wait a minute...

等一下...

No! You changed it!

不！你把標題改掉了！

come on media what are you doing?

拜託媒體，你在衝三小？

what does it say now?

他們現在是怎麼說的？

*Pewdiepie's fall shows the limits of 'lol just kidding'*

* Pewdiepie對"lol 只是開玩笑"一詞定義了新的下限 *

Hey alright

嘿 聽著

Emma Grey Ellis

Emma Grey Ellis

may I just say that if you're gonna call someone

我說，如果你要將某人定義成

a hero to the nazis

一個納粹英雄

you may want to double check if that's true or not

你可能要重複確認這是真的還是假的

because afterwards you can't go 'lol just kidding' (roasted)

因為以後，你不能只是用"lol 只是開個玩笑"來蒙混過關

the amount of cherry-picking that the media came out with after this whole thing

在媒體捏造這一切子虛烏有的事件

to prove this narrative that I'm somehow an anti-semite

只為了證明我不知何時成為了反猶太主義者之後

that was eh *kiss* beautiful

這真是.. 漂亮

Please keep doing it, it's hilarious

請繼續保持，這一切真是太可笑了

*chuckles*

* 咯咯笑 *

Vox media posted this unironically

Vox發了一篇這樣的文，完全不諷刺

*arguably similar to Nazi fashion*

*近似於納粹的時尚風格*

*recently he has been wearing Himmler style glasses*

*最近他一直戴著類似希特勒款式的眼鏡*

*and sporting a fashy [slang for fascist] Hitler youth haircut*

*和蓄著fashy [俗稱法西斯]希特勒青年時的髮型*

VOX

VOX

You got me (me too)

被你發現了

damn it

該死的

*sigh*

*嘆*

i didn't want to admit this

我不想承認這一點

i didn't want to talk about this

我不想談這個

I love Korean fashion

我愛韓國時尚

I love K-pop

我喜歡韓流

That's why I dyed my hair

這就是為什麼我要染頭髮

I'm going through a mid-life crisis here ok?

我要以此對付我的中年危機 好嗎？

I want to be a K-pop star!

我想當一個潮到出水的韓星！

JK Rowling is calling me a fascist

JK羅琳稱呼我為法西斯主義者

Why? I don't *chuckles*

為什麼？我不...* 笑 *

I guess she read it on eh she read it off a headline

我猜她讀了那些聳動的標題

and sort off went with it

然後就這樣信了

well I read on an online article that

話說，我看了一篇網路文章，

you once said in an interview that you found dressing up as a nazi arousing

你曾在接受採訪時說，你找到了一個能夠喚起心中納粹魂的裝扮

I read that on an online website so it must be true! (roasted)

因為我是從網路上看到的，所以它一定是真實事件！

right? JK?

對吧？ JK？

so I made the apology video where I thought at least was from the heart

所以我做了，至少我認為是出自真心的道歉影片

explain the situation

解釋這一切的狀況

and I admitted it that I didn't do everything like I'm not guilt-free in this situation by any means

我坦承我沒意圖從這些事件中以任何方式替自己脫罪

it was met by the warmest

而我得到最溫暖的

positivity from the internet and anyone that i think saw it

來自網路上的各位正面的回應

it was just amazing and I owe you guys my biggest thanks for all the support that I got from that video

我十分驚喜， 我想大大地感謝你們對於這個影片給我的所有支持

(love you pewds <3)

(我愛你pewds!)(趁亂告白)

however! the media wasn't as impressed

然而！媒體並不太賞光

they kind of stuck with their narrative

他們堅持自己當初的立場

*Pewdiepie half-heartedly apologizes, calls media "motherfuckers"*

* Pewdiepie虛偽地道歉，稱媒體“趕羚羊 草枝擺”*

*Pewdiepie's "apology" for Nazi jokes shows that he still doesn't get it*

* Pewdiepie對於納粹笑話所發表的道歉顯示他仍未搞清楚重點

*trump and Pewdiepie are using the same playbook*

*川普跟pewdiepie用了相同的劇本*

so we basically went from "Pewdiepie is a nazi" to "Pewdiepie is trump"

所以我們基本上是從Pewdiepie是一個納粹去得到Pewdiepie是川普

we'll get there one day media i'm sure we'll get there one day

媒體，我相信總有一天這能夠得到證實，總有一天

and I want to point out not all media okay

我想指出，並非所有的媒體都是這樣好嗎

i've seen more and more balanced articles come out about this situation

我看到更多，更貼近真相的平衡報導出來對抗這種情況

even though it seems pretty dead at this point

即便它們在當前的風向不怎麼受到支持

the whole situation is a testimony of old media not understanding youtube

這整件事情顯示了那些舊式媒體不瞭解Youtube

the fucking senior editor of wall street journal

華爾街日報他媽的資深編輯

*chuckles*

* 咯咯笑 *

the senior editor of wall street journal tweeted

華爾街日報的資深編輯推文

*man this pewdiepie video is long*

*天啊pewdiepie的視頻真長*

i'm sorry mike i'll try and cut it down next time a little bit for you

抱歉阿 Mike 我下次會把影片弄精簡一點的

so you don't have to spend so much time doing your journalist research

這樣你就不用花那麼多的時間做你的新聞採樣

maybe i'll add a little meme

也許我會加一點網路梗* 2

maybe that will make it more interesting for you

或許這會讓你比較感興趣

i dunno

我不知道* 2

senior editor huh how about that (roasted)

