>>502 This is an over-simplification of those two situations that I can't let go without comment, even though you are being sarcastic. If these were accurate summations of Tayto and his GG speech, then our criticism of him wouldn't have been warranted, and we would indeed be the toxics were are often accused of being.

While I most certainly don't speak for all, for most on this board (please correct me if I'm wrong) the problem with both EO and Tayto was the hypocrisy. We'd been told: his private life was just that - private, relationships were sacred, family was the most important part of his life, yet those two relationships (one probably real or the other most certainly not) were used for PR purposes, his family was used for PR purposes. Then he had the temerity to suggest that the public nature of Tayto was due to people with cameraphones. We're all prone to hypocrisy but TH hit it out of the park in these instances.

The GG speech wasn't misunderstood; it was miscalculated. There's a difference. Remember that TH's agents had just recently formed a partnership with Unicef or a charity agency of some sort (I can't remember). That speech was a lite tie-in in which he spoke about himself and the popularity of his tv show more than he spoke about the actual work aid agencies are doing. It wasn't a white savior speech, but it was virtue signalling of the worst sort.

No, he's not assaulted or harassed anyone. No, he's not killed anyone: the arguments that nannies make as excuses for his behavior. But that doesn't mean he hasn't been a lying, attention-seeking shit that's due criticism when earned.