Pedophilia ring on Youtube

[Dontspillthemilk]

I have no idea why YTers ever put their children on line to such a huge extent. I used to like Louise Pentland but got increasingly uncomfortable with seeing her children all the time. They just aren't in a position to give their consent. She won't put her partner on much to protect his privacy but not her children. Also Inghams, Wilkes Family, Saccone-Jolys. I think they are storing up no end of potential trouble & mental health issues with their offspring.

Have you ever seen Cole and Sav LaBrant? Their two girls are literally their money makers. I feel sorry for the girl Everleigh who has a camera in her face every single day. They have a newborn now, who has 1million followers on IG.

 

[DirtyLaundry]

I have no doubt that the likes of Jonathan Saconne many family vloggers knew this was happening way before that video came out.

YouTubers like the Ballinger family need to shut up. Yes your child is only doing gymnastics but people are using those videos for sexual gratification and they are worried about being demonized?

As far as I'm concerned these vlogging families are complicit. They may aswell sell their kids to the highest bidder if they don't want to go out to work.

They all need to find some morals but money talks...

Seriously disgusted in these family vloggers reactions.

 

[Member 3675]

YouTube bans comments on all videos of children

The streaming platform is disabling comments on videos of children after paedophiles left predatory comments.

www.bbc.co.uk

YouTube bans comments on all videos of children

YouTube said its new policy meant videos of very young children would automatically have the comments section disabled.
A small number of YouTube content creators will be allowed to enable comments on videos featuring children.

These channels will be trusted partners such as family video-bloggers or known YouTube stars.

However, they will be required to actively moderate their comments and demonstrate that their videos carry a low risk of attracting predatory comments.

 

[StarryEyed]

I have no idea why YTers ever put their children on line to such a huge extent. I used to like Louise Pentland but got increasingly uncomfortable with seeing her children all the time. They just aren't in a position to give their consent. She won't put her partner on much to protect his privacy but not her children. Also Inghams, Wilkes Family, Saccone-Jolys. I think they are storing up no end of potential trouble & mental health issues with their offspring.

I definitely agree, especially when these kids are filmed every little thing they do. Must be tough at school as kids can find the smallest thing to bully other kids and Wilkes’s daughter has definitely had issues directly linked to her Leasa vlogging their entire lives. And it’s not as if Wilkes makes more than pennies from vlogging it’s just a vanity thing for her

 

[Dontspillthemilk]

I find the whole concept of plastering your child online quite frightening. I loved social media before my son was born, and about 6 months in of me posting everything about him online (under locked accounts, locked privacy etc)... I stopped. I don’t have a FB, Twitter or Instagram and I never post photos of him online. He’s a stereotypically cute kid; blonde curly hair, blue eyes, chubby cheeks and the thought of that being anyone else’s child other than mine and my husbands make me sick.

I’ll watch the video over the weekend. It keeps popping up in my YouTube feed.

 

[Oohthedrama]

Dougal is from edinburgh and is groomer... he is on the pesto list.. I dont no his real name.. but muttley is kenny ball..

It’s quite easy to work out who currently hates who and find out exactly who you are or might be btw. To go on such a vendetta I assume you’ve been involved in arguments with this person lately. Maybe on Twitter ?
If you have proof give it to the right people, if not, you’re making dangerous accusations right now.

The worst of the family channels are by far the saccone Joly’s.
Jonathan makes me so uncomfortable with the uploads and clips he shows of his kids. He knows how dangerous it is too but doesn’t care.

 

[StarryEyed]

This is a great point. And while I agree, just thought I'd throw in something to ponder about: could it be argued that the same issues apply for child actors on tv? And if so, should children not be shown to the public on tv? To the latter I'd say of course not. Did the Olsen twins or Macaulay Culkin understand the terms of their contracts? No. Yet many people love Full House, Home Alone is a classic. We are okay with child actors because there are regulations in place to protect them. That is the difference. So maybe it's more fair to say that instead of family vlogging being illegal, family vloggers should have strict regulations to follow (examples: the children can only be filmed for a certain amount of time per week which would eradicate daily vlogging, they must be fully clothed, and comments should be approved before publicly viewable - yes, that means parents will need to filter them themselves, hire an assistant, or opt to keep comments off). Just some things to think about.


Should it have been illegal for Hilary Duff to be Lizzie McGuire, Miley Cyrus to be Hannah Montana, Miranda Cosgrove to be iCarly etc? Millions of viewers, similarly to kids on Youtube.