資深編輯嗯 這樣怎麼樣

let's get into the wall street journal thing

讓我們談談有關華爾街日報的事情

there's one thing that I wanted to talk about that i didn't really do in my last video

有件事我一直想說，但我沒有在之前的影片裡提到

which was the fact that wall street journal went to the brands that i work with

就是華爾街日報在找我談話之前

before they came to me for a comment

跑去找跟我合作的企業尋求訪問

i know this because they didn't just talked to disney and youtube

我會知道這事是因為他們不只找了迪士尼，還去找Youtube

it shows to me that they were just after making the strongest headline and the strongest story

我的解讀是， 他們只在乎能不能做出最聳動的標題跟故事

that they could get without any regards of what kind of damage they would do in the process

他們可以絲毫不管過程中會造成怎樣的傷害

i mean why would wall street journal care about minimizing harm

也對，華爾街幹嘛在乎縮小傷害這種鳥事？

it's not like it's one of the fore-major section in the journalist's code of ethics (true)

道德考量又不是做出熱門報導所需的首要因素

i-i-i- mean why would wall street journal care about that?

為什麼華爾街日報要在乎呢？

i don't understand

我不明白

they wanted that headline, they got the headline

他們想要這樣的頭條，他們也得到了頭條

*wall street journal should've tried to get a response from me (pewds) directly to begin with*

*華爾街日報應該直接找我本人訪問*

*not going to brands I work with first. Proves to me their maliciousness.*

*而不是去找我的合作企業，這只顯示你們喪盡天良*

christopher mims of the wall street journal tweeted back at me

華爾街日報的Christopher Mims回推我

*demonstrably false but anyway welcome to our post-truth age*

*事實證明你錯了，但歡迎聯絡我們的揭發真相報導*

he says *nothing, absolutely nothing gets printed in the wall street journal without an attempt to reach a mentioned subject for comment*

他說*沒有--絕對沒有-- 任何印在華爾街日報上的報導是經由上述手段得到的*

so seems fair right?

所以看來一切良好對吧？

but then he goes and says *I have no idea about the chronology*

但隨後他又表示*我不知道訪問的先後順序*

which was my fucking point!

這就是我他媽的重點！

christopher mims you demonstrated yourself false

Mhristopher Mims你這是在自打嘴巴

so welcome to the post-truth age (roasted)

所以歡迎聯絡揭發真相報導

the other thing that i had a problem with which i already brought up

另外有件事我先前已經提過了

i don't think i need to elaborate on it

我認為我不需要再去詳述

which is the context or lack of context

就是斷章取義或缺乏背景的問題

i think in the video there was one piece of context out of five in total

我認為，在一則影片中有著五個以上的段落

so if you think that's a balanced way of doing journalism, you tell me

所以，如果你認為這樣做報導算是中立的話，隨你說去吧

i have a big problem with the whole thing in general

我對這整件事有個很大的疑問

because this whole thing wasn't a problem until it was brought up

因為這整件事本來是沒有問題的，直到它被不斷炒作

because my audience understand they were jokes

因為我的觀眾們都知道這只是個笑話

they weren't actually doing anyone any harm

它們並沒有真正對任何人造成傷害

but the way the wall street journal defended this was that

但華爾街日報為自己辯護的藉口是

neo nazi websites were supporting me

新納粹網站支持我

calling it the no.1 pewdiepie fansite

將其稱為頭號Pewdiepie粉絲網站

which i obviously had no idea about, believe it or not, i don't go to neo nazi websites *chuckles*

我明明完全不知道有這回事，信不信由你，我完全沒看過這個新納粹網站

the wall street journal condemns me for using "posts"

華爾街日報以&quot;發佈&quot;一詞對我譴責

they don't call it jokes

他們不稱之為笑話

they literally said that the fact that I used adolf hitler and the fact that I used nazi imagery

他們只提到我使用希特勒和我用納粹圖像的事實

that's bad enough

還真是糟了個糕

it seems right here that you are guilty of the same thing

就這點看起來，你犯了同樣的錯誤

*german*

*德語*

oh look there is hitler~ this looks like nazi imagery to me~

哦看，這是希特勒，這看起來應該是納粹的圖樣

someone start the press!

有人踏入禁區了！

i think we have a scoop!

獨家新聞出爐啦！

it turns out the neo nazi websites have changed their mind

事實證明，新納粹網站已經改變了主意

right now, they are the no.1 wall street journal fansite

現在，他們是頭號華爾街日報粉絲網站

interesting! i don't believe wall street journal has made a statement!

