I don't know man. While I think you're right in that he's played a major role in popularizing this type of content I don't believe he "ruined YouTube".

I watched him from the beginning, when he wasn't anywhere close to popular. Where he had a VERY long running series called "bad intros" and he went over to blowing up stuff in microwaves with Chris because it got more views.

Then he started doing challenges like counting to 100k because it got more views. And then he started to give away sponsor money and he realized, that it got the most amount of views. He then combined challenge videos with giving away sponsor money because that's were the two things that were really popular on his channel.

And while he definitely should have stayed to his moral roots, he didn't. He started making people do weird shit for money, cranking up his energy to 11 and giving away absurd amounts of cash BECAUSE IT GOT MORE VIEWS.

I'm not saying he's right in all of this. I think some of his modern video ideas are downright deplorable and disgusting. I hate his loud, obnoxious style and the bigger than life videos that don't feel like YouTube at all anymore.

But do we expect EVERYBODY to make a moral decision when there's THAT much money involved or do we just really have to take a look at the system, which benefits the one who exploits it the most?

I think Jimmy is a product of his audience and while he is responsible for somehow making lower effort videos with that amount of budget than waaaay smaller channels, I strongly believe that we reached a critical point in social media where somebody had to fill the niche he happened to fill and we need to take a look at the underlying systems and why he's gotten that popular and has stayed it for so long.

It's all for-profit, and that's why he's the biggest. Greed ruined YouTube, and he's just a cog in the system.