General Discussion

(and, no, I'm not going to bother to 'research' the little weasel)
But I would hazard a guess, just based on what else we see, that this 'influencer' (like most) is primary funded by the general public. (as opposed to 'businesses' and 'corporations, or 'foreign agents', etc. ) In other words, it's our own dumb assed selves ... Feverishly poking at those icons - hoovering up that content! (regardless how - and sometimes in preference of - how sh*tty it might be ..) That is giving this Kirk wannabee his approval (and whatever monetary awards are accrued) And it is this human metric - not some dirty dark cabal - with evil overlords ... Musk, Putins, Theils, Trumps ... That is enabling and financing.

The next level of that argument is of course the 'platforms'. But, there too, is that really a road we want to go down? People can't make this kind of content? Post it? People can't watch? As example - right here on DU - we're pretty insistent on a 'right' to a certain amount of amateur, poorly sourced, click-bait content. With the general reaction there, "If you don't like it, don't watch .. " So ... We don't want to make any such 'call' ...