re: Phil's content
SquishPhan wrote: Also I really don’t see why people are talking about them (or Phil in this case) becoming irrelevant. His latest vid already has 750.000+ views in about 18 hours. I don’t see anything to get worried about.
Firstly, I would just like to say I liked the taking quizzes topic I thought it sounded fun But then I’m a Dan fan so I don’t know what that tells you.
But to address the topic seriously:
There is nothing damn wrong with Phil’s content. Phil is killing it, he’s at the top of his game. He raking in the views and the cash at alarming rates. Rates that truly boggle my mind. I think plenty of people love his content – otherwise he wouldn't be where he is today.
Also, I don’t like this assumption that some kinds of media are more ‘worthy’ than other kinds of media. What I’m trying to say is: liking a vloggy video that makes you smile is not mindless. It is not ‘worse’ than enjoying the most experimental art film. People like different things, people should be able to consume whatever they want to consume. No matter how ‘arty’ or ‘mindless’ the media is it’s all for the same purpose – to entertain. If you are entertained, what’s the problem? If you’re not turn it off. I quite often do this with AP videos. It’s not a diss. It’s not that there is anything wrong with Phil’s content, I just prefer my humor drier and dirtier and a little more sarcastic.
I’m not going to offer any criticisms for this reason. I recognize that the reason I sometimes don’t like Phil’s content is because I want it to be like Dan’s content – it just isn’t my cup of tea. Which is fine, people like different things.
Having said that if people who are usually fans of Phil's content have constructive criticism for him, then I think that is perfectly valid and should be helpful to Phil. Also if Phil isn't happy making his current content and isn't challenging himself then that's a problem. But if 'danosaurs' are going to complain that they don't like Phil's content because they fundamentally want him to just be Dan then I don't really see the point I can't say I've read much of that on here though
kuensukki wrote: It surely helped Dan because people applaud him for how far he's come yet we don't do the same for Phil even though he's come a long way. He started off this awkward white kid trying to find acceptance in his peers and look how far he's come now. His change was more in 2012 and even now he's a different man then he was in the past. He has become more confident then he used to be. He was scared at calling a hairdresser and now he's performing on stage and slowly putting himself more out there yet we never discuss how far he's come.
This is a good point
re: ermm... babies
If Phan adopted a baby yes that would be good for their popularity. If Dan or Phil had/adopted a baby with another partner – shitstorm, unending shitstorm.
re: is the Phandom out of control
I would do a point by point rebuke of the second one but I feel like I would get people come at me with pitchforks if I bring up Dan’s nails again, so for now I will settle for politely agreeing with this:
fancybum wrote: I want to take all of that bullshit down piece by piece but dammit I'm busy today and also just rolling my eyes is more than it deserves anyway. All of that's already been talked to death around here.
Is the phandom too out of control? No – some individuals
in the phandom are out of control. Just like some individuals in every subgroup you can think of will always be ‘out of control’. Out of control individuals in fandoms/subgroups are not a new thing. The phandom did not invent this, nor does it have a monopoly of it. Unfortunately the phandom is stereotypically perceived as a bunch of girls, and therefore is stereotypically associated with all the negatives historically attributed to them – crazy, hysterical, neurotic, overly-emotional. Whatever you want to call it it’s a stereotype. I’m not saying there aren’t people like that in the phandom – there are a lot of them. I’m just saying they are individuals and shouldn’t define us as a group. The Phandom is not out of control because we are not some giant one headed overly-emotional hysterical beast. Some individuals in the phandom are stalkers, and cross the line. Regarding the second tumblr post: putting people who spam an online chat about nail polish in the same category as people who 'actually stalk' them is flawed because these are very different things. I think it’s Bad that some individuals go and see them at airports, I think it’s Bad that some individuals force them into a marriage proposal stance at M&Gs. But they are individuals, it is not ‘the phandom’ that is out of control, just those specific people.
Disclaimer: Everything I've written is just my own personal opinion, and I'm aware others disagree and I enjoy reading counterarguments. What I mean is, if you disagree that's fine too because none of it is meant to be taken personally
Thank you
Ticia for the video, I have never seen that part before for some reason. Yes I agree with you that could be part of in the incoming 'hitting of the fan' - good thinking.
I liked your post, very insightful. I agree that it's a huge achievement to stay relevant and successful on Youtube for that long. I'm happy for him 
I think YT Red is the beginning of this and it ames me kinda grumpy, but at least its still accessible and next to their other content and on the internet.