I don’t think it’s that simple. Heinous allegations can make that business relationship untenable. YouTube has an image to protect as well as other partnerships to maintain. There are people (not just wealthy executives) whose livelihood relies on those things,.
If a person’s reputation, fair or not, creates a risk to those things, why should YouTube be forced to assume that risk on their behalf?
Slotos@feddit.nl 1 year ago
Bullshit. If they wanted to cut ties and protect their image, they could block the channel and wash their hands.
This here is pure profiteering.
Lmaydev@programming.dev 1 year ago
Profiteering by a mega corporation, say it ain’t so!!