In an (all too-expected) turn of events within the YouTube community, numerous high-profile YouTubers have recently begun expressing their support for Jirard the Completionist, a once revered figure in the gaming content world. This wave of solidarity to defend follows Jirard's latest video, "My Response," which has sparked diverse reactions due to its unconventional approach to addressing past controversies.
For over a decade, Jirard the Completionist has been a staple in the gaming segment of YouTube. However, his reputation faced challenges due to allegations of misusing donations intended for his Open Hand Foundation. The foundation, initially lauded for its charitable intentions, became mired in controversy over Jirard's financial decisions and alleged untruths.
Jirard's recent video, "My Response" is a striking narrative that veers away from traditional apology formats. Instead of a straightforward acknowledgment of his past missteps, Jirard's video is perceived as shifting blame to viewers and donors, while downplaying his own role in the controversy. The video, characterized by its deflection and minimization of responsibility, has added a new layer to the ongoing discourse.
Many high-profile YouTubers, some of whom are known to be close to Jirard, have publicly supported him. Their statements, ranging from empathetic to defensive, suggest a newfound willingness to speak on his behalf. This marks a significant shift from the initial silence or cautious neutrality seen earlier.
This assertion, while challenging to prove definitively, finds some grounding in the observed historical patterns and my personal insider knowledge of how some of these specific high-profile YouTubers often operate. There's a noted tendency within these digital communities for creators to form close-knit networks, where loyalty and mutual support often supersede impartiality. Critics argue that in such an environment, the truth becomes secondary to the unwritten code of protecting one's own. This behavior, they suggest, is not solely about preserving friendships but also about safeguarding the interconnected interests and public images that these content creators share. As a result, the objective truth, especially in controversies, can sometimes be overshadowed by a collective effort to maintain a united front, further complicating the discernment of fact from crafted narratives in the complex world of digital fame and influence.
For example, it speaks volumes that my response (above) to Wood Hawker (BeatEmUps on Twitter) is now on pace to ratio his reply to Jirard. Wood is nearly 100x larger than my channel. This speaks volumes for the community sentiment and just how off-base his bias is shown here.
...Or how RGT85 subtly pushed the narrative in his charity joke video that this situation is over and implies that Jirard has been subsequently absolved from any serious wrongdoing. It's kind of gross. Jirard lied. To everyone. Ignoring that reality or joking about it is legitimately abhorrent. Imagine being a person who knows someone affected by frontotemporal dementia and donating money to Jirard in good faith believing him that the money you are donating is going to directly impact a source Jirard literally mentions (University of San Francisco & more) by name in streams, only to have it sit in an account for nearly a decade, wasting away.
There are plenty of examples of high-profile, notable names in the YouTube gaming community who have taken a similar approach. Jirard did NOT show ANY receipts applicable to accusations. Simply saying he did does not make it a reality.
Jirard simply stating that he is showing receipts is not that. Nor is linking a bunch of random links unrelated to the issue within the description of his latest video. WTF does showing a document of his mother's autopsy report have ANYTHING at all to do with accusations from Muta and Karl discussing mismatched funds and lies regarding the funds getting donated?
A few YouTube viewers have remained divided in the comment section of my videos covering this story. While some fans echo the supportive sentiments of the high-profile creators, most express disappointment and frustration at what they perceive as an evasion of accountability. The comments sections and social media platforms are abuzz with debates and discussions, reflecting the complexity of public opinion.
This situation sheds light on the dynamics of the YouTube community, particularly regarding loyalty and reputation management. It raises questions about the responsibilities of content creators, especially those in influential positions. Jirard's approach in the video also sparks discussions about the effectiveness and ethics of shifting blame in public apologies.
The unfolding events around Jirard the Completionist's response to his foundation's controversy and the subsequent reaction of the YouTube community highlight an intriguing aspect of digital culture. Many choose sides based on who they like or are entertained most by, as opposed to taking the time to do the research on readily available information and come to their own conclusion (read: Sheeple). Many long-time viewers don't want Jirard to be guilty or "Be the Bad Guy" because he plays such a 'nice guy' character on YouTube. As the narrative continues to evolve, it underscores the nuanced relationship between public figures and their audiences in the digital age. Jirard's "apology" video is not a 'sorry for lying' style video. It's a 'sorry I got caught'.
One thing's for sure. No matter how much these big guys try to push the narrative that this situation is over and Jirard has been subsequently absolved, the reality is anything but. In the eyes of the law, they don't care about silly YouTube high school popularity contests.