Blake Cousins (Twins Who Shall Not Be Named -- TWSNBN)

[Christopher O'Brien]

Maybe he is hoping the UFO channel will get them real paid production work. If that happens -- and remember this is supposedly their full time job -- this channel will vanish in the haze. Hey, that would be a good thing!

No Gene, I don't think he's interested in production work. His massive ego is (to me) obviously on display in every stand-up he does. He's buck'in for his own "credible," mainstream channel show. Every video and doc he hosts is an audition. Isn't it obvious? He probably spends more time in front of the mirror than his wife/GF, I hope he's reading all these posts. Maybe he'll get the message and finally do the right thing and become a part of the solution, etc,

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Well, he's a little over the hill as young filmmakers go. Maybe this is his last hurrah!

 

[Randall]

The clip that follows is supposedly from Mrytle Beach and is supposed to show what is being referred to as "UFO Sightings Cloaking Technology Exposed Brilliant Military Disguise (sic)." Not sure what that means...
So, what do you all think? Looks pretty innocuous and mundane to me.

Get the Word out! Have your "Experts" take a closer look...CGI? I dont think so...See what you can do with the footage... let me know...Thanks

I'm no video expert, but neither do I have to be. These are blurry blinking lights at night off in the distance in the vicinity of an airport that appear to belong to some kind of aircraft. The video even bills it as "Military Cloaking Technology". Therefore this video doesn't even qualify as a UFO report in the first place and consequently it wouldn't qualify for a rating on any scale for UFO reports. It would simply be classed as an "Unknown Aircraft".

Quote From Air Force Regulation 200-2 Section 2.​

​

(1) Flying objects determined to be aircraft. These generally appear as a result of ADIZ​

violations and often prompt the UFO reports submitted by the general public. They are​

readily identifiable as, or known to be, aircraft, but their type, purpose, origin, and​

destination are unknown. Air Defense Command is responsible for reports of​

"unknown" aircraft and they should not be reported as UFO's under this regulation. ​

(2) Aircraft flares, jet exhausts, condensation trails, blinking or steady lights observed at night, ​

lights circling or near airports and airways, and other similar phenomena resulting from, ​

or indications of aircraft. These should not be reported under this regulation as they do not​

fall within the definition of a UFO.​

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

From the "I knew it was too good to be true" Department:
[the only thing missing from his last response is the whiny tone that must have accompanied his trembling fingers—chris]

Blake Cousins replied:

Your a jerk off DUDE~ I will not talk to you every again! BYE...Your a Troll and no help at all~


Christopher O'Brien responded:

My job? You make me lol. YOU are the one breathlessly trumpeting his footage to the masses. I have nothing to do with it. It's YOUR job to have Joe do the follow-up. Did he report his sighting to FL MUFON? Did he contact Peter Davenport at the Nat UFO Reporting Center? As the one who is pandering to the great uninformed, eager masses, you have a responsibility to have your video submitters properly back-up their claims. Nice try, but you can't put the onus on me, PT. lol. You keep us updated after you've put in place some simple guidelines for your eager, aspiring investigators to follow. If you need help with this, let us know and also let me know when you have some quality, uncompressed video to analyze.​

lol Chris ​

​

Blake Cousins:​

​

very Simple DUDE! Contact Joe and ask him for the footage, and do your JOB! I gave you a contact now go with it...Keep us updated..​

 

[Burnt State]

I'd like to return to the suggestion of another poster in this thread - spend more time turning up the signal to blot out the noise. All the back-slapping and congratulations of slamming the obvious hoaxer/moneymaker/carnival barker only delays progress. This is symptomatic of the Waiting For Godot approach of Ufology.

It can't be just about pointing out the simple frauds. Where's the direction? Can someone point out the signpost that actually goes somewhere? That's really the meaningful part behind this thread isn't it?

 

[RobDel]

Blake Cousins replied:

Your a jerk off DUDE~ I will not talk to you every again! BYE...Your a Troll and no help at all~

lol, there's a typo in each sentence. And I would hyphenate jerk-off. This was more entertaining than anything on his website.

