Video description explicitly mentions a partnership (not just affiliate link) + 2min 20s segment embedded in the video.
The person in question: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Lapierre
User Lumpy_Carpet9877 shares more info:
Vincent Lapierre’s Wikipedia page is quite explicit about his far-right positioning and includes numerous sources. He worked for several years for a far-right organization founded by Alain Soral, which promotes anti-Semitic, Holocaust-denying, conspiracist, sexist, masculinist, transphobic, and homophobic ideas, and who fled to Russia to escape justice.
He is close to Dieudonné) (a Holocaust denier). He founded Le Média pour tous, a far-right website that particularly targets anti-fascists and defenders of Jewish rights. He has always been close to conspiracist circles
I’ll add that if you dare venture on his youtube channel (at the risk of ruining your suggestion algorithm like I did to provide the screenshot), you’ll see that most videos are typical far right content / talking points
Update: read Proton’s response below
You’re right to raise this, and we want to address it directly and provide you important context on how this happened.
Vincent Lapierre’s channel should never have been part of our affiliate and sponsorship program, because we intentionally avoid association with channels whose content could distract from our message and divide our community.
Proton operates globally, and while our services are available to everyone regardless of political views and our mission is consistent everywhere, our knowledge of every local media landscape is not. In this case, our team didn’t have enough context about the French space to make a well-informed decision, and that’s on us.
We also want to be straight about what a placement like this is and isn’t. An affiliate or sponsorship arrangement is a transactional placement for awareness, not an endorsement of a creator’s views. In the case of Vincent Lapierre, this was a single video sponsorship, not a partnership.
But that distinction doesn’t excuse what happened here. The responsibility to vet who we put our name next to is ours, and we didn’t meet it this time. We’re now reviewing our vetting process and our guidelines for our marketing agencies to ensure this doesn’t happen again.
If you see something like this again, tell us. We rely on your feedback and vigilance."
The majority of the time youtube sponsorships have almost no where near enough over-site into who they are sponsoring. Its commonly a shotgun approach. Hell half the time companies arn’t even doing it driectly but going though a middle man company that sends out the emails and all they have to do is sorta review it once and a while to make sure that company is doing their job.
It’s extremely obvious this is yet again another great example of that. The number of times companies have found themselves sponsoring someone they don’t agree with or would never do in any other circumstances is staggering on youtube. It’s basically a running joke at this point.
This is basically a fat fucking nothing burger beyond “yet again a company fucks up due to language barriers and poor management.” Honestly i wouldnt be half surprised if they review their process fix it and then it goes right back to being half broken in 6 weeks.
Its basically youtube sponsership 101 at this point.
oversight
Exactly. I don’t think any reasonable person can expect that a relatively small company knows and understands the ins-and-outs of every country’s political spectrum.
Especially because, like you noted, they mostly do that through third parties. And a third party might be super comfortable supporting someone like that. How often does anyone pay enough attention to call them out on it?
Yeah. Never mind last time.