The first reference in that article is to a behavior. It’s not IS’s fault that there are a lot of articles denigrating people with NPD for displaying that behavior. The behavior itself is an issue, whether or not the person doing it has NPD. A job interview is an example of flattery and manipulation, and that’s why nobody expects them to be an absolutely accurate view of a person.

The second reference is a language issue and it’s a valid point. “Narcissistic” is a loaded term, in that it’s both a diagnostic descriptor and a colloquial term, and it’s easy to simply substitute it with egotistical or self-obsessed, which don’t have additional medical definitions. This is the absolute first time this has come across my radar, though, so I wouldn’t be hugely surprised if it’s also not on IS’s radar- the author of that piece ascribes it to hate, but that seems like a real stretch.

I watched the video, and then visited the sources. This seems like a good candidate for the psychology of the video, but frankly, there are a lot of sources that all describe the methods of alt-right actors online. It would be great if it was better sourced, but it’s a quick video that doesn’t cover too much new ground.

The title of the article is also misleading- the author notes a poorly cited video and two microaggressions against people with NPD, but those aren’t reactionary things imo.

There is a bunch of odd things on that page that make me distrust, if not its journalistic integrity, then at least its fact-checking ability overall - e.g. nowhere does it ever describe what “NPD” means (an extremely basic rule in all professional writing: always define abbreviations upon first use, even if only via a link to something like a dictionary page), and this next one is more just odd but on a mobile site they have disabled zooming in on the pictures to read them more easily. i.e. despite its tone it reads like it exists more for the sake of the author wanting to vent their emotional state rather than trying to actually convey information.

In any case, I imagine that Ian is the type of person who would receive criticism well and, if warranted, even remove that video from his site in the worst case, or else adjust it if need be. But rather than take that idea further, I will preemptively concede that nothing is ever fully perfect, and even if that singular video were to be found to have problems with it, it would barely budge my opinion of the overall series of videos, which have quite a bit of weight behind them given their number and overall high quality of content. i.e., one video is not nothing, but neither is it everything. Also, on general principles, since when did one data point ever define a “trend”?

If discussion of politics is not to your liking, there are many other topics on his YouTube page, even if the Playlists page does not make that immediately apparent. e.g., feminism, art critiques, especially about video games and some older ones about movies, and more. One I HIGHLY recommend is this: https://youtu.be/R943_eAvnWw?si=dqjL7WtKZAM-W3iS about the nature of “protagony”, consent regarding artificial entities and what that may imply for us all (warning: while not technically NSFW, still caution may be advisable). Also, a metric shitton of videos about games, games, and more games.

Here is perhaps long past where I should have added that I do not always agree with what he says. But that literally does not matter to me in the slightest - I still enjoy hearing what he has to say, and especially the manner in which he dissects it.:-)