 

[Muadib]

I have to admit this whole thing has gotten me interested in how much money they could possibly be making off of these quite clearly fake videos. I wonder if there are any Paracasters with Youtube experience who could shed some light on the subject. I know that the people who do this type of thing for a living regularly post up videos that get views in the multiple millions, looking at their channel, they have a few that have broken this mark, but most are from a year to two years ago. He can't be making that much money from this and if he's not interested in possibly landing a gig doing production, you have to wonder what the hell the point is? He certainly isn't making himself any friends among serious UFO researchers. My point is, I really don't see this going anywhere for him, unless the profit he's making off of posting Youtube vids is enough for him to live on, I have to wonder where he thinks this is going to get him.

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

... Can someone point out the signpost that actually goes somewhere? ...

"Ball's in his court" I think sums it up nicely. Or the 'ol adage: "You can lead a horse to water, tell it a joke, but you ain't gonna make him take a dump..." Or something like that... Look: it's actually fairly simple Burnt-one: He can get himself up2speed and do it right, or he won't. He can learn, grow and be open and receptive to good advise, or he won't. Frankly, IMO, in Blake's case, I think he's too busy posing and preening to actually take the time and turn a fairly good idea into something great—something useful and truly visionary. Rather, he choses to provide contrived drama, crappy "royalty-free" grooves, hoaxes and hyperbole — a bunch of noise—that may be obscuring some really fine signal. Oh well... next?

 

[pickles]

per say

Don't have an English program there either evidently.

 

[Burnt State]

"Ball's in his court" I think sums it up nicely. Or the 'ol adage: "You can lead a horse to water, tell it a joke, but you ain't gonna make him take a dump..." Or something like that... Look: it's actually fairly simple Burnt-one: He can get himself up2speed and do it right, or he won't. He can learn, grow and be open and receptive to good advise, or he won't. Frankly, IMO, in Blake's case, I think he's too busy posing and preening to actually take the time and turn a fairly good idea into something great—something useful and truly visionary. Rather, he choses to provide contrived drama, crappy "royalty-free" grooves, hoaxes and hyperbole — a bunch of noise—that may be obscuring some really fine signal. Oh well... next?

What I'm trying to say is that Cousins and his ilk are as irrelevant as those who participate in the lowest common denominator I'll-believe-in-any-kooklaid-you-give-me-to-drink aproach to Ufology. Talking more about them is time wasting. The bigger question is, where exactly is the signal?

So while he's pedaling crap where's the direction Ufology is heading in besides in circes within circles within...

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

...The bigger question is, where exactly is the signal?...

I'll bet, if someone who knows what to look for managed to slog through the morass of crap videos on TPOTM, I'll betcha there are some real gems there nestled in those 600+ posts. I like sushi. Blake is like a fisherman w/ a net who probably wouldn't know a keeper, sushi-grade fish if he caught one. Sure, there's a lot of bullheads, suckers and crap fish to be tossed from his net, but every so often he may have caught a tuna or a yellowtail. Finding one or two or three would be worth the trouble and be possibly tasty and important... umm, could you pass the wasabi?

 

[Burnt State]

I like sushi.

I think we all like the sushi, the more raw and thick (especially with some wasabi and pickled ginger on top), the better. I, myself, prefer hamachi but the most I'm going to find over at TPOM is some uni ( and it will be spelled wrong even though it only has three letters). Some might prefer the sea urchin; I think it looks and smells pretty bad - I guess that counts me out as a connoisseur. But, I'm not looking there for direction; I'm looking here at this moment.

 

[Infolad1]

I have to admit this whole thing has gotten me interested in how much money they could possibly be making off of these quite clearly fake videos. I wonder if there are any Paracasters with Youtube experience who could shed some light on the subject. I know that the people who do this type of thing for a living regularly post up videos that get views in the multiple millions, looking at their channel, they have a few that have broken this mark, but most are from a year to two years ago. He can't be making that much money from this and if he's not interested in possibly landing a gig doing production, you have to wonder what the hell the point is? He certainly isn't making himself any friends among serious UFO researchers. My point is, I really don't see this going anywhere for him, unless the profit he's making off of posting Youtube vids is enough for him to live on, I have to wonder where he thinks this is going to get him.

I can go into a more detailed explanation later, but this is it in a nutshell. How much he makes depends on a number of different factors. Is he independent, or
part of a network? Networks like Machinima and Maker can take upwards of 50% of ad revenue. Are the video views on desktop or mobile? mobile revenue at present is tiny relevant to desktop, but growing rapidly.

Revenue is measured in CPMs (cost per thousand) and RPMs (revenue per thousand). Think of RPM like net profit, after everyone gets their cut.

Approximate average RPM is around $3.00, although this average is currently declining, due to Youtube opening video monetization up to anyone.

