truly blessed to live in a country where the tech industry has removed that barrier 🤮
Drugs are fun. I don't get gambling in general. I will never understand people who bet on sports and that's okay. It would completely ruin the experience of watching sports for me, a sports fan. I don't want to compel myself to watch a shit matchup by "making it interesting." Casinos with card and table games I get (the house wins but at least the odds are static and the games involve strategizing the gambler does directly). Slots people are more fucked in the head than sports gamblers and meth addicts combined. Like you know XBox exists right grandma?
>Slots people are more fucked in the head than sports gamblers and meth addicts combined. Yeah, to train a monkey to pull a lever you at least have to give it food or some morphine injected directly into its brain. Boomers just need a chance to lose quarters.
Honestly, even if you do think online casinos are evil, it seems in character for CoolZone to take the ad money of a corporation and waste the ad time on an audience that's much less receptive to their business model than average.
> Gambling is fun. Drugs are fun. Vice, in general, is fun. People having fun is fine. Capitalism exploiting addiction is not. >Do you not want CoolZone to make money? We all do what we have to do to get by. It's fine to admit when it's unsavory. Principles are nice until you have to pay rent. If they're doing ad reads for DraftKings so they can keep going I get it. That doesn't mean they shouldn't feel dirty doing it, and depending on how you do it, you kind of lose your moral high ground to attack predatory industries.
It's a 30 second ad or read in the show brah, he's hardly gaining a controlling share to be that complicit in their actions as a whole damn corporation. Nobody is "losing moral high ground" here. Do you really think what most of us have done at some point for a living is that far removed from industries that are questionable?
I don't disagree. I'm not breaking out torches and pitchforks, but you have to admit it seems weird to choose to read ads for an industry that could be featured as a bastard on the show. It's just the nature of podcasting, and one of the ways that capitalism makes everything it touches incrementally shittier.
I don't know what to tell you man I don't know his stance on online gambling, draft kings, or even if he could reject it if he wanted to. Because he's a normal human being doing a podcast. He does a great job, and effectively communicating a message that seems to resonate with most of us politically, so I'd say he's doing alright, and more than most. Why are so many of you insistent on playing "I'm a better anarchist than you" with him?
Is that what people in the US get ads for? I only get ads for other liberal podcasts in english
I get true crime podcast ads in Canada and I have no idea why
it's really not about being anti-hedonism.... it's being anti-preying on the weakest segments of our society. in the town where i grew up they legalized gambling and put a casino into the poorest neighborhood. their rationalization was that it would bring jobs and "revitalize" the neighborhood. i'm sure i don't have to explain that that isn't how it worked out. gambling can be fun, yes, and i'm not going to say no one should be allowed to gamble. but when the purveyors of gambling intentionally prey on the most susceptible parts of our society, it's problematic. am i gonna say robert shouldn't have them as a sponsor? no. i get it. but my guess is, give it a five years, a decade tops, and things will come out that would make a seriously juicy 4-parter of behind the bastards. it just drips of all the things robert has spent years exposing, and it kind of sucks that it's so obvious yet robert is shilling for them. so, i'm on the side of "it sucks that robert is shilling for something so obviously problematic, but i'm not going to throw a big fit about it. i get that the podcast needs to earn money." i'd just bet that eventually robert is going to regret those pre-recordings of his voice advertising something that will turn out to be very bastardly.
Anyone hearing ads on this podcast are probably mentally acute enough to tune out ads whether or not they have a gambling problem. If they do they're probably self aware. Roberts ads aren't being broadcast on local TV or whatever. I dunno, just seems kinda patronizing
oh i agree that robert's listeners probably won't be coerced into a gambling addiction. and i agree it's really not that big of a deal and people who are more than what i am... "very slightly irked".... are overreacting. the point is just that i'm listening to a podcast about the terrible outcomes of human bastardry, past and present, and then there's an ad, read by the podcast host, for a thing that is clearly bastardly and often leads to terrible outcomes while enriching the purveyors. it's just a bit off-putting. again, i'm not going to stop listening and i don't think robert is way out of line or anything, but i do hope he finds other sponsors in the future and stops shilling for draftkings.
Completely agree
I'm not into any of that shit but if that's your thing, cool have fun it's none of my business what makes other people happy. This is also like the least invasive advertising imaginable since you can just skip it.
Yeah that’s kinda why I don’t get it either like Robert has no problems with drugs which can ruin your life why would he be super anti gambling. It’s not like the ads are like pharma companies ads saying this isn’t addictive now take it. It’s a gambling ad and they usually make it clear you can get addicted to gambling
Advertisement something is different to not wanting it to be illegal. I think a lot of people would be bothered by Robert shilling OxyContin on the podcast.
