Later edit: This post refers to the false accusations against James Jackson/Onision and his spouse. At the time I felt uneasy about using names. They have since been cleared of these accusations (the police report was recently released to the public). It turned out the whole thing was a lie.

The past few months have seen intense and very public coverage of grooming allegations against a certain YouTube creator and his spouse, whom I will not name as the dynamics around the case are far more important (to me at least).

To start with, at this point, I reiterate that everything they have been accused of is alleged, as they have not even been charged with any offence, let alone convicted. I can however say I consider them complete creeps, as that’s not lawsuit material.

So as a second disclaimer, I am in no way saying the allegations are not credible and those affected should not have spoken out, or that there shouldn’t be a criminal investigation.

Following this case on and off, as many YouTube viewers have, I came to discover that the behaviour of those anticipating an arrest and conviction was far more interesting from a social observation standpoint. Whilst this coverage started with the right intentions (giving a voice to alleged victims), it morphed into something grotesque, which gave way to people’s worst instincts.

Unbeknownst to many (apparently), creeps and douches still have rights, as we all do. Forgetting that turns the entire situation mediaeval, which is not a good trend to normalise.

Hopefully, when things settle one way or the other, this case will lead to a broader discussion regarding social media, privacy rights, ambush journalism, mob behaviour and harassment.

My observations are interspersed with comments people have made on the subject.

Burn it all down

To summarise, the intense coverage of these allegations started a few months ago, although they were not new and had been covered sporadically over the years. The goal was to raise awareness and perhaps get these two people deplatformed, as they had allegedly been using their YouTube celebrity status to lure various young women into inappropriate situations. Given the evidence brought forth by a number of women, it was both appropriate and necessary in order to prevent others from ending up in the same situation. As far as I’m concerned, although they haven’t been completely deplatformed, the rest has been achieved.

However, things quickly moved from “they should be exposed and deplatformed” to “they should rot in prison, their children should be taken away and we’ll make that all happen”. People began to speculate that not only had they treated these young women in an exploitative and predatory manner; they were probably abusing their children and even “fucking their dog”. Everything went (and still goes). There is no basis whatsoever for such speculations.

Through the involvement of a famous journalist, an FBI investigation has apparently begun (although there is no proof of that at the moment). That was not enough for the crowd however, as legal proceedings tend to take a long time. They want these people hounded at all times and expect a culmination of this investigation any day now, waiting with baited breath (and popcorn) for a dramatic arrest. Here and there you see suggestions that a crowd should gather and “storm their house”.

At this point it remains unclear which laws were allegedly broken (regardless of the immorality of that behaviour) and what can realistically be expected as a consequence. However, the crowd expects to see someone “go down” in any conceivable way, regardless of the likelihood of that happening.

Forget about the character of those involved for a second and what is alleged. This progression is quite frightening and could escalate into a dangerous situation.

People accused of committing offences don’t have rights to legal protection (apparently)

Recently, as a clear PR stunt, the aforementioned journalist turned up to these people’s door with a camera crew of six, requesting an interview he knew he would not be granted, given previous discussions. As a result, the police were called for tresspassing and harassment and a restraining order was requested against him, which is yet to be ruled on.

To the public, this matter was only slightly divisive, most people agreeing it had been a great idea and a great show to boot (it was of course filmed and put online for millions of people to see). Said journalist proudly told viewers he would soon inform them “what was going on in that house”, in extremely poor taste. In my mind this crossed the line. Keep in mind this is the home of two young children and had they been present (which remains unclear) it would have certainly been distressing to witness the whole scene.

Personally, I have great disdain for ambush journalism, especially at people’s doorsteps, as even if someone is guilty, it causes distress to any unwilling participant who happens to live or be there at the time. People’s families should not be subjected to this; it’s not journalism; it’s being a vulture and perhaps cornering someone into unpredictable behaviour. As a side note, said journalist has caused a suicide in the past using similar tactics.

People’s reaction generally was that “journalists do this all the time”. It doesn’t mean they should.

Additionally, most claim someone who is being publicly accused of such things has no business requesting legal protection regardless of what happens to them or their family being put in danger by a media circus. That is also false.

It simply underlines the mentality that a person “should know they are toast” because they’ve been convicted in the court of public opinion and should stand by and witness their own destruction. That is not how life works and it’s not how the law works either. Again, a frightening mentality.

Institutions used as weapons against people the internet hates

Various “benefactors” have called CPS on these people overtime, with nothing happening as a result, which should be a clue to stop doing this.