Just as an example, let's say the Cousins are getting a $5.00 RPM, due to their channels popularity (it could be as high as $10.00 RPM for the most popular networks).

The "UFO Sightings Sea Monsters Enhanced Footage and Analyses!" video has 2,164,451 views. At a $5.00 RPM, that comes to $10,822.00
(2,164,451/1000 = 2,164.40 x $5.00 = $10,822.00).

Then we estimate that only 70% of RPM is being counted. These are for desktop views, which as I said earlier are more lucrative at present than mobile views.
This would bring total approx. revenue for this one video to $7,575.40 ($10,822.00 x 70% = $7,575.40)

It could be lower. it could be higher (YouTube and their top content producers tend to keep the details to themselves for competitive reasons).

Now multiply the number of video he has that has these many views (I saw 7 at a quick glance) times $7,575.40, and you get $53,027.80 aggregate revenues
over the time of these videos release.

This is why it's of utmost importance that they keep feeding the beast that they've created. New content equals new views, equals new revenue.

With 1.23 Billion views for "Gangnam Style", Psy's cut of YouTube ad dollars was roughly $870,000.

The 58-second viral "Charlie Bit My Finger" made its creators around $158,560.

Blake told us all what he was about from the get go. "Is it interesting?" "Is it controversial?" His language is Viral Video 101. He's actually very good at it.

Hopefully this gives everyone a good idea about what's his primary motivation. And with that kind of relatively passive income at stake, who can really blame him.
C2C does it, Project Camelot does. Why not? He's telling us by his actions and words that he's the 21st century version of a tabloid newspaper, but without the
overhead. (Print returns were a killer). Chris's P.T. Barnum monicker for him is more than apt.

I say relatively passive, because it's fairly obvious that they're producing a lot of their own content. As the Star Wars fan film article illustrates, they know their way
around After Effects. They probably hang out on Creative Cow's site, checking out the latest VFX tutorials. It's actually quite genius. You never have to worry about
not getting new "sightings".

And as the young kids say these days, don't be a hater. I would strongly suggest to Gene and Chris, that you guys setup a YouTube channel as counter-programming.
done right, it would not only inform, but also establish a decent revenue stream (rent's got to be paid folks

 

[Infolad1]

"Let the people decide"? Seriously?

There's a reason why we have a republic in the US, and not a pure democracy.

Time for some Wiki-Fu:

Democracy vs Republic

The key difference between a democracy and a republic lies in the limits placed on government by the law, which has implications on minority rights. Both forms of government tend to use a representational system where citizens vote to elect politicians to represent their interests and form the government. However, in a republic, a constitution or charter of rights protects certain inalienable rights that cannot be taken away by the government, even if it has been elected by a majority of voters. In a "pure" democracy, the majority is not restrained and can impose its will on the minority.

The various forms of government can be briefly summarized as:

Monarchy or dictatorship: Rule by one (a king or emperor)
Oligarchy: Rule by a few
Democracy: Rule by a majority
Republic: Rule by law

Democracy Etymology:
from Greek demokratia "popular government," from demos "common people," originally "district" (see demotic), + kratos "rule, strength" (see -cracy).

Mob Etymology:
Slang shortening of mobile, mobility "common people, populace, rabble" (1670s, probably with a conscious play on nobility), from Latin mobile vulgus "fickle common people" (the phrase attested c.1600 in English)

So basically a pure democracy is mob rule.

Good luck with that Blake. Hopefully they don't turn on you. Crowds are fickle that way

 

[Infolad1]

And last thing (I've GOT to go to bed!)

Goggs, you knocked it out the park Sir. Unlike Fox News, actual fair and balanced commentary (although to be fair to Fox, they did a great job pointing out to Karl Rove his various errors live on election night. Check out his meltdown on Youtube. Hilarious).

I could definitely see you as a regular contributor. Kudos

 

[Randall]

... Blake told us all what he was about from the get go. "Is it interesting?" "Is it controversial?" His language is Viral Video 101. He's actually very good at it ...

