Will we have future youtubers who planned their crimes for fame?
Youtube, just like in the case of youtuber ‘SnapKing’, has found no reason yet to ban youtuber Austin Jones, who this month pleaded guilty to child pornography charges and coercing 6 underage female fans to send him sexually explicit photos. Austin’s channel is still online, and has over half a million subscribers. Youtube has now responded to the controversy.
While many of Austin Jones’ social media pages have been removed, his YouTube channel still exists. The youtuber admitted this month in a 27-page plea agreement he had sexually explicit conversations with multiple 14 and 15-year-old girls, who looked up to him, and Youtube has now made a statement about the controversy.
BBC writes Youtube insisted it takes claims of sexual misconduct “very seriously” and that it “stopped the monetisation” of the Austin Jones channel in 2017 so Austin is not able to make money from advertisements anymore. In the article it states Youtube does remove content when the youtuber(s) behind a channel has/have been convicted of a crime “in some cases”, when the content is closely related to the crime committed.
For example, in this case, if a youtuber raped another youtuber, they wouldn’t ban the youtuber-rapist if the content of the youtuber wasn’t about rape. A parenting Youtube channel featuring parents and their children, that has been convicted for child-neglect, would get banned though, as happened in the case of the DaddyOFive youtube channel.
While from the outside this might look like Youtube wants to protect children in the case of the DaddyOFive situation, it really isn’t about children, when Youtube allows predators like Austin Jones on Youtube who groomed children. For Youtube it’s about money - but you will only realise this, if you look at the pattern.
Even in following their own ‘content’ policy, Youtube is being a hypocrite.
Take youtuber OakleafNL, a Dutch youtuber named Jos Brech, who has been arrested based on a DNA match after a 20-year police investigation, concerning the murder and possible sexual assault of 11-year-old Nicky Verstappen. Brech’s Youtube channel is still online, which it is about surviving in the wild, camping and bushcraft. Nicky Verstappen was murdered during a children’s summer camp, so you would figure this means the cough ‘alleged’ crime is related to the content of the channel. Youtube doesn’t think so however, and gives the man a platform still.
We can point out the same hypocrisy, when it concerns Peeew!, a Youtube channel that describes itself as “a stinky, sit-down comedy talk show satire starring Michael Alig and Ernie Glam”. Michael Alig is a man who spent almost 17 years in prison for manslaughter. Alig was part of the Club Kids, a group of New York Citty clubgoers and dance-personalities. He was convicted of the violent death and dismemberment of a fellow ‘Club Kid’ and drug dealer named Andre Melendez.
He’s allowed to upload videos on Youtube, and has come under fire for collaborating with a child on the Peeew! youtube channel.
The child in question is a 11 year old autistic boy and has been celebrated in media for his dragqueen clothing styles. Lifesite writes that ‘Conservative media published concerns for the boy when’ when in footage of the child he was ‘showered with money as he did an awkward impersonation of singer Gwen Stefani’ and in one clip ‘rips off his dress to reveal his midriff-baring top as adult men hoot their appreciation’.
Considering the Peeew! channel concerns performing arts, and one of the hosts has murdered another person in that scene, you would think Youtube might not want him on the platform, since the content is related to the crime. Again, this is not the case. Youtube sits back while murderers have a social media platform on their website, showing a ‘moral policy’ they only follow through with if enough people outrage, and even then, not always.
Youtuber Austin Jones, has now pleaded guilty to child pornography. The Daily Mail mentions what he allegedly said to the children he groomed, which makes him nothing but a creep who shouldn’t be allowed the privilege of a global community and audience, that revolves around entertainment. Anyone who as an entertainer abuses people isn’t an entertainer at heart but a modern-day fake clown who hides behind the mask of entertainer, in order to gain attention, power and influence. An entertainer wants to entertain, make people happy and brighten their day in some way. Abusing people is the exact opposite of what an entertainer does, so it’s a valid concern we do not want these people on Youtube.
It will probably not take long until we see convicted child rapists on Youtube, after they served their sentence, monetising their channels and gaining thousands of followers just based on their crimes.
All this leaves me wondering how long until people start to specifically murder just for fame, since the public now knows if they serve a few years of prison, after the sentence they can quickly draw attention online just because they have been convicted for murder.
Maybe people have already started doing this, and in a few years, we’ll see them on Youtube, after they served time in prison. They might be hiding as ‘gurus’ or ‘entertainers’ who try to ‘turn their life around’, while really they planned their fame before their murders. They might be someone your child looks up to one day. Maybe, those youtubers, are already here.
Is this truly what we want?
Petition: Ask youtube to ban predators and abusers from Youtube, here.
PhotoandGrime.com does not display third party advertisements because we believe information and knowledge that informs or protects the public, should be (clutter)free.
If you found this article informative and want to support the website, consider sharing it!