Jack Doherty signed a gambling contract and now can’t post on social media

[tread93]

Hey guys,

What do you think about this? I find it kind of funny honestly. Apparently the CEO said it’s the best money he ever spend to shut this mf up hahahaha.

I recognized him but didn’t follow Jack and I wasn’t really familiar with his internet activity before I read this headline today. Usually social media users who are asked to sign a contract with a gambling website are signed for the sole purpose of creating content and promoting the gambling website.

Jack has done those similar videos we have all seen for stake or rainbet or whatever gambling site it is where they do a live bet or a video of a bet in some place or while they are doing some everyday thing. This type of content is universal with crypto casinos nowadays.

What I think is pure genius though from the CEO’s standpoint is that he pretty much made the greatest campaign ever for their online casino by doing the exact opposite of what the other casinos do because it was so controversial and drama rich, right? Just from all the social media posts from this so called “ban” that was written into the contract.

I think it’s all a set up, and a good one at that. They knew the internet was going to eat this shit up and that they would get way more publicity for a stunt like this and even so much as the CEO taking the stance he did on some rich YouTuber 21 year old, people love it.

What do you guys think?

[Julien_Olynpic]

As far as I understand, this refers to the well-known American video blogger Jack Doherty, who was indeed banned from online activity due to the terms of his sponsorship agreement.

On the other hand, many analysts believe this is a good marketing ploy. Apparently, Jack Doherty hasn't done anything bad to Shuffle Casino, and the casino's representatives have no need to seek revenge against the blogger. Most likely, this is simply a viral marketing scheme involving a controversial blogger, who was allegedly forced to sign an unfavorable contract that sparked the alleged scandal. I'd say this is very creative advertising for both the casino and the blogger. Fake scandals are a good way to go viral.

[stadus]

On the other hand, many analysts believe this is a good marketing ploy. Apparently, Jack Doherty hasn't done anything bad to Shuffle Casino, and the casino's representatives have no need to seek revenge against the blogger. Most likely, this is simply a viral marketing scheme involving a controversial blogger, who was allegedly forced to sign an unfavorable contract that sparked the alleged scandal. I'd say this is very creative advertising for both the casino and the blogger. Fake scandals are a good way to go viral.

Definitely this is just a marketing ploy.

It's just a 6-month deal .. so surely Shuffle spent money on this contract hoping it would get people's attention and that the news itself would serve as an advertisement. But if this marketing stunt fails then it would be a loss for Shuffle, but since the amount was not disclosed we don't know how much money we're talking about here.

[Dareo]

The way casinos are promoted on social media these days makes it more likely that this whole incident will be a staged drama. This strategy of getting into the discussion overnight by creating controversy or strange incidents has now become a trend, as I saw a few days ago when porn star Bonnie Blue named her baby Betbolt for £1.2 million. People may temporarily enjoy seeing these and many new users flock to the site out of curiosity, but there is also a downside to it, So while this move by the CEO may seem like a masterstroke on the surface, if people are to maintain the real trust in a brand, they will have to focus more on better service and transparency than these viral stunts in the long run.

[Betwrong]

~I think it’s all a set up, and a good one at that. They knew the internet was going to eat this shit up and that they would get way more publicity for a stunt like this and even so much as the CEO taking the stance he did on some rich YouTuber 21 year old, people love it.

What do you guys think?

I think things like this are done mostly to draw attention to a public person, blogger in this case, because he "can’t post on social media" doesn't mean he can't do anything. I'm sure, they will find a way how to use someone with 6.50 billion views for their benefit. Actually, I'm sure they'd found the way some time ago and only then they planned all this thing with a gambling contract and ban from posting on social media.

[Dave1]

As far as I understand, this refers to the well-known American video blogger Jack Doherty, who was indeed banned from online activity due to the terms of his sponsorship agreement.

Yeah, he said that he signed the contract, but didn't read the terms which is weird. I mean even a normal person should know that before you sign any documents, you have to read what's inside and understand it.

On the other hand, many analysts believe this is a good marketing ploy. Apparently, Jack Doherty hasn't done anything bad to Shuffle Casino, and the casino's representatives have no need to seek revenge against the blogger. Most likely, this is simply a viral marketing scheme involving a controversial blogger, who was allegedly forced to sign an unfavorable contract that sparked the alleged scandal. I'd say this is very creative advertising for both the casino and the blogger. Fake scandals are a good way to go viral.

Regardless on what he did to the casino, now both are being talked on many social media accounts. So we can say that both are in a win-win situation as obviously, they get the hype that they needed in this so called contracts.

[alani123]

Hey guys,

What do you think about this? I find it kind of funny honestly. Apparently the CEO said it’s the best money he ever spend to shut this mf up hahahaha.

I recognized him but didn’t follow Jack and I wasn’t really familiar with his internet activity before I read this headline today. Usually social media users who are asked to sign a contract with a gambling website are signed for the sole purpose of creating content and promoting the gambling website.

Jack has done those similar videos we have all seen for stake or rainbet or whatever gambling site it is where they do a live bet or a video of a bet in some place or while they are doing some everyday thing. This type of content is universal with crypto casinos nowadays.