Thanks Info for all that info. Excellent post. And it affirms that we're dealing with the issue of profit vs principle. The problem with trying to counter it with a debunking channel is that in order to focus on what needs to be debunked we'd inadvertently be giving it more exposure. The most logical course of action is to convince Cousins that being more responsible will add to his ratings rather than detract from them. Shallow sensationalist content wears thin really fast. If he wants staying power, he needs to refine his approach now before it's too late. It's not a bottomless market. There's no harm in posting the kinds of videos that he does. What's needed is the proper cataloging and rating of them. At first he might see a drop in his ratings, but I suspect that just like after they made the restaurants and bars here go non-smoking, the business dropped off, and then bounced back even harder ... and with cleaner air. On the other hand, if he doesn't do it, then his reputation is going to head the way of Ray Santilli ... but maybe that's what he wants ... who knows?

 

[Muadib]

I can go into a more detailed explanation later, but this is it in a nutshell. How much he makes depends on a number of different factors. Is he independent, or
part of a network? Networks like Machinima and Maker can take upwards of 50% of ad revenue. Are the video views on desktop or mobile? mobile revenue at present is tiny relevant to desktop, but growing rapidly.

Revenue is measured in CPMs (cost per thousand) and RPMs (revenue per thousand). Think of RPM like net profit, after everyone gets their cut.

Approximate average RPM is around $3.00, although this average is currently declining, due to Youtube opening video monetization up to anyone.

Just as an example, let's say the Cousins are getting a $5.00 RPM, due to their channels popularity (it could be as high as $10.00 RPM for the most popular networks).

The "UFO Sightings Sea Monsters Enhanced Footage and Analyses!" video has 2,164,451 views. At a $5.00 RPM, that comes to $10,822.00
(2,164,451/1000 = 2,164.40 x $5.00 = $10,822.00).

Then we estimate that only 70% of RPM is being counted. These are for desktop views, which as I said earlier are more lucrative at present than mobile views.
This would bring total approx. revenue for this one video to $7,575.40 ($10,822.00 x 70% = $7,575.40)

It could be lower. it could be higher (YouTube and their top content producers tend to keep the details to themselves for competitive reasons).

Now multiply the number of video he has that has these many views (I saw 7 at a quick glance) times $7,575.40, and you get $53,027.80 aggregate revenues
over the time of these videos release.

This is why it's of utmost importance that they keep feeding the beast that they've created. New content equals new views, equals new revenue.

With 1.23 Billion views for "Gangnam Style", Psy's cut of YouTube ad dollars was roughly $870,000.

The 58-second viral "Charlie Bit My Finger" made its creators around $158,560.

Blake told us all what he was about from the get go. "Is it interesting?" "Is it controversial?" His language is Viral Video 101. He's actually very good at it.

Hopefully this gives everyone a good idea about what's his primary motivation. And with that kind of relatively passive income at stake, who can really blame him.

Great breakdown, thanks for posting it. Now it becomes a lot easier to see why he's so reluctant to change anything, after all, if it ain't broke, don't fix it, and as you said that kind of passive income is nothing to sneeze at. There's literally no motivation for him to implement any kind of rating system or do anything but keep presenting the videos as he's been presenting them, until, as Ufology pointed out, his views start to drop. Once people get tired of the sensationalism, he may try to turn the whole thing around, but I wouldn't count on him doing anything until he reaches that point. Once he get's there, I'd bet on it being too late, the internet is extraordinarily fickle and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see TPOM wind up in the dumpster bin of internet fad history in a couple of years, especially since they aren't providing anything of real value, just some silly videos to laugh at when you have spare time. As time goes on, shock value wanes and at some point it won't be funny or interesting anymore, and his views will disappear.

It also becomes easier to see why people like Rich Dolan and Stanton Friedman would get involved with him, there's plenty of money to go around and as you said the rent must be paid. However, a good reputation in this field is hard to earn and harder to maintain, I'd say that in the long run, being involved with this guy will do more harm than good for their respective careers.

 

[Smoking Man]

So I haven't posted here yet despite how long I have been a member, but i listen to the show pretty faithfully these days, and that's even with my....mixed feelings about the times past on this podcast with a certain other host . That being said, I have come to like Chris's no BS kind of approach. I'm 28 and have loosely been studying the subject for the majority of my life now off and on and have privately talked for hours with many well known personalities in the field, often asking hard questions that I have never seen posted anywhere. I have also dabbled in internet marketing for a few years, and what is abundantly clear, is this guy is about growing his community for commercial purposes and adviews, simple. Chris and Gene smelled the bullshit early on and called him out, and they were right too.