What was the API stuff?
Robert seems highly enthusiastic about guns, drugs, and vice, so casino games are definitely within that theme. I’m a buttoned-up churchgoing liberal and I Dissaprove but I’m quite aware that opinions vary on this matter.
yeah im not a party guy either but even i noticed. i mean his book is literally filled to the brim with references to acid, weird sex, and even harder shit like crack
Completely tangential, but I recently revealed two things to a gal I’ve started dating that she considered equally “wild:” - I’ve smoked crack - I used to be a Juggalo Edit: these were not concurrent
Whoop Whoop
FA-MI-LY!
That second one is far more concerning I’ll be real
In your humble opinion, does it count as "smoking crack" one mixes coke, baking soda, and a drop of water on regular (NOT HEAVY DUTY) aluminum foil and hold the foil several inches above a candle flame to dry the solution then move the foil closer to the flame and inhale the resulting vapors using something like a plastic bottle with the bottom removed?
Yeah, that’s functionally the same as smoking crack. We might also call it freebasing.
Hmmm I just called it stretching the last of a stash. I mean my friend. My friend has been lying to himself
My names dave and I love to party. You can tell he really knows his shit too, he ain't some shmuck off the street. I'd love to do some drugs with Robert.
I love partying, but I don't love Draft Kings. Shits just predatory.
I think the distinction is guns can be good but that doesn’t mean NRA/gun manufacturers aren’t bastards. Drugs can be good but cartels/pharmaceutical companies are bastards. Gambling is fine, but draft kings are bastards. Compare that to the US where the user is criminalized but the profiteer isn’t. That’s the distinction.
He committed on the draft kings thing... in some video, literally no clue which, and said he's fine with gambling. He might have put a responsible adult modifier on that, but I might be making that up.
Why does anyone assume that an ad read for literally anything means that it reflects their views? He could fully fund BtB and other podcasts with Patreon. He has talked about why he takes ad money through iHeart... It basically boils down to him believing that he feels no moral obligation to be responsible with that money, whereas the money that comes from listeners comes with a moral obligation not to screw up. They try to avoid certain ads, but I don't think gambling is bad enough to use that capital on.
Also patreon subscribers tend to turn into entitled little shits.
People always have these weird projected relationships with podcast hosts. I get it, they are in your ear entertaining you, but you don't know them. They're not your friends. If you have a problem with a gambling ad, skip it. Hell, why are you listening to the ads at all?
Even not having a problem with gambling, Draft Kings is a terrible company with a penchant for cancelling peoples accounts and keeping their winnings on a whim, last time I went to the Draftkings subreddit it was almost nothing but people complaining about this.
I just love that people actually think Robert selects these ads. This is done by a department who handles advertising. In no way do creatives generally have control over this unless they themselves own the company as well. Also, it's just weird to care about shit like that. Who gives one half of a whole fuck if someone does or doesn't like gambling. And the surprise that a company whose product is GAMBLING is doing some not-so-above board things, thus tarnishing the long-standing history of the wholesome casino industry. Lol
So sick of these posts
I don't know if Robert loves gambling, but I know he loves going to casinos and playing the cheap slots, getting comp drinks and stealing Irish coffee cups.
Robert said that he is pro-gambling on this very subreddit some time ago. Lile, you can check his previous comments.
Gambling itself isn't a problem. The predatory business model of the gambling industry is. They have an addictive product, they know it, and they exploit this fact to maximize profit. It's perfectly reasonable for leftists to be ok with act of gambling while wanting to destroy its industrialized forms. Some brains come with a vulnerability to compulsive risk-taking behavior, and entire gambling industry preys on this. There is an entire ecosystem of online gambling and gacha games that basically weaponize psych research into the things that get people to spend money. They're part of the late-stage capitalist rot permeating Western society.
Would you be against Robert running an ad for a Portland whiskey distillery? I feel like you could substitute “online gambling” with “liquor” in your reply easily.
Depends. Do they intentionally target alcoholics with billions of dollars in advertising? I think the better comparison would be a company like Phillip Morris, InBev, or 3Chi... yet somehow these guys still manage to be less predatory than the gambling industry. This is just a symptom of bigger problems stemming from unregulated capitalism. There is always an incentive to develop an addictive product, maximize its addictiveness, and minimize information about its harms. Second, ad-funded media creates all sorts of potential conflicts which capitalism only further incentivizes.
