You seem like someone who’s unfamiliar with both the Kleins and Matt Hoss. It’s as if you wrote this article because it’s one of the bigger stories on Reddit, YouTube, Twitter and other websites around the net and you know it’ll get you some hits because it has H3H3 winning their lawsuit in it.

And in terms of subscriber base, the H3H3 couple certainly comes off as a big bully.

“Big bullies?” You’re kidding me right?

You write like someone very unfamiliar with H3, which is a bit absurd considering this is Gizmodo. Nothing H3 does is bullying, anymore than the Onion is a bully for writing a mean thing about a celebrity. It’s satire, it’s mocking, and 90% of the people they mock enjoy it, benefit from it or generally are too big and…

Gotta disagree with this article’s characterization of H3 as “bullies” in this scenario. If anything, Matt Hoss’s videos pervade bullying against women in public. He still managed to get 170 THOUSAND people to subscribe to him. That’s not nothing.

No, That’s not what H3H3 did AT ALL. Your analogy is absurd and you clearly don’t know anything about the case.

i’m not sure why this article needs to imply that H3H3 are unethical. A lot of subscribers does not automatically make a channel a “bully” and calling out questionable, terrible content and bad behavior by other content creators is not merely “stirring up up shit” as the author suggests.

So condescending and dismissive. YouTube is a medium just like film or television. No better or worse. Lots of it is terrible, but there are many talented, creative and hard working creators on YouTube making amazing content.

I assume this is Matt Hoss’ burner. You’re insane dude.

Wait, are you actually taking Hosses side on this one?

And in terms of subscriber base, the H3H3 couple certainly comes off as a big bully.

So the fact that H3H3 has more fans makes them bullies? Would they be more morally acceptable if they put out a shitty product no one likes?