The internet is a tool that cuts both ways. I'll give you guys an example. I really enjoy watching Japanese animation, otherwise known as "anime". Many fans over the years have translated shows from japan that never got commercial releases in the U.S. and so people watch these very well done fan translated shows. Well, there were (and are now literally hundreds) of illegal streaming sites setup to show this content and profit from it through ads, be them ads that make them money via clicks they get, or simply through how many "views" the ad gets.

One such site, that was in on the ground floor of streaming anime early on, showed both illegal copyrighted stuff AND the the fan translated stuff (which still should not be profited from). The anime fan base is rabid and large, and they quickly pimped out this site on social media and what have you. These folks visiting this kind of site weren't interested in purchasing or supporting anime, which is struggling, nor were they interested in the art form or anything beyond surface level entertainment (which is what anime is to be fair, but there are deeper levels to it). This site is called crunchyroll, and it is now one of the premier streaming sites for legal and legitimate anime. The parlayed there illegal activities which *got them* there fan base into a legit operation, which to me is shameful. Even if 3rd phase COULD be changed for the good, these folks don't deserve it.

The cold hard reality is, if they *did* the proper vetting and were really hardcore about truth and sharing information? It would be a dud of a channel, and a business. Entertainment sells, information does not, especially truthful straightforward information. If truth mattered, then the 1700+ architects and engineers for 9/11 truth would probably get a bit more play, as these are serious as a heart attack professionals trying to simply say hey "the official story isn't true" and leaving it at that, just like serious UFO types say "hey, this is a real physical phenomena, and it needs more credible research".

I say with a heavy heart that I do not think the "masses" are interested in truth. If they were, they would not be eating garbage processed food made of GMO's and 100's of pesticides. There are vocal minorities in all endeavors in truth, but they are just that, minorities. However, Like Chris and Gene, and I suspect many here, I believe that "truth matters", it has to. Often the pursuit of truth and profit don't mix, and the most honest brokers of information, invention, and truth seeking do so on a shoestring budget with real sacrifices to there personal and professional lives. I am almost universally suspicious of anyone who makes a solid living from the pursuit of "truth" outside some well funded scientific arenas. I say this because science is not "just done", it has to be funded, and the powers that be, who often do not want truth known, be them corporate or government (as if there is a big difference anymore), are the ones doing 90% of the funding.

Chris and Gene are right to call a spade a spade. I have debated throwing my own hat into this arena, as I have a wonderful woman who supports me financially where she can (which isn't much), but frankly the whole truth/alternative community tends to eat its own, and they are often infiltrated too. Plus she has seen the immense levels of bullshit you bring into your life by pursuing the UFO subject among others, including interest from possibly the very phenomena one is pursuing, which is something she doesn't want in her life, and understandably so. I have become very friendly with Rich Dolan privately, and he encouraged me to enter into the field because he doesn't see enough eloquent, young, and intellectually honest people pursuing UFO's or truth in general, and while I don't agree with his overtly generous but welcome assessment of me, I do understand where he's coming from.

This is a hard road we walk, this pursuit of truth. But one thing I do know that's very easy? Is too repost a bunch of shit people send in to you for free. User generated content is a lucrative business because you don't have to make it yourself . The sad fact is, he is going to continue to do well, and the folks doing the honest to goodness, and often boring and tedious work, will continue to struggle in every conceivable way. I hope that at some point, I and others like myself can do our part in helping good folks like Chris, Grant Cameron, Rich Dolan (yes I know his, is a more commercial endeavor), and others.

Keep up the good work Chris.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Blake Cousins replied:

Your a jerk off DUDE~ I will not talk to you every again! BYE...Your a Troll and no help at all~

And that, as they say, is that.

 

[mikeclr]

Wow. I just finished listening to this episode. I think everything that can be said has been said but I will add this, I think Gene is right about what Blake's egotistical dream job is. He clearly is trying to be something along the lines of Robert Stack in the old Unexplained Mysteries as shown by his constant use of phrasing like, "We here...at Thirdphaseofmoon...". Unfortunately he is no Robert Stack. He isn't even the guy on the public access channel at 3am. Blake should seriously considering enrolling in a broadcasting school or working on his Bachelors in Communications if he has any hope of becoming a real broadcast journalist or personality. Having a BA in Communications myself and having worked in both local TV and radio my objective analysis of his broadcast journalism skills is simple...THEY SUCK OUT LOUD. Ye Gods, he is freakin' awful. Painful!

N' the idea that anyone with even a bare interest in the subject of UFOs has never heard of Chris? Please!