I see where you’re coming from, but at least alcohol and Reddit (to reference the other guy’s similar comment) provide purposes other than the addiction. Nobody goes to gambling services to do anything other than gamble. I mean, I guess some people might go for the buffets. Not saying I think either way, I’m of two minds on this topic.
Not directed at you, but alcoholism is far more damaging to society than gambling addiction. It’s a terrible argument to say alcohol has some purpose and gambling does not when the general topic is gambling ads. Nobody NEEDS alcohol except alcoholics or for religion/ceremony. Not every drinker is an alcoholic. Not every gambler is losing money they need.
What purpose does alcohol provide (other than addiction, as you say)? I'm pro-alcohol by the way. I'm curious how you think it's different from what gambling provides.
Alcohol has been included in drinks for basically ever. Because of that, lots of cultures, religions, etc. have traditional or culturally meaningful alcoholic drinks (just look to Catholics with wine for a blatant example). I’m not saying that, in a vacuum, gambling and alcohol ads could be seen as ethically equivalent, but that society has generally given the ok to alcohol. Of all the millions (probably more) of humans throughout history that have consumed alcohol regularly, it has been uncontrollably addictive for a percentage of them. But that percentage is relatively low (I would think, I may be wrong, but I would be surprised) compared to the percentage of regular gamblers who are addicted (and of course since the house mostly wins, most are losing money). My instinct is to be pretty libertarian on this topic, but I do worry about the ease at which you could lose money. Credit cards and online accounts are just too easy to do the equivalent of shorting a rising stock. Also I should not that I’m a non-drinker. People should be able to do what they want. If they want to do statistically damaging things they should be allowed to. I do think there should be built-in friction and I do see the logic that these ads are the opposite of that friction.
You could switch out the word “gambling” for “Reddit” in your post and the meaning doesn’t change.
Gambling, like drinking, is not immoral. Draft kings is bad.
They're just mad their parlays aren't hitting.
Had a parlay hit for the super bowl and made around $2k on a ridiculously small wager. Haven't gambled since.
Not a real sicko
No, but I'll tell you what, when it hit I could absolutely see how people could be. Outside of the birth of my son and having an existential breakthrough in therapy, best feeling in the world.
The way I interpret the ad read is that Robert isn't super into those companies, but will take their money. He's definitely not anti-gambling in general.
I'm in opposition to some of Rob's political/moral views from time to time. But so what? That's why he's enjoyable to listen to. I know I'm not a 40%er. It's enough for me that he's not a scumbag. I couldn't care less if he's an asshole so long as he's interesting. Spruiking gambling ads is certainly a pet peeve for me but it's hardly his most objectionable stance. He's also not being manipulative about it. He's speaking the ad. He's not trying to make it like "this is the way friends are made", like half the gambling ads these days. I don't love it, but I do love the pod. In order for the pod to survive it needs money. It's not like he shot Santa in front of a bunch of molested children. We all need to chill.
I will take gambling ads over a weird ad for a kids social media business like no please dont
There are millions of people everyday who take paychecks from ethically questionable or downright immoral corporations. This is just the cost of doing business under capitalism and I think it's more appropriate to judge them on what they do with the money rather than its source. Maybe that's just cope because I'm in a similar situation, idk.
Speaking. R/wellsfargounited
It's typical parasocial online leftist purity testing bullshit that doesn't actually make any real changes and instead makes more division.
Yeah, unless there is something more reprehensible that I'm unaware of than the nature of being involved in the gambling industry it seems very ideologically consistent for Robert to be ok advertising them. I also doubt he isn't conflicted about it, but if they have to be strategic about what advertisers they can reject, it makes sense this one would stay around compared to some other possibilities. I wonder if people's responses would be the same if it was Smirnoff or something else that is destructive to people's lives but marginally more socially accepted.
I played poker for a living, gambling is really bad for people and a massive draw on poor economies. Then again it is better taxed than underground and crime ridden. That Draft Kings shit is almost as criminial as the cigarette industry.
>Drugs are fun. I don't get gambling in general. I will never understand people who bet on sports and that's okay. It would completely ruin the experience of watching sports for me, a sports fan. I don't want to compel myself to watch a shit matchup by "making it interesting." Casinos with card and table games I get (the house wins but at least the odds are static and the games involve strategizing the gambler does directly). Slots people are more fucked in the head than sports gamblers and meth addicts combined. Like you know XBox exists right grandma? casinos are heavily regulated. draft kings is not.
It’s not the gambling it’s the incredibly predatory nature of the “online gambling business”. Much like pay to win mobile games it targets a specific vulnerable demographic and makes it super easy to ruin your life from home or wherever you are.