有趣！我再也不相信華爾街日報的發言了！

CONDEMNING THESE WEBSITES

譴責這些網站

SO THEY MUST BE A NAZI-SUPPORTING WEBSITE NOW

所以他們現在一定是支持納粹的網站

I THINK WE NEED TO TALK TO THEIR SPONSORS ABOUT THIS

我想我們需要跟他們的贊助商談談這事

NOT WALL STREET JOURNAL THEMSELVES

而不是先跟華爾街日報講！

OR DOES CONTEXT MATTER? I DON'T KNOW~

還是我應該先了解一下事情的來龍去脈？我不知道耶〜

OH LOOK! HERE'S THEIR SPONSORS!

哦，看！這就是他們的贊助商！

HOW ABOUT THAT~

這樣好了〜

GUESS WE NEED TO TALK TO THEM FIRST

我想我們需要先跟他們談談

i realize how childish i sound okay

我知道我看起來有多幼稚，好嗎

it's just to illustrate this point

我只是為了闡明這點

and if you didn't think it could be any more unethical or any more stupid

但如果你不覺得還有人能夠更不道德或更笨的話

one of the journalists ben fritz

有個記者 Ben Fritz

it came out that he's been doing the same kind of jokes

從頭到尾都在開同樣的玩笑

NO! NOT BEN FRITZ!

不！不！BEN FRITZ！

SAY IT'S NOT TRUE

說這是不正確的

*he has a hard on for the nazis*

*他只對納粹硬得起來*

NO!!! NO!!!

不！！不！！

THAT'S AN ANTI-SEMITIC JOKE

那是反猶太主義的笑話

HE WANTS TO FRY THE JEWS?

他想炒猶太人？

sorry, sorry, i don't even want to show these jokes

對不起* 2我根本不想顯示這個笑話

i don't show anti-semitic imagery on my channel that's disgusting

我不會在我的頻道裡插入反猶太圖像，這令人作嘔

i'm so disappointed in you ben fritz

我對你太失望了 Ben Fritz

i didn't want to say this because it didn't feel neccessary

我不想說這些，因為我不覺得這些有多重要

but there wasn't just pressure to get my show cancelled

但這不僅讓我的實境秀被迫取消

along with other brands that i work with that they reached out to

也讓那些跟我合作的企業跟我斷絕往來

youtube also had pressure to demonetize my entire channel essentially getting me fired

YouTube也因應輿論壓力試圖將我的頻道去商業化，這等同於將我解僱

luckily my videos does not go against community guildelines

幸運的是，我的影片並不違背社群規範

so it didn't but they tried

所以沒成功，但是他們嘗試過了

so it seems only fair by wall street journal's own way of conducting themself

所以整件事看起來，如果華爾街日報認為自己政治正確

that ben fritz should get fired

那Ben Fritz應當被解僱

this whole thing has been embarrassing

這整件事情過於羞人

it's been a fiasco

這是一場慘敗

it doesn't make me happy when i find like these things out it makes me sad

當我看到這些事情的時候，我並不感到開心，我覺得難過

that this is the world we live in, where people

因為我們活在這樣的世界裡，有這種人

people make articles about people making jokes that they make themselves

人們將某人開玩笑當作新聞，然後自己再去開玩笑

trying to get their lives ruined

試圖毀了自己的一生

a thing that i saw a lot on the media was that

我想我看到不少反應，像是

because i said wall street journal did this attack on me

因為我說華爾街日報對我做出這樣的攻擊

and people just didn't believe me

然後人們都不相信我

like what does wall street journal has to gain from that or

說&quot;華爾街日報能從中獲得什麼好處&quot;或

they are such different organization like they have nothing to do with what I do

&quot;他們跟我們是完全不同的組織&quot;及&quot;他們做的事情跟我做的全無干涉&quot;

so it wouldn't make any sense

所以沒道理進行抹黑攻擊

well here's a graph showing the trust in media going down based on age

這是一張圖表，顯示媒體的信任度隨著年 齡層逐年下降

i assume that pieces like this is not helping with that

我認為像這樣的舉例還不夠說明一切

here's a graph of the newspaper ad revenue from digital and print

這個數位及實體報紙的廣告收益的圖表

showing decrease of revenue in the media

顯示媒體經濟收益的下降

oh okay so wall street is losing influence and income

哦，所以華爾街日報正在失去失去影響力和收入

hmm i wonder who's gaining that right now?

我真好奇現在是誰得到了那些好處？

so what does wall street journal has to gain from doing a piece like this on me?

所以，華爾街日報對我進行攻擊能得到什麼好處？

nothing nothing obviously

沒有，顯然沒任何好處

i mean why else would they put the article behind a pay wall, twice?

嗯，我的意思是，不然你們為什麼還要把這則新聞設為付費顯示，還來兩次？

so wall street journal is losing revenue

華爾街日報失去收入

maybe maybe i should buy the wall street journal

也許，也許我應該買下華爾街日報

actually i don't know, it seems like a failing business to me *BURN*

其實我也不知道，看起來這是個穩賠的生意。

*music*

*笑*

*laugh*

&quot;上下文很重要 Ben&quot;*笑*

'context matters ben' *laughs*

(love for poods <3)