100% spot on, this conversation has already happened in the entertainment industry and while it may not work perfectly it’s a step forward and better than the non existent safeguarding that’s currently in place for family vloggers. The whole filming every moment of their lives and broadcasting it to strangers is very weird

 

[StarryEyed]

Maybe this is the point where mass reporting Ingham vlogs might actually work. The way the thumbnail is always Isabelle even if she’s barely in the vlog and the way they use the girls makes me seriously question if they are deliberately targeting the paedophile market to give them views and comments. I’m sure I remember when the allegations came out and people said their target audience was teenage girls they brought out a figure to say it wasn’t. I can’t remember the words they used but maybe that’s why and their target is older creepy men

 

[StarryEyed]

We have had 5 year of trolling of this scumbag.. you guys have only had 8 months... think i have enough evidence about muttley on how vile he is..

If you have any hard evidence then provide it. But all I see is someone that’s pissed off (potentially with good reason) and out for revenge

 

[Mayday]

This is a great point. And while I agree, just thought I'd throw in something to ponder about: could it be argued that the same issues apply for child actors on tv? And if so, should children not be shown to the public on tv? To the latter I'd say of course not. Did the Olsen twins or Macaulay Culkin understand the terms of their contracts? No. Yet many people love Full House, Home Alone is a classic. We are okay with child actors because there are regulations in place to protect them. That is the difference. So maybe it's more fair to say that instead of family vlogging being illegal, family vloggers should have strict regulations to follow (examples: the children can only be filmed for a certain amount of time per week which would eradicate daily vlogging, they must be fully clothed, and comments should be approved before publicly viewable - yes, that means parents will need to filter them themselves, hire an assistant, or opt to keep comments off). Just some things to think about.


Should it have been illegal for Hilary Duff to be Lizzie McGuire, Miley Cyrus to be Hannah Montana, Miranda Cosgrove to be iCarly etc? Millions of viewers, similarly to kids on Youtube.

This is true. I don't have an issue with child actors per say (more Hollywood. Not sure if anyone has seen it, but there's a documentary called 'An Open Secret' which focuses on kids and their parents being groomed by people in Hollywood), and also parents pushing their kids into it/sponging off of them like Macaulay, Lindsay Lohan's parents etc. I would have less of an issue with family vlogging if, like you said, there were regulations in place and it wasn't just parents being greedy or kids not getting a financial share for the future. Also if there was less stuff that seems specifically aimed at pedos like the pool parties, bathtime fun etc, and if parents were more careful with what they share. (So many seem to just be fine to share photos of their children nude and think its fine because their parts are covered).

It just baffles me how there's no rules...I think child actors in the UK are quite protected, and have been able to live relatively normal lives (for example, Rupert Grint seems to just do indie movies now and keep a low profile) due to not being in that Hollywood bubble, so you'd think they'd notice people registering businesses for their Youtube vlogging and think hmm, maybe we should have rules for this.

 

[Mayday]

How is this a 'wormhole'? It looks to me like he is literally just searching different words and finding content. Clearly it is completely wrong though

I think its because usually Youtube recommends a wide variety of stuff based on most of your recent searches/recently watched videos? Or even stuff that they 'promote' from creators because it has a lot of views at the time. Where as searching for this only shows similar videos - some of which appear to be private/unlisted yet still appearing.

 

[mags]

I agree tbh. They just can't give informed consent. Even Louise will say 'Darcey do you want to be filmed?' 'Yes'. As if she can possibly understand the implications. Maybe if she added 'this will be with you for years. Everyone you come into contact with in the future will look at this and know everything about you. You have in effect given up any normal rights to any privacy. Strangers will know intimate details about your life. Now. Do you want to be filmed?'. In not many years time I think we'll look back at this family vlogging and be horrified. I think parents who do it are insane. Actually makes me sad to see Darcey filmed - she seems a very trusting lovely little girl. Stopped watching for those reasons amongst others.

I agree, it's not enough for parents to simply ask the children for their permission as their immature, undeveloped minds cannot, by any possible stretch of the imagination, be expected to make an informed choice....but for what it's worth, Louise is the only vlogger I can ever personally recall asking that sort of question of their child. Mind you, if you do ask your child you are surely acknowledging that there are issues (around sharing your kids with the world) but then you're going ahead anyway, given their nod. Not at all a pleasant business and I hope things do change for the better.