What I think is pure genius though from the CEO’s standpoint is that he pretty much made the greatest campaign ever for their online casino by doing the exact opposite of what the other casinos do because it was so controversial and drama rich, right? Just from all the social media posts from this so called “ban” that was written into the contract.

I think it’s all a set up, and a good one at that. They knew the internet was going to eat this shit up and that they would get way more publicity for a stunt like this and even so much as the CEO taking the stance he did on some rich YouTuber 21 year old, people love it.

What do you guys think?

I'm preeety sure this is a trick. In essence, the youtuber received a sum under a contract and a clause was to stop posting.
But a contract can't violate your constitutional rights.
It would be within this rights to break the contract and even keep the sum maybe.

So there's a 99.9% chance this is yet another publicity stunt to promote a casino.

[crwth]

I'm just curious what kind of contract that would be. Imagine your income comes from being an influencer, and now you cannot post anything; how would you earn? I know you would still earn income from older videos, but would the incentive of not posting be higher than what you would earn?

This begs the question of whether it's highly likely it came from a gambling site, because they have high purchasing power for marketing.  

[Ziskinberg]

I'm just curious what kind of contract that would be. Imagine your income comes from being an influencer, and now you cannot post anything; how would you earn? I know you would still earn income from older videos, but would the incentive of not posting be higher than what you would earn?

I really would love to know, unfortunately the contract was not published and neither party has disclosed how much Jack Doherty was paid.
All we know is that it's a 6-month contract, and his post can be seen below.

https://x.com/dohertyjackk/status/2108728754893652425
Jack Doherty's 6-month social media ban contract with Shuffle

This begs the question of whether it's highly likely it came from a gambling site, because they have high purchasing power for marketing.  

This came from shuffle. It's a contract between them.

[SatsPH]

I'm just curious what kind of contract that would be. Imagine your income comes from being an influencer, and now you cannot post anything; how would you earn? I know you would still earn income from older videos, but would the incentive of not posting be higher than what you would earn?

This begs the question of whether it's highly likely it came from a gambling site, because they have high purchasing power for marketing.  

But he has the luxury to tell us which gambling site it is or the gambling site acknowledging the contract between the two. So it seems like everything is being set up by the two camps. The contract might have covered his 6 months for not posting in his social media though.

So yes, as gamblers, we really need to read between the lines on what the platform has done here. It's really a competitive market out there, so a social influencer + casino is a good marketing strategy.

[cryptomaniac_xxx]

I might have heard the name of this influencer, however, I don't know how big he is in terms of his followers and his social media accounts. But in any case, they've got what they wanted already, as it's been in some gambling forum about this so called contracts.

And it's true, we are not born yesterday. This is obviously a marketing stunt by Shuffle (if I can say the platform). They are also doing good in the gambling space. But they needed another edge so that they will be talk about and maybe some gamblers are willing to test their online casinos because of this issue.

[ZeroVinsonN]

I might have heard the name of this influencer, however, I don't know how big he is in terms of his followers and his social media accounts. But in any case, they've got what they wanted already, as it's been in some gambling forum about this so called contracts.

And it's true, we are not born yesterday. This is obviously a marketing stunt by Shuffle (if I can say the platform). They are also doing good in the gambling space. But they needed another edge so that they will be talk about and maybe some gamblers are willing to test their online casinos because of this issue.

A regular contract of him running ads would have probably only been seen by his fans and followers,if I'm not interested in the guy then I'm not interested in whatever he is doing
 But a stunt like this one has reached far beyond his followers, I don't know who he is and I've heard about it, it's become a trending news and has therefore fulfilled it purpose, it's a win win situation, the casino gets their publicity and he doesn't even have to do anything about it, 6 months later and he will be back to his usual self.

[Ishicryptic]

This is definitely one of those unconventional marketing strategies which would arouse people's curiosity to be talking about the brand that is in the middle of the unconventional advertisement, think about it if it were the regular casino adverts that content creators make I doubt that we would be discussing about it. I think it's a genius idea to talk about a content creator who was paid not to advertise the brand that he was paid for on social media which happens to be his "office" people would also be curious to know which casino would do such a thing. As long as Jack's restriction is not permanent restriction from creating contents on social media, he should just enjoy the cruise until the contract expires then it'll be business as usual for him.

[angrybirdy]

Hey guys,

What do you think about this? I find it kind of funny honestly. Apparently the CEO said it’s the best money he ever spend to shut this mf up hahahaha.

I recognized him but didn’t follow Jack and I wasn’t really familiar with his internet activity before I read this headline today. Usually social media users who are asked to sign a contract with a gambling website are signed for the sole purpose of creating content and promoting the gambling website.

Jack has done those similar videos we have all seen for stake or rainbet or whatever gambling site it is where they do a live bet or a video of a bet in some place or while they are doing some everyday thing. This type of content is universal with crypto casinos nowadays.

What I think is pure genius though from the CEO’s standpoint is that he pretty much made the greatest campaign ever for their online casino by doing the exact opposite of what the other casinos do because it was so controversial and drama rich, right? Just from all the social media posts from this so called “ban” that was written into the contract.

