So a dude with more money than most people see in their lives chose to take advantage of economically-disadvantaged individuals for the sake of some anti-Semitic “humor,” and is now surprised that there are consequences that go with that kind of behavior.



Got it.



Having read some of the comments on the previous article for this story, I want to make a couple of things clear:



1.) Those who are decrying PewDiePie’s “Nazi humor” are not without a sense of humor themselves. Humor requires context, and references to The Producers, South Park, and similar bits of satirical humor that have referenced the Third Reich at certain points miss a key point: those films/shows/texts/etc placed their Nazi references within a given context that created a humorous situation, often through mockery.



Offering a couple of economically disadvantaged guys five bucks to hold up an anti-Semitic sign, and then going, “LOL, these economically disadvantaged people will do anything for a fiver—isn’t that shit hilarious,” is much the same thing as tossing loose change at a homeless person just to watch them pick it up.



It is mean-spirited, it is small-minded, and in threading the anti-Semitic reference into the act, PewDiePie was not creating a humorous situation—he was abusing his wealth for the sake of making someone else look ridiculous, and using hate speech in order to do it.



So, in short, the context of this “joke” of Pewd’s was: Rich asshole takes advantage of the economic fragility of others to get his jollies; makes anti-Semitic remarks as part of his “LOL, poor people are poor” bullshit.



2.) Removing Pewds from his association with Disney—and now with YouTube—is only “censorship” in the loosest possible sense of the word. Both Disney and YouTube are publicly traded companies, reliant upon the continued goodwill of their shareholders and audience alike for continued operations and profits.



That goodwill is not sustained by maintaining relationships—and especially not employment relationships—with an individual who has made rather a pattern of anti-Semitic remarks.



PewDiePie remains free to say whatever he wants to say, as he always has—but neither Disney nor YouTube are under any obligation to pay him for saying vile, hateful shit, even if it is in the name of a juvenile idea of “humor.” They owe him nothing apart from remuneration for services rendered—and at this point, his “services” may well be damaging their business and brand more than bringing in profit, which makes him a liability rather than an asset.



Firing/severing ties with him is not an act of “censorship” so much as it is a sound business decision in the face of his recent actions. I doubt very much his claims that he harbors no anti-Semitic feelings whatsoever, as the video referenced in the previous article was not a one-off occurrence—but even if I were to give him the benefit of the doubt, the fact is that he has shown incredibly poor judgment in choosing to make these sorts of remarks on multiple occasions (and particularly in abusing the economic vulnerability of others for the sake of his “jokes”).



Disney and now YouTube took the only sensible course of action from a business perspective. Whinge on about “censorship” and “free speech” all you like, but he’s not being quashed by the government—and severing an employment relationship with an employee that is bad for business isn’t really an act of censorship so much as it is “saving the ship” relative to the employer’s business interests.

