Kids and teens love YouTube’s colorful celebrities who cater to their specific interests. But many influencers use their celebrity status to lead fans into harmful situations. In today’s GKIS article, find out how these YouTube celebrities promised big earnings from online gambling, offered poorly planned conventions, attacked other influencers, and encouraged fans to harass other online competitors. Using unethical tactics and no disclosure, many of these profit-making schemes succeed unchallenged.
What’s a YouTube influencer?
A YouTube influenceris a person with a YouTube profile that has a large number of followers and can influence trends, products, and purchasing habits. Their content is typically videos of product recommendations or reviews. Other times, it’s a video (vlog) with influencers talking to their audience about anything that strikes their fancy. Most vlogs include colorful opinions, vulgar language, and provocative topics.
Most influencers are trained marketers who profit from ads, partnerships, and paid sponsorships. Although some provide harmless entertainment, others intentionally mislead or introduce content that can harm their followers.
“Oops, I didn’t mean it.”
One-time mistakes are getting increasingly rare among YouTube celebrities. For some, a string of mistakes results in more fame and profit. For instance, PewDiePie is one of the world’s most famous YouTube celebrities with 91 million subscribers. In 2108, he was criticized for promoting an Anti-Semitic YouTube channel [1], delivering Anti-Semitic jokes [2], and using the hard N-word to thousands of viewers in a live stream video [3].
In 2019, PewDiePie stoked fan fires by encouraging “a fight” with a YouTube channel T-Series and Indian production house. Competing for subscribers, PewDiePie fanned a competition between American YouTube culture versus Indian YouTube Culture. The rallying cry resulted in hacking printers and Google homes, a vandalized World War II memorial in Brooklyn (“subscribe to Pewdiepie”), and, most horrifying, a Christchurch mass murderer yelling “subscribe to PewDiePie” during the live stream of his shooting.
YouTube Influencers Encourage Gambling
CSGOLotto: In 2016, YouTubers TmarTn and ProSyndicate promoted and advertised a site called CSGOLotto. On this site, players bought in-game items that were placed into an online pot alongside other people’s purchased merchandise. The goal was to gamble to win the biggest pot of merchandise.
Video ads for the GSGOLotto showed TmarTn and ProSyndicate having fun gambling large amounts of money trying to win big. Most times, they did win BIG – up to three times the amount they started with up to $20,000 worth of merchandise!
Based on our research, at no point in the ads or written copy did either influencer mention to their collective audience of 13.5 million that they owned this site and were profiting directly. We found the ads to be misleading, looking like the celebrities were simply players rather than profiteers.
Mystery Brand: In 2018, Jake Paul and RiceGum created a similar gambling site called Mystery Brand. In this game, players purchase $5 to $100 virtual boxes that would contain a mystery item worth either less or more than the amount paid. The promised a chance to win a $250 million house with only a $15 buy-in.
The influencers were reportedly paid $100,000 for promotion to their collective 30 million subscribers. In their videos, they narrated how they “teamed up” with Mystery Brand to show how “dope” it was to play.
After demonstrating the easy signup process, the two spent big. Once a player buys in, their money stays in. Players can’t cash out. They can only earn sponsored prizes shown on the site, like a virtual shopping mall. For example, in one video RiceGum shows off his $15,000 profit after only spending $3,000. Neither RiceGum nor Jake Paul refers to the site as “gambling,” but instead call it a “game” with “good value,” promising “there is no losing in this.” Based on our research, no place on the site states the players’ chances of winning.
A Poorly Planned Convention
Tana Mongeau is a content creator with 3.7 million subscribers. In 2018, 5,000 people showed up at a hotel in Anaheim to attend her convention, advertised to be a cheaper and more accessible version of Vidcon (which is a large-scale event hosted by YouTube to meet your favorite YouTuber). Due to poor planning, over 4,000 people waited for over four hours in the sweltering heat outside of the hotel. There were little shade, food, or water available, and many attendees got sunburned, passed out, and rioted due to poor accommodations and security.
Although promised to be free, it wasn’t. While 4,000 waited outside, the 1,000 inside were greeted with a $60 “VIP” pass, with a lack of entertainment, overcrowding, and almost the same issues as those outside the hotel. The videos of this event are upsetting to watch.
Using Their Platform to Attack People
When some YouTube influencers don’t like other content creators or other people in general, they sometimes rant with name-calling and unfair accusations. This cyberbullying can result in a cyber flash mob of dedicated fans that cyber attack through doxing(showing private information), pranking, and cyber-harassment.