I think it’s all a set up, and a good one at that. They knew the internet was going to eat this shit up and that they would get way more publicity for a stunt like this and even so much as the CEO taking the stance he did on some rich YouTuber 21 year old, people love it.

What do you guys think?

I'm preeety sure this is a trick. In essence, the youtuber received a sum under a contract and a clause was to stop posting.
But a contract can't violate your constitutional rights.
It would be within this rights to break the contract and even keep the sum maybe.

So there's a 99.9% chance this is yet another publicity stunt to promote a casino.

However, the issue of constitutionality is not that straightforward either. tho, freedom of speech gives the right to end a contract for a private party without any liability, such a right does not exist if a party has voluntarily accepted money for a private party on the condition that they remain as a party to the contract or to a series of contracts. That is, it will only be binding if the terms of the agreement specify it. Moreover, even though there may be a chance of successfully disputing a particular contractual obligation, this does not imply that one will be able to get away with keeping the money. However, idea for marketing strategy seems to be a good one, especially if there is a public discussion and more traffic to the website.

[cryptoaddictchie]

I'm just curious what kind of contract that would be. Imagine your income comes from being an influencer, and now you cannot post anything; how would you earn? I know you would still earn income from older videos, but would the incentive of not posting be higher than what you would earn?

As I read the article about this unusual deal, it seems the shuffle CEO intentionally spent some money for him to fully shut his mouth and maybe its a marketing ploy weve eversince done. On the standpoint of many a company usually pays content creator to do their usual noise to help their branding but this one is opposite.

Honestly a very unique approach that its either they really loss their mind or just trying to experiment whether the news could actually be the advertisement itself. Cause if you think about the scenario it doeant make any sense. Well he signed it so let it be!

[Bigjoe33]

I'm just curious what kind of contract that would be. Imagine your income comes from being an influencer, and now you cannot post anything; how would you earn? I know you would still earn income from older videos, but would the incentive of not posting be higher than what you would earn?

This begs the question of whether it's highly likely it came from a gambling site, because they have high purchasing power for marketing.  

But he has the luxury to tell us which gambling site it is or the gambling site acknowledging the contract between the two. So it seems like everything is being set up by the two camps. The contract might have covered his 6 months for not posting in his social media though.

So yes, as gamblers, we really need to read between the lines on what the platform has done here. It's really a competitive market out there, so a social influencer + casino is a good marketing strategy.

I wouldn't doubt this too. It's money we are talking about, and somehow, these influencers can reach an agreement that you may not believe. After all, at the end, he gets well paid. If his agreement covers his not posting and using social media for a stipulated time, then why would he worry if it's financially covered, lol. They both have been the talk around social media, and maybe, that's what they really wanted, the visibility as part of the contract agreement.

This is why gamblers aren't soposed to only depend on promoters information about a casino or the short video clips they watch online. Uts necessary you go through the casino, read there terms and conditions and be satisfied before signing up with them.

[Davidvictorson]

from the website: The 23-year-old YouTuber says he signed an agreement with the cryptocurrency casino without reading the entire contract. Now he claims one of its terms prevents him from posting online, and he’s brought in a lawyer to straighten out the mess.

He signed a contract without reading the entire thing...this is even more reason why he need to just keep quiet.
I can imagine people getting fed up with his pranks and what-have-you that he does on the internet.
This is the first time I am hearing or reading of this type of reverse sponsorship deal.
It makes me wonder if other content creators or influencers will see this as an avenue to exploit after they can always create an alternative channel or even use of their alternative faceless channel if they sign this type of contract.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

I'm just curious what kind of contract that would be. Imagine your income comes from being an influencer, and now you cannot post anything; how would you earn? I know you would still earn income from older videos, but would the incentive of not posting be higher than what you would earn?

Just as others has mentioned that this is a planned marketing scheme for the casino that had Jack signed the deal, I believed that they must have paid him enough money that will cover the amount of revenue that he was supposed to earn from his social media for the period of 6 months that the contract is supposed to last. Since this contract was not made public, I am also curious on the amount they must have paid him that would limit him from posting in all his social media accounts which generates different amount for him. So, I just believe they paid him well.

[Wind_FURY]

?

For everyone asking:

- yes it's real
- 6 month term
- money well spent to get this mf off the internet

His lawyers are now pressing us hard to have this contract scrapped but we will stay strong



https://x.com/noahdummett/status/2108746017273475436

But a marketing ploy to pay someone from talking in the internet for six months?

   

It's probably better to pay him to talk about Shuffle rather than stop him from talking, no?



  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[vs2014]

It seems a clever marketing strategy rather than a normal sponsorship deal. Most companies pay influencers to promote their product to draw people's attraction and Shuffle has done it with different approach. Even I just found out about this thing from your post OP. I believe this was planned from the beginning and i must say, Shuffle really knows how to get publicity. They found a way to make public talk about their casino by using something different strategy where people are already discussing about the deal. Now I'm wondering about jack whether he is really banned or the whole drama is nothing but a clever marketing strategy.