They don’t understand that finding a person despicable in their interactions outside the family does not automatically mean they are a bad parent and there are standards of evidence to be met before such actions are taken by local authorities. If several visits were made and none of that was found, it’s quite obvious such actions are not needed. CPS are usually overreacting and paranoid, so the fact that they didn’t take any action should say something.

Unfortunately it is not uncommon at all nowadays for adults to target other adults’ children in this manner out of sheer disdain for their character. A few years ago this was done to Katie Hopkins – arguably another douche – for her political stances. Of course nothing came of it as it was being done without cause and for the wrong reasons.

In my opinion it’s the lowest common denominator to target someone’s family, regardless of the issues one has with them personally. Issues between adults should be handled as such. It’s strange enough that the same crowd showing concern for these children had no issue with a large camera crew unexpectedly showing up on their front lawn recently.

Alleged victims hassled for more “drama” details

Recently it has come out that the women who spoke out about their mistreatment have been approached with invasive questions, asked for more interviews by certain channels etc. It became apparent that some people covering this situation feel entitled to such information and are treating anything new as a sensational follow-up, in tabloid fashion.

I needn’t mention that no one is entitled to anything at all and their traumatising experiences should not be treated in that manner.

Speculations and the kitchen sink

Here are some of the most “out there” comments I have encountered:

I just realized he has dogs in the house as well as kids. Is there a chance he has sexually abused the dogs? I don’t even want to think about the children. Oh jesus, I hope they are all alright and that this deranged pervert hasn’t sexually abused any of them. :c

YouTube genius

I honestly feel they only had kids for a tax write off. I remember back in the day being an ******* fan and him saying “I’m not ever going to show my kids out of respect for their privacy” but I genuinely feel now that he doesn’t show them either due to him abusing them or him and *** just not caring about them enough to spend actual time with them trying to film a video (508 likes)

YouTube genius

I have a two year old son and love him to the moon. When I hear their child say mommy…omg it kills me I just see a child in a diaper asking for food or to play outside. I just cry. Omg please I will take care of them. I will love them okay. Please. 😢

YouTube genius reacting to a toddler saying “mummy” in a short audio

The Christ figure and demonic detractors

Finally, the cult-like following of the journalist in question has fully come to light when the real time questionable actions and behaviour of his collaborators, as well as his own, have been brushed aside.

This behaviour largely consisted of doxing, threats of violence, false copyright claims, an online scam, censorship to block any criticism and of course, the famous visit.

It has become apparent that the way the information is being realeased is designed to keep up the tempo of his online show and is geared towards viewers, not necessarily having in mind the safety of anyone involved.

Moreover, anyone with a negative opinion of these actions has been labelled a fan of the people being investigated, one of them using a sock puppet account, or even a member of an alleged criminal group around them (which there is no evidence for).

you’ll notice the only people freaking out have strangely bare channels, sometimes they have zero videos and many subscribers [how does that happen?] . you have an example in this very thread. i suspect they are part of ***** grooming network. you will notice they pretend to agree with you on some subjects. it’s called “gaslighting” (34 likes)

YouTube genius

The only people that are angry because of you going to his home are either 1. his “fans” or 2. too stupid to understand what an investigative journalist does. Or both, I guess.

YouTube genius

Boy, does this bring back memories. It’s a very cult-like reaction. Being observant and objective is a liability nowadays, as joining “the mission” of the “right crowd” with unconditional support is all that matterts.

To conclude, this could be summarised as a case of “hold your horses”, descending into mass hysteria. There are proceedings in place to deal with any kind of accusation and they should not be treated as a reality show, with onlookers waiting for the next episode.

Whatever happens as a result of the investigation, this will not be the first or last case of mass hysteria on social media.

And a few days later…

The venerable journalist, who is definitely not in it for the money and to revive his career (irony intended) came upon a police report from last year, regarding an accident that took place almost half a year ago. Evidently, it was investigated at the time and classed as such.

The irresponsibility of making that public, leading of course to the most awful mass speculations, which are too crazy to even write here, is difficult to quanitfy.

So here are my conclusions, following wich I’m pulling the plug on this circus, as even partaking in the energy of those creating it is kind of gross.

  1. Any scandal is a cash cow and those fuelling it will use absolutely everything at their disposal to capitalise on others’ misery.
  2. Mass hysteria makes people lose sight of the matter at hand and indulge in any kind of fantasies based on little or nothing. And they have no limit.
  3. Although these people claim to want investigations, if these conclude with no further action being taken, they are utterly dissatisfied with that; what they might try next is scary to think about.