 

[Mayday]

I saw that channels risk deletion if they turn comments back on. Special Books by Special Kids posted this:


I feel quite bad for him as his comments are usually always positive and he just interviews kids and their families.

 

[Scullybob]

If you don't know his real name then how do you know he is on a 'weirdo list'?

 

[GiggleBee]

Maybe this is the point where mass reporting Ingham vlogs might actually work. The way the thumbnail is always Isabelle even if she’s barely in the vlog and the way they use the girls makes me seriously question if they are deliberately targeting the paedophile market to give them views and comments. I’m sure I remember when the allegations came out and people said their target audience was teenage girls they brought out a figure to say it wasn’t. I can’t remember the words they used but maybe that’s why and their target is older creepy men

It sickens me how much Isabelle is pimped out! ?

 

[Mayday]

I have no idea why YTers ever put their children on line to such a huge extent. I used to like Louise Pentland but got increasingly uncomfortable with seeing her children all the time. They just aren't in a position to give their consent. She won't put her partner on much to protect his privacy but not her children. Also Inghams, Wilkes Family, Saccone-Jolys. I think they are storing up no end of potential trouble & mental health issues with their offspring.

I never even thought about that before but yeah its odd how she shares very little about/of Liam and her relationship, but is happy to film her kids so much.

 

[raccoonlivesmatter]

@Jakky I almost believed you until you said you were a Hibs fan!

 

[Member 3675]

And when is the r family gonna wake up that there channel is used as a peados HQ... spanners all false ppl.. peados hide behind angry wank and use him to fire the gun of hate towards everybody... the peados protect him and the videos that they love.. Dave channel is a pweirdo heaven..

Probably when he thinks you might not be talking complete crap

No it's true.. but am just a nobody so who is gonna listen to me.

Very few people as you appear to be pretending to "know stuff" and are fucking up threads with your bollock

I just want to let desent ppl know a well groomer from Scotland is on the prowel.. I hate angry wank... but i don't want his to be a victim and his family.. I do care about Dave and family dont get groomed.. take it or leave it its the truth..

Think most will leave it tbh

Lets just say iv known this for months but no one listens... cos they arguing to much.. and yes muttley and dougal are groomers ... dougal is grooming Jane and her daughter cant remember there twitter.. just us or summit they are called ..

then you could have messaged the families privately but my guess is they think your a nutter

Dougal is from edinburgh and is groomer... he is on the pesto list.. I dont no his real name.. but muttley is kenny ball..

Are his jazzmen involved in this too or is it just Kenny ? or whatever his real name you made up is today

Just look at angry wanks twitter... could someone please tell Dave this us the truth.. is not about subs or views anymore... I beg him to take this serious.. am not here to make touble. But hey no if Dave wants to carry on and think is bull shit. Then let him be with this trolls and peados.

If you contacted Dave privately and listed what evidence you have he would no doubt look at it. His wife certainly would for very good reasons

Cos dougal and muttley are pals.. or is it the same person... they are both hearts football fans from edinburgh... so muttley and dougal could be the same person... kenny ball

I see you have certainly got some compelling made up evidence there with is they aren't they can you see how you might be regarded as a bit of a fantasist ?

And I am from edinburgh i now hearts fans i live in that part if the city... we all no who the peados are in town... it's not rocket science...

So do you chant their names out just before the game starts and at half time ?

Oh its serious stuff.. it's ok I dont need to talk private i have nothing to hide.. but Dave thinks everybody has got it in for him.. all the arguing and fighting with the rees ... Jamie was getting to hot on how to prove the emails.. the trolls did not like that why.... cos then groomers would be caught... but Dave being Dave took to his high horse and came out guns blazing.. so thats how Jamie had to be shut up.. get them taken down... cos the groomers peados all lead back to Dave's channel where they used Dave as there sheald... yes Dave you thought all you gang was fighting for the girls.. u got sucked in too.

hmm yea I believe you thousands wouldn't

Seriously your posts are like the ramblings of a lunatic and are across several threads as someone who is quite wise said the other night
that threads got weird lately

If you have "evidence" that compose an email and message Dave or his wife
Keep postings fantastical waffle and you will be regarded as a bit of a nut job

 

[Oohthedrama]

 

[Anita]

Just watched the inghams and they repeatedly showed Isla sliding down a slide with her crotch showing (she did have tights on) I would never share that with family never mind the internet.

They don’t seem to care??‍