False Accusations Against a Competitive Influencer
Jackie Aina is a popular beauty guru who creates and shares videos of makeup applications with 2.9 million subscribers. In 2018, she made a video accusing another YouTuber, Petty Paige (128 thousand subscribers), of stealing $1,500 from her personal bank account.
This accusation appeared to have no proof of legitimacy. Although she never stated Petty Paige’s name in the video, she put up a picture of a video Paige had made, making it easy for her subscribers to identify the accused perpetrator. Jackie Aina’s fans took to social media to harass Paige for weeks. Paige even stated that many business and job opportunities were canceled because of harassment.
Targeting Their Audience
The Gabbie show (6.4 million subscribers) is one of many YouTubers who have targeted everyday people with no regard to how the fan base would react to it. When a young girl in her audience made a negative comment on one of Gabbie’s tweets, Gabbie screenshotted it along with the girl’s account and posted it on her Twitter (2.7 million followers). This led fans to spam and harass the girl, flooding her inbox with hateful messages.
Are there legal consequences?
Too often, when malicious or unethical online behavior is identified, the scandal is fleeting. For example, in the case of TmarTns and ProSyndicate’s gambling scam, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a case for lying about ownership of a product. Yet somehow, both influencers avoided legal prosecution, only suffering a mild loss in subscribers and yearly income due to a damaged reputation. They still have a net worth of around $5 million.
For Jake Paul and RiceGum, absolutely nothing happened. RiceGum created a video justifying his behavior as the same as what others do. Jake Paul made a joke about the situation. When asked, “You loved being called out for selling a gambling scam to underage kids?” He responded, “Yes, love it.”
Of the influencers covered in this article, Tana Monogue probably received the biggest consequences. After months of backlash and hate from fans and YouTubers, Tana made multiple apologies. But she still suffered no legal consequences. And as for what Jackie Aina and Gabby Shows did, many just see it as insignificant errors in judgment.
What can be learned?
Influencers are not your friends and most often cannot be trusted.
Fanning follower anger is often fake and staged.
On the internet, bad behavior makes influencers money and often goes unpunished.
If you believe the hype, you’re gullible. It’s probably not worth the drama. Think for yourself instead of following blindly.
Thanks to GKIS intern Jack Riley for researching and writing this article. If you learned from this article, stay tuned for part 2, which details the irresponsibility and scams that YouTube influencers continue to feed their audience as well as the marketing and social manipulations used to make sure viewers keep coming back.
Onward to More Awesome Parenting,
Tracy S. Bennett, Ph.D.
Mom, Clinical Psychologist, CSUCI Adjunct Faculty
Works Cited
YouTube Influencers Encourage Gambling
Fluff, TMARTN GAMBLING ON CSGO LOTTO & DECEIVING OWNERSHIP (Full Video Reupload), YouTube.com
(2016, July) YouTube gamers caught in gambling row, bbc.com
There is a YouTube/TikTok trend of parents pulling pranks on their kids for viral shares. Some appear to be innocent jokes. Others are recordings of parents screaming at their children while the kids cry. Debates fill comment sections on how wrong it is to capitalize on “bullying” a vulnerable child. Professionals argue that this “comedy” violates trust and traumatizes children. It has even been argued that sharing milder pranks is still harmful, exposing children to the cruelty of internet trolls. In contrast, fans of the pranking videos complain that people need to lighten up. After all, we survived similarly harmless pranks when we were kids. Read this article and ask yourself, “When is the line crossed between comedic relief to child abuse?”
YouTube’s Response
YouTube videos go viral, fast. The comedy of pranking gives videos an extra boost in popularity. Yet, they got so out of hand that YouTube clarified their child safety policies in January 2019. They added that the mere perception of endangerment or vulnerability is unacceptable:
“We’ve made it clear that our policies prohibiting harmful and dangerous content also extend to pranks with a perceived danger of serious physical injury. We don’t allow pranks that make victims believe they’re in serious physical danger – for example, a home invasion prank or a drive-by shooting prank. We also don’t allow pranks that cause children to experience severe emotional distress, meaning something so bad that it could leave the child traumatized for life.”[1]
The Invisibility Prank
The invisibility prank was a fad for some time. In these pranks, families were videoed as they deceived children into believing that a magic chant made them disappear.[4]
Here’s how it worked:
First, the main pranksters let family members in on the joke so they can play along. Then the pranksters volunteer the child for a “disappearing magic trick.” The child sits on a chair in the middle of the room while the audience surrounds him. The magician covers the child with a blanket, and says three magic words, then ta-da! This is the audience’s cue to act completely surprised that the trick worked. Some get angry saying, “This isn’t funny! Bring him back!” Others gasp in astonishment. Whenever the child touches someone, they pretend to be spooked by this unseen force. The biggest part of this prank takes place when the pranksters ask the child to take a picture. The child doesn’t know the pranksters staged the picture beforehand. The fake picture shows the prankster’s arm hugging nothing. That empty space is where the child was supposed to be. The child sobs at this point because they’re desperate for acknowledgment.[2]
The Martin Case
An infamous case of YouTube pranking is that of the YouTube channel “DaddyoFive.” After their local county received several citizen complaints, the YouTube couple lost custody of two children in 2017. A county judge sentenced Michael and Heather Martin to five years of probation on child neglect charges. A neuropsychologist determined that the children experienced “observable, identifiable, and substantial impairments of their mental or psychological ability to function.”
