Getty
Show Hide image

Is there any truth in the rumours of a YouTube “paedophile ring”?

Talk among high-profile YouTube users of paedophilic activity on the video-sharing site began spreading late last week.

“Hi, internet friends. There is a paedophile ring on YouTube.”

So starts a five-minute-long video by YouTuber ReallyGraceful, a romance author who makes tri-weekly videos “diving down the rabbit hole of truth”. ReallyGraceful created her video after a Reddit post claimed that child pornography could be found on YouTube if a user searched the words “Webcam video from”.

Since then, many big name YouTubers have followed suit in trying to expose an alleged paedophile ring on the site. Last week, Pyrocynical, a British YouTuber with over one and a half million subscribers, created a video called “Child Exploitation on YouTube”, discussing “Webcam video from” videos of children twerking or filmed from sexually suggestive angles, many of which had accumulated millions of views and hundreds of predatory comments. He notes that none of the videos contained actual nudity.

“This is essentially softcore child porn,” he says in the video, before later adding: “YouTube has the ability to crack down on this shit but they choose not to.”

If you search “Webcam video from” on YouTube today, no such videos will be found. YouTube relies on a system of users and “trusted flaggers” to highlight videos that violate its policies, and it appears that, after the videos were exposed by top YouTubers, the content has been removed.

“YouTube has a zero-tolerance policy for sexual content involving minors,” a YouTube spokesperson says. “Engaging in any type of activity that sexualises minors – including leaving inappropriate comments – will immediately result in an account termination. We encourage users to flag videos or comments for our review.”

Although it is apparent that some sexually suggestive content was hosted on YouTube, and that predators also aggregated innocent videos of children, is there any truth to rumours that “Webcam video from” is a secret code for paedophiles, and that a ring – which is to say, a group of people acting together to find, upload, and share the content – is operating on the site?

YouTube’s “webcam capture” feature was discontinued at the beginning of 2016, but it previously allowed users to upload content directly from their webcams which would then be titled “Webcam video from” followed by the date and time. Most of these videos were innocent, though it is apparent from comments posted on such videos – with the “Webcam video from” title – that predators used the search term to find content of children. Accusations that paedophiles downloaded, reuploaded and monetised these videos are hard to prove or disprove, though it is possible, considering how long such videos were left up. Most of these videos were – before they were removed – a few years old, and the trend seems to be an obsolete one that was only discovered recently.

Comments from “Webcam video from” videos, via Imgur

This wouldn't be the first time that paedophilic activity has been discovered on YouTube. Last April, a spate of “mummy vloggers” stopped filming their children after discovering that their videos were embedded into paedophilic playlists on the video-sharing site.

“Before the internet, someone with a sexual interest in children had to take lots of risks,” Karl Hopwood, a member of the UK Council for Child Internet Safety, told me at the time. “They needed to loiter near schools, go to the beach or park. Now, they can browse huge amounts of content from the privacy of their own homes, and no one knows they have done it.”

It is clear, then, that predatory users can abuse YouTube to find, aggregate, and share content of children, but the term “paedophile ring” muddies the story slightly. The phrase implies some sort of organisation or central power, and ReallyGraceful connected it to “Pizzagate”, the conspiracy theory, favoured by some Donald Trump supporters, that a pizza shop in Washington DC is a front for a Democratic paedophile ring visited by Hillary Clinton.

“You can say all day that this has nothing to do with Pizzgate but clearly it has everything to do with Pizzagate because there is a paedophile ring out in the freaking open on YouTube,” she said in her video.  

ReallyGraceful also uses her channel to spread stories about “#TwitterGate”, an alleged paedophile ring on Twitter. “The story that broke this morning involves the very platform that was trying to supress Pizzagate,” she says in her video on the topic. In her video about YouTube’s “paedophile ring” she says: “The second one of us uploads a Pizzagate video to YouTube, we get flagged for some ridiculous reason.” ReallyGraceful voted for Trump and has previously created videos questioning Barack Obama's birth certificate

The rhetoric of “paedophile rings” has been seized as a political tool by some US right-wingers to argue for their cause, as well as attack their enemies and generate hysteria about the need to “drain the swamp”. This new-found trend of “exposing” paedophile rings and using this exposure to bolster one’s own political beliefs can obscure legitimate concerns about children’s online safety. While predators may in the past have used YouTube to prey on children, the sensationalism of a handful of professional YouTubers in telling the story has obscured a real and important issue.

If you identify troubling content on YouTube, click the flag underneath the video or the three dots next to the comment in question. A staff of specialists monitor all reports 24/7 and will take action to remove any offending content. If you are concerned about a child’s online safety, you can find advice or make a report to the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre at: ceop.police.uk.

Amelia Tait is a technology and digital culture writer at the New Statesman.

Artie Limmer/Texas Tech University
Show Hide image

Meet the evangelical Christian persuading believers that climate change is real

Katharine Hayhoe's Canadian missionary parents told her science and God were compatible. Then she moved to Texas. 

During Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, alarm rose with each mention of climate change. Denial, dismissal and repeated chants of “hoax” left no doubt as to his position.

Now President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement has been seen as a seminal moment in the fight against climate change - one which many fear could lose the battle ahead of humanity.

But one scientist has been fighting a war of her own on the ground, against those who typically doubt the facts about global warming more than most - the evangelical Christian population of America.

And to make matters even more unusual, Katharine Hayhoe herself is an evangelical Christian who lives in the indisputably "bible belt" of Lubbock, Texas.

The atmospheric scientist has been named one of Time magazine's 100 most influential people and one of Politico’s 50 thinkers transforming American politics. Now she is using her considerable heft to speak to those who are hardest to convince that there is a manmade problem that threatens the Earth’s future.

I meet her at the science and music festival Starmus in Trondheim, Norway, where she is to address the attendees on Thursday in a talk entitled "Climate Change: Facts and Fictions".

Hayhoe was born in Canada, to missionary parents. Her father, a former science educator, showed her that there was no conflict between the ideas of God and science. However, it was something of a surprise to her when she discovered her pastor husband, whom she married in 2000, did not feel the same about climate change. It took her two years to convince him.

What started as a conversation became an organised project when she moved to America's South in the mid 2000s. 

“Moving to Lubbock was a culture shock," she tells me. "When I moved there I wasn’t doing much outreach, but it moved me in that direction.

“Lubbock is very conservative. It’s small and isolated.

“I would say the majority of people in Lubbock are either dismissive or doubtful about climate change. I was surrounded by people - neighbours, parents of friends, people at church, colleagues down the hall in the university - who weren’t convinced.”

So Hayhoe, who works as an associate professor and director of the Climate Science Centre at Texas Tech University, set to work. She began to collect the responses she was seeing to the climate change discussion and prepare her counter-argument.

“When I talk to people who are doubtful, I try to connect with the values they already have," she says. “The greatest myth is the myth of complacency - that ‘it doesn’t really matter to me’.

"But I would say that the second most insidious myth is that you only care about this issue if you’re a certain type of person. If you’re a green person, or a liberal person, or a granola person."

The stereotypes mean that people outside that demographic feel "I can't be that kind of person because that's not who I am", as she puts it.

Hayhoe convinced her husband using data, but rather than repeating a formula, she tries to find out what will resonate with different people: "For many groups, faith is a core value that people share.”

Whether she’s speaking to city planners, water company managers, school kids or Bible believers, Hayhoe says her hook is not the facts, but the feelings.

“I recently talked to arborists," she says. "For them, trees and plants are important, so I connect with them on that, and say ‘because we care about trees, or because we care about water or what the Bible says then let me share with you from the heart why I can about these issues because it affects something that you already care about’.

“My angle is to show people that they don’t need to be a different person at all - exactly who they already are is the kind of person who can care about climate change.”

Hayhoe came to public attention in the United States after appearing in a Showtime series on climate change. She has appeared on panels with Barack Obama and Leonardo DiCaprio, and launched a web series. As well as plaudits, this level of fame has also earned her daily threats and online abuse. 

“My critics think they’re coming from a position of religion, but they aren’t," she says. "They’re actually coming from a very specific political ideology which believes that the government should not have control over people’s lives in any way shape or form - very libertarian, free market, free economy, Tea Party."

She believes that in the United States, faith and politics has been conflated to the point "people can no longer tell the difference". 

“Now it’s conservatism that informs religion," she elaborates. "If the two are in conflict - like the Bible says God has given us responsibility over everything on this earth - then people say ‘oh, we can’t affect something as big as this Earth, God will take care of it anyway’."

Around half of those who attack her on social media identify themselves as Christians, she notes, but almost all call themselves conservatives. 

As a scientist, she’s been preparing data herself - naturally - on her online attackers, with depressingly familiar results.

“As soon as you stick your head out of the trench, you get it. There have been papers published showing that white men disproportionately form up that small group of dismissives. They’re almost all men. When I track my social media comments, I would say that 99.5 per cent of them are white men.

“Out of 1,000 negative comments, I have maybe five from women.”

After the climate change argument moved up a gear - following the Paris withdrawal - Hayhoe admits that she and her fellow scientists are concerned, although she pays tribute to the businesses, cities and states from the US that have committed to following the Paris agreement themselves.

On the subject of the chief white male denier, Trump himself, Hayhoe says she has a discussion point which she feels may convince him to think carefully about his role in the fight against global warming’s impact on humanity.

“I would attempt to connect with the values that he has and show him how acting on this would be in his best interests," she says.

“One guess would be ‘what do you want your legacy to be? What do you want to be known as, the man who destroyed the world, or the man who saved it?’”

Katharine Hayhoe is speaking at Starmus on Thursday June 22. For more details, visit Starmus.

Kirstie McCrum is a freelance journalist. Follow her @kirstiemccrum.

0800 7318496