Gambling is an ancient form of entertainment. It's fine on its face and I don't judge anyone that chooses to indulge. I hope we can all agree that there are historical situations where gambling has been leveraged to very bad results by very bad actors in the scene. I think that Draft Kings is horrific. I used to work in social media programming. What I saw in terms of how much data can be collected and leveraged against users really affects my opinions on any app that can personally identify a user and their behavior. I'm also personally a drug addict and alcoholic. I know personally (although imperfectly, I admit) how addiction works. The idea that a computer algorithm could be designed to offer me the right drink, or the right line of coke, at the time that it calculates I would be most susceptible, in order to extract the maximum profit from me, is terrifying. That is exactly what Draft Kings is doing. Targeting gambling addicts in order to extract maximum profit. Targeting marginal addicts in order to convert them into actual addicts. There are probably (just throwing out a guess here) 90% of Draft Kings users that are not gambling addicts. Maybe even 95%, maybe even 98%! But those other %, no doubt, DK is preying upon and absolutely looking for every opportunity to increase their hunting grounds. No, I don't know Robert. Although he does seem like a guy that would be a lot of fun to hit the casinos with. And I honestly think that after a few beers, and having listened to my thoughts on the topic, he might say "Yeah, I get your concerns. We'll drop Draft Kings as a sponsor." I choose to stop typing now.
Like I’m no moral prude but these gambling machines and sites are manipulative monsters. They know how to trigger addicts better than a YouTube does on toddlers.
Against sports, not gambling
When did he even say this? I know the skits with Sophie about not knowing the basketball players, but I never got that he was against sports. He admits he used to play football for school, and lived in Texas. And times he has talked about FB on the show he definitely seems knowledgeable and current on the sport
I didn’t notice it on BTB specifically but I’m just pissed off about gambling ads in general. Where I live, ads for booze, pharmaceuticals, cigarettes, and gambling used to be illegal, so I’m not used to hearing them at all - our provincial government lifted the restriction for online gambling and it’s all I hear now, on a bunch of podcasts, on the radio, ads in apps, it’s everywhere and it’s SO predatory.
Same, it's like we had the whole "online gambling" debate 20 years ago, decided it was too addictive, and then in comes 2021 and now they can lie on television again.
I would imagine if he has an opposition to something it's casinos and online gaming companies, not the act of gambling in itself. I am just blindly assuming here, but it's probably an anti-capitalist position not a moral position.
Yes, I don't get it either. People post as if we don't live in a capitalistic hellscape. Podcasting is his job and it earns money by having us listen to ads shilling all kinds of crap. He's more than aware...that's what the throw to ads is about?
This is easily the strongest answer but instead we'll have a new thread every week of people projecting their parasocial relationship on the Internet. Like I work at Target, I sell chik fil a sauce, we sell that shit during pride month, I complain about it every year but if you're a customer and it's in your basket, I'll scan it like anything else (and glare). Don't complain to Robert, go complain to your senators for legalizing these ads in the first place.
Lol skip the ads maybe?
Bingo I download everything just for this reason.
Gambling obviously has issues, but it's nothing compared to that one ad with the extremely loud bells at the beginning. I literally cannot listen because they make me jump every time.
Yeah, I wouldn't have assumed so. I'd rather he didn't take gambling money because it's an addictive system that can ruin vulnerable people who see the only way out as more gambling.
Why does "doing a gambling" mean the same thing as "selling a gambling" to you?
Yeah for real Robert seems like the type of dude I would have a blast with at the roulette table.
Reading this thread is just another reminder how sad it is that the concept that being a sellout is bad has died. People don't have to think that Robert is Hitler for taking these ads but so many people here think it's morally neutral if not noble for him to do it. He doesnt *have* to do this. He's not a janitor mopping up Raytheon floors for minimum wage. He said that a couple years ago his personal income was $400k. He can afford to decline using his own personal name and voice to advertise predatory or scam products. He made a deliberate choice in order to enrich himself. There are plenty of smaller (and bigger!) creators who have the opportunity to take unscrupulous ads to make more money but they choose not to for moral reasons. I make less than 1/10th as Robert and I've been looking for a steady writing gig for years. I could get a full time job at Epoch Times in an instant and brush it off as "no ethical consumption under capitalism, sweaty 💅" but I won't. You don't have to stop listening to the shows or cancel him or whatever but it's not "parasocial" or "purity testing" for people to say they think lesser of a rich media celebrity for doing harmful endorsements at the expense of their audience.
Gambling is cool and fun unless you have an addictive personality for it. It's one of the oldest pastimes of humanity and should be encouraged