The Martins had over 300 videos of them verbally, mentally, and or physically abusing their children for “pranks.” The Martins pleaded that the pranks supported their family with thousands of dollars of YouTube ad profit.[8]
Where the Line Is Crossed
At GetKidsInternetSafe we put children first, always. We believe that supporting child mental health and a strong, positive parent-child alliance is extremely important.
Pranking, which takes the form of bullying, may traumatize children if it repeatedly creates emotional, mental, and or physical duress.[5][7] Victims of pranking may suffer chronic anxiety, as they remain hypervigilant for the next prank will occur. Once pranked, they may no longer trust their parents or their surroundings. Surprise pranks may contribute to social issues, defiance, cyclic bullying, depression, and aggression.[7] Children with pre-existing behavioral and mental health issues are particularly vulnerable.[7]
Before the Internet, family pranks were private and lost their sparkle quickly in favor of empathetic support and good judgment. YouTube, TikTok, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat broadcast private moments to thousands and sometimes millions of strangers.[5] Strangers in the community and friends at school get to see a child pee their pants from being so scared. While the world laughs at their fragility, the loss of privacy magnifies their insecurity.[6] This embarrassment extends at-home bullying to the public causing cyberbullying or public harassment.[7]
YouTubers, like Logan Paul, increasingly push the boundaries to increase viewers and keep people entertained. These prank-based YouTube channels push the same boundaries but for the sake of their children’s health and safety.
The Balance
Not all parents maliciously prank their children to the extremes. For some families, jokes and ongoing pranks are traditions that bond everyone together.[9] In our family, we yell “123 not it” at the end of our meals at restaurants. Whoever is last has to carry the leftovers out and put them in the fridge when we get home.
When children are mature and the jokes are gentle, pranks can be positive lessons in trust.[9] According to sociologist Gary Alan Fine, “We can play these games with each other and we trust each other sufficiently that we won’t get angry, that we will be friends afterward, despite this momentary uncomfortableness.”[9] Pranks also help people develop a sense of humor, which is a useful coping skill.[5]
Arguably, parents tricking their children into believing that the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus exist are good examples of appropriate pranks. The jokes gently play with the child’s innocence. These videos are memories cherished with laughter as our children grow older. They exhibit pure-hearted children living happy childhoods.
Things to Consider Before Posting a Prank Video
Trust your gut.
Every child’s temperament varies. Cultures, ethnicities, and family dynamics all differ. How a child will react to a prank is best known by their parent. Parental instinct and listening to our guts are our best courses of action.
Ask your child before posting.
Part of the GKIS Connected Family Screen Agreement explains that family members will not post images or videos of each other without permission. This is a critical step to building important dialogue for negotiation and trust. This applies to pranking as well.
Anticipate how that video will be received by other adults and peers.
It’s easy to get caught by the urge to instantly share hilarious moments with the internet. But take a moment before hitting “post” to consider how your child will feel in a year or two with the video still online. Think about who has access to your content. Follow the GKIS Grandma Test: “Would grandma have a problem seeing this?”
Will it target your child for further bullying?
For example, imagine a group of fifth graders seeing your family’s prank. Will they be laughing with your child or at them? Will they give your child a demeaning nickname?
Will copycat behaviors be unkind or cruel?
Anticipating the consequences of these videos is essential before posting.
Thanks to Hanna Dangiapo for covering this important, sensitive issue. If you’re ready to start a more positive, cooperative connection with your family and increase screen sanity, check out our GKIS Connected Family Online Course. With 10 easy steps, you can bring the fun back into family life.
I’m the mom psychologist who will help you GetKidsInternetSafe.
