omebody with audio without their permission. In my state it is. It's different I think different places.

So that's the first thing you need to know. So the Daily Wire has played this so far professionally and I got to give them credit for that.

Now here's what Crowder should have done or could have done if he had more experience and wanted to solve this. He could have said to them look I totally understand that if we have a deal where we're both doing something to make money and if I do something that makes you not have money that needs to be dealt with somehow because otherwise why would the Daily Wire make a deal when they didn't without protecting the thing that's their biggest risk. Here's how they do it. It's a very typical contract problem. Stephen Crowder could counter with this. How about we share the subscription revenue and I just keep all of the YouTube revenue and then it's my problem if they demonetize me but we'll have a much smaller dollar amount and we'll just share the subscription money so that the Daily Wire will never ever be in a position where even accidentally they're on the side of the censors because that's where the subscription gets you. People just pay it no matter what. That would be the counteroffer. I've made those counteroffers before. It's very standard business.

Now you might say but why did the Daily Wire offer that in the first place? To which I say that's not the way it works. No they make the offer that's good for them the Daily Wire and they make it close enough to something that's good for the other person that when they negotiate you know they're not too far off and you could go back and forth. So Crowder could have easily said how about way less money but I'll have full control to say what I want and if I get demonetized it only affects me. Now they might not have gone for that offer but that's the offer.

But in every case it's only about the money. It's only about the money because the money is what causes the censorship. So to say it's about the censorship is honestly that seems disingenuous. Like I don't even know what to think about that.

Jared says wow Scott you completely missed Stefan's point. I bet I don't. His point is that the Daily Wire would be colluding in this in the censorship accidentally but colluding with the big tech companies to censor him. Isn't that the point? Right do you, I'm just saying did I really miss the point? I don't think I did. I think you missed the first part where I described his point in detail. So how do I do a deal like this? Same way. Same way. So when I do a deal with a publisher do you think the publisher says I'll give you millions of dollars no matter what you do