It sounds like you close your eyes there on one front.
Your explanation during the end seems to try to portray said audience member in defense of said penalist.
Yet your description fits perfectly well for both sides. Said penalist (no idea why we don’t name them) uses planned rhethorics in their videos, misleads and misrepresents and creates just the same mob-mentality.
By apologising and trying to “de-escalate” uni-directional, you are doing a disservice to the general way in which people talk to each other. Criticism seems to become more and more a No-Go. I trust the Green brothers to understand that criticism is one of the most important factors of development (in any area). And your panel guest seems to be impervious to it.
“Maybe that is especially true when creators have built a fan base with the kind of inflammatory rhetoric and audience development strategies that can potentially turn their followers into more than just trolls. We are all watching as those techniques wear at the fabric of not just internet culture, but our whole world.”
Very well written but completely forgot that this perfectly fits both said penalist as well as said audience member.
To re-iterate: I do understand that the problems you describe exist and that videos by said audience member may well have been a catalyst for bullying.
But your panelist’s videos do just as much harm to a fruitful conversation about the topics at hand and created just as much of a mindless mob when viewd from a bird’s eye. (imho)