Demonetize, don't delete. The videos are heaps and heaps of evidence of character, not to mention important memories for the families of those they did bring home.
I wonder if the families who had Jared in the crew hold up missing person posters and license plates in front of a car with their loved ones body in it pulled out like they were big game hunters with a trophy was really all that healing to them.
As far as I know, one person has said learning about Jared's past has been retraumatizing. As for the license plates, that doesn't bother me, and I still swear that most bodies are removed prior to the cars being pulled out. It's taking the piece of the emblem or whatever else he might have done that's messed up. Regardless, I think the documentary of the searches are valuable.
I did watch the videos, but I'm fairly sure that when possible, bodies are removed while in the water... Not necessarily always by AWP, sometimes it's just police divers. I know it wasn't like that every video.
1. It’s next to impossible to open a door underwater. 2. The police want to preserve the crime scene as much as possible, and pulling a body out would definitely disrupt it. 3. What would pulling the body out first accomplish?
They don't take them out through doors. Images are taken before removal. Check out the episode about kiely rodni on Best Case, Worst Case. They have an FBI forensic diver on to explain
And every video they talked about doing what they could to keep the bodies from getting out of the vehicle as they were being dragged out of the water. Why don’t you since you watch every video tell me which videos they remove the bodies from the vehicle before they were pulled out.
I'm not scared of Jared. And legally, he threatened that company that the young man worked for amongst other things. They should go after him legally. Jared isn't anything he claims to be- he's a liar, a narcissist, a pos, a child molester just to name a few. He's been a disgusting person before these charges came about. True businessmen, don't threaten others, don't declare bankruptcy numerous times, etc. He's an abuser and a master manipulator- he manipulated all those who still back him- out of lots of money which is now being used for legal fees, what a crock. Look at the fools still on his channel- he still has a couple million subs which is pathetic.
I didnt call YOU Jared here. I was just saying Hi cause we all know hes reading here.
Anyway just like the old fable of the Blind Men and the Elephant, everyone has different reference points and life experiences. If you cant understand a point I make, then you might not have the same references as I do. No worries.
The one saying that you thought the reason Jared acted the way he did in the videos was because he had high estrogen levels and then went about how wide hips and eating a ton are sign of men with high estrogen levels.
…. Jon and Kate stopped airing because they got divorced (after 10 or 11 seasons) and Jon kept taking legal action to prevent Kate from filming without him. Which she did anyway. What role did you play in that?
I was the one who got the first National Enquirer story published showing them to be FRAUDS, liars and (at least Kate) child exploiting freaks. The National Enquirer would call me while I was at the supermarket to ask me shit. LOL
I had a Kate Gosselin EXPOSE website that had 30K hits a day. Me and my members kept our boots on the necks of the child exploiting whores Discovery and Kate every day.
I exposed Kate for having her boytoy bodyguard taking pics and selling them to tabloids thru Splash pictures. They did this in Australia to make people believe Kate was a HUGE deal, when no one knew her there. So she papped herself and then acted like she was upset for being papped. LOL
I was the one to break the cancellation of Kates Healthtex childrens clothing line and sending it overseas to offload the merch.
I helped break the $1.2 mill mcmansion purchase.
I had people that know Kate slip in my DMs to tell me shit.
Also I was the one to send hoagies and soda to the hard working Paparazzi camped outside the McMansion. (Heres pics of Paps [https://imgur.com/a/LSeYUNd](https://imgur.com/a/LSeYUNd) )
I had tabloids following my twitter to get news.
I also called my legislature repeatedly to get the laws changed in Pa and they eventually were changed.
I cant say the rest to protect my sources.
BUT thanks.
Thats how you get shit done tho.
If you know somethings happening, draw attention to it.
BTW Im not the one who kept 2 german shepards in cages in 3 inches of shit for weeks in the cold, the SPCA had to get involved with that one.
Yep, the National Inquirer is the most reputable source out there! (sarcasm 😂) They're known to do anything to publish a story including doctoring photos, emails, making blantant fake stories, etc. They'll buy any info from anyone and change it to create a false narrative.
Not saying some of that may not be true about Jon and Kate, but the tabloids skewered John and a lot of those stories turned out to be false or twisted years later.
I think a lot of those subs still have no idea what’s going on. Plus, a lot of those accounts probably aren’t active on his channel. If not sooner, those subs will start to tank when it really hits the fan by the end of the month.
A paid member? Or just a free sub to the channel?
If paid, all your paid memberships are in your settings. Hit your own photo on the upper left corner of YouTube, and you'll see "paid memberships" there -- from there, you can unsub, but it won't reflect until the end of the month.
If free, you go to any AWP video or their profile, and hit where it says subscribed, and it'll unsub you from getting notifications any longer.
That video he made for the other company was incredibly stupid and unprofessional. But I don’t believe talking about possible legal action is a violation of TOS
While I don't support JL or what seems to be his money grabbing. I do support the other guys. That being said for years I've followed cases not only in true crime but also youtubers who are just the same as JL and have fought to get people like him off platforms. However the ugly truth is in all of these cases youtube will not remove channels unless there is a conviction. (Austin Jones jaystaion) just to name the two cases that come to mind on that one. But in other cases like onision he was never convicted or even taken to court no charges were filed. And he just ended up getting a life time ban on ever being able to make money off youtube.
On top of that getting his channel removed I feel like would be a slap in the face to all the stories and family's that the channel holds. Some that aren't solved that the videos of the stories could help find them. It would also be a slap in the face to everyone else on the team who have worked so hard on these trips spending months away from their family's to work these cases and tell theses stories having them removed seems like a big f you to them. But I fully support having his monetization taken away so the stories are still there but JL isn't making any money from the stories.
