I saw something last week that made me genuinely nostalgic for a simpler time on the internet. A channel with 25 million subscribers - twenty five million - left a comment thread so petty and defensive that it felt like watching a teenager argue with their mum about bedtime.

It was WatchMojo, if you're curious. The channel famous for listicles and countdowns. Someone made a video criticising their content, and instead of ignoring it - as any sensible channel with 25 million subs would - they waded in personally. Aggressively. And then admitted they hadn't even watched the video they were complaining about.

I had to sit down.

Remember when having a tick meant something?

Back in the day - and I know how old I sound saying this - a verified badge actually meant something. It meant you'd earned it. You'd hit some threshold of relevance, and with that came a certain unspoken dignity. You didn't need to fight every critic. You were above it.

Now? Anyone with a few thousand followers and a pulse can get verified. But worse than that, the behaviour hasn't scaled up with the numbers. You'd think someone with 25 million subscribers would have a PR person, a social media manager, someone - anyone - to say "maybe don't respond to the 500-view criticism video, mate."

Apparently not.

The weird psychology of big channels

I've always found it fascinating how the most successful creators often have the thinnest skin. My mate runs a small channel - maybe 12,000 subscribers - and he gets the occasional nasty comment. He just deletes and moves on. Doesn't even think about it.

But the big ones? The ones with millions? They seem to absorb every single piece of criticism like a sponge. I'm not entirely sure why. Maybe when you're that successful, you've got more to lose. Maybe you've convinced yourself your content is untouchable, so any dissent feels like a personal attack.

Or maybe - and this is my cynical take - some of them know exactly what they're producing, and that makes the criticism sting more.

Because let's be honest. A lot of these massive channels aren't making art. They're making slop. Factory-produced content designed to maximise watch time. And when someone points that out, it's harder to shrug off when you secretly agree with them.

The irony of the aggressive reply

Here's the bit that really got me. In the comment, the WatchMojo person admitted they hadn't even watched the video they were responding to. They just saw the title, got angry, and fired off a reply.

So. Not only did they engage with criticism they should have ignored, but they did it without even doing the bare minimum of knowing what they were responding to.

That's not defending your brand. That's not engaging with your audience. That's ego. Pure, unfiltered, 25-million-subscriber ego.

I remember when being a big creator meant you had a certain grace. You took the hits, you kept making your stuff, and you let the work speak for itself. Now it feels like everyone's got a hair trigger and a chip on their shoulder.

Anyway, back to the point. If I were running a channel that size, I'd probably have a boilerplate response saved. Something boring and professional like "Thanks for the feedback, we're always looking to improve." But apparently that's too much to ask.

Maybe the lesson here is simple. If you've got millions of subscribers, you can afford to be the bigger person. If you can't resist arguing with strangers on the internet, maybe step away from the keyboard for a while. Or at the very least, watch the video before you complain about it.

That's not too much to ask. Is it?