Honestly... I feel the first video was beneficial. And necessary to call out attention and force change.
The second video just rubs me wrong somehow.
It’s not necessary. Doesn’t call out anything beyond what we could have intelligently realized from the first video (obviously they knew what they had done when the parts were mangled).
The follow up message of the computer had been exchanged was sufficient.
The second video just seems to go further than necessary.
He doesn’t need to become an Apple endorsement. But if it were me, I’d drop the point aside from encouraging a better design.
I’d temper the complaining a bit as they did handle the repair in the end, and are asking for the damaged equipment to investigate.
Simply put, while I’m typically blunt, and I call it like I see it, I also believe in a bit of class.
The second video just hits the wrong button with me.
I think the second video was to address the criticism he received from some people about the first video. He states he knows how to use a screwdriver, has experience doing IT/computer repair, addresses the loctite possibility on the screws. He also makes sure to show us that he didn't make up the damage to his iMac Pro/stand, that the Apple manager even knew about it yet they still gave him back the computer.
I think it was mainly to show that he didn't doctor anything, that he actually experienced these shortcomings.