Fact check: The individuals behind the youtube channel Clownfish TV have a very low opinion of Kevin Smith.

1. Summary of the results

The relationship between Clownfish TV and Kevin Smith is more complex than simply having a "very low opinion." The conflict stems from specific events surrounding the Masters of the Universe: Revolution/Revelation series. There was a direct confrontation when Clownfish TV claimed to have insider information about He-Man being sidelined, which Smith initially denied ^[1]. Smith later admitted to "obfuscating" about He-Man's role in the show, though he maintains he didn't technically lie ^[2].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several important contextual elements are missing from the original statement:

• The conflict began specifically around the Masters of the Universe franchise, not as a general animosity ^[1]
• There's evidence of Clownfish TV maintaining neutral to potentially positive coverage of Smith's work at times ^[3]
• A specific incident occurred where Geeky Sparkles, associated with Clownfish TV, demanded an apology from Smith for publicly mentioning them ^[4]
• The controversy extends to viewership metrics, with low views for the Revolution trailer suggesting broader fan dissatisfaction beyond just Clownfish TV's opinion ^[5]

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement oversimplifies a complex relationship:

• It presents the situation as one-sided when there's evidence of mutual antagonism, with both parties having made controversial statements about each other ^{[2] [4]}
• It fails to acknowledge that Clownfish TV has a documented pattern of making controversial claims about various subjects, suggesting this might be part of their content strategy rather than a specific opinion about Smith ^[6]
• The statement ignores that some of Clownfish TV's criticisms were ultimately validated, as Smith admitted to being intentionally misleading about the show's content ^[2]

This situation appears to be more about content creators engaging in public disagreement over intellectual property handling, which generates attention and engagement for both parties, rather than a simple matter of personal opinion.