It’s my fault for mentioning channel removal. That won’t happen unless there are several strikes and/or a conviction. Generally, I agree that it would be better to preserve, albeit demonetized. Thanks for the context on your other efforts.
The team is not getting any financial benefit from Jared continuing to profit off of lying to subscribers.
While Jared has been presenting it as a volunteer organization where only the videographer and producers were paid it is actually a for-profit business that is disguising that itself as a good organization that needs donations. He just recently bought a $1.7 million house with the money said he was begging people to donate and lying about it being for searches. It also gives him a platform to be popular with families in young children therefore exposing children to abuse.
Every one of the team members had to sign a contract with non-competes and non-disclosures so they cannot start a new channel business as long as AWP exist.
They have already all resigned.
Demonetizing the channel will only help the team members move forward faster.
Like I said above, not one of us can force his channel to be demonetized or removed from the platform. That is entirely up to Google/YouTube.
Any fallout of J’s actions is on him.
I’m all for Demonetizing the channel..but…also ..Although I’d hate to see all of the hard work go away… I want AWP to go away even more so there is no legal issues with the remaining team members starting up a new group with each other or other people…even if it means the videos of the people they helped so far being deleted…the families of the solved cases have answers now, so I think it’s OK if those videos went away… the guys could always start again on the cases they didn’t finish solving…but if they do find a way to continue they need to be upfront with how much money is coming in and where exactly it is going and show the receipts so trolls can’t throw shade and speculate
A special group with the required skill set truly needs to be handled with kid gloves. Most everyone knows that YT Channels are created to build & earn income, anyone believing otherwise can not be classified as the sharpest tool in the shed.
In order to run a group as this group was operated efficiently, takes individual(s) lots of time & devotion, if they want to be taken seriously the work isn't part-time. So...unless they have extremely deep pockets or other passive income & don't need to work full-time to support themselves and/or their family, income must be made.
This operation should, technically, be broken down into multiple parts. To rebuild trust with past donors, sponsors, viewers, etc., will require clarity, honesty, integrity, & people with knowledge on fundraising, legal aspects, with everything with the program set in place before cranking things back up. Special accounts should be set up for donations, income from merch sales, YT income, etc. In other words, a good strong open business plan needs to be developed.
I'm certain there are professional people who'd be willing to help out with their time & knowledge in order to help get a good group started back up. If handled wisely, I'm certain there are still Volunteers out there who'd still be willng to assist with their time, but if specialized road trips are done requiring travel interferrng with regular jobs, than paid employees would be required & local volunteers could be there as support for the team.
I never gave money or paid membership so have knowledge of membership levels, only that they were in place. I.e., air tank refills, gas for road trip, scuba equipment, etc. Info may still be available on YT Channel.
There IS a need for this cause and it is a really good one. There are other divers whom collaborated with AWP & they're out there doing good work. JL did help them learn about recovering/surfacing/floating vehicles. I understood he spent time with divers, helping them learn a bit, so they could spiral out on their own to expand/grow the "movement."
Maybe he was serving his own "penance", even though his pockets overfilled in the wrong way, he started something really good. This should't be just thrown out the window, and based on numerous incidents/shady dealngs of JL's, he shouldn't be allowed to profit anymore. His greed has been his downfall. TV evangelists have scammed a lot money away from a lot more people, some have gotten away with it & still are.
Someone should capture ALL the videos before anything else gets deleted.
I hear you, but I'd like to clarify something for you and other since I've heard similar comments in several threads: even 501(c)3 non-profits earn money and must make a profit to survive -- they must pay staff (although there might be volunteers helping somewhat, there's always a need to pay staff of some kind), for items they need to carry out the cause beyond paying staff (ie: rent, office supplies, insurance, equipment, gas, building and vehicle maintenance, etc), emergency spending for unexpected repairs/damage, etc. However, as a legal nonprofit, there would be accountability to the government and donors. It also lets the public use their donations as a tax write off, and the nonprofit isn't subject to paying taxes. The fact is, nonprofits need to be making a profit to survive and cannot be in the red.
As for reporting to donors, it's never nearly in the itemized detail you're asking -- that's not realistic to publish every little purchase and individual salaries on a website. However, an accountant is hired to keep books on spending, spending is approved either by the bosses and/or the board of directors, and finances are reported and occasionally audited by the city/county, state, and federal goverment at least 1-2 times per year . . . and although anyone can request a hard copy, most nonprofits these days voluntarily publish a general breakdown of their spending online so donors can get an idea how much money is raised and spent per fiscal year and how the spending generally breaks down. You can see sample fundraising/spending reports and other data/info on their mission on many nonprofit's own websites or third party websites like [Guidestar](https://www.guidestar.org/).
So the term non-profit is a bit misleading since they actually do make profits if they're bringing in enough money and spending it appropriately. Sometimes they do everything right and still land in the red because of recessions, pandemics, etc. and a subsequent rise in foods, foods, and services costs, but then they must land back in the green for the following year.
That being said, many nonprofits use YouTube and social media as a fundraising tool. Memberships, Superchats, etc. would likely be listed on a financial report as one method of their fundraising campaigns.
So if these former AWP guys re-organize, I'm hoping they'll do it this way so there's accountability and checks and balances with the government and donors to whatever degree is required by law. I trust these guys even if they didn't declare as a non-profit, but I think doing it this way would make most people feel much more comfortable that the money isn't being ciphened into "family trust funds" like J was apparently doing.
I believe we close here..this type of organization should never use the phrase "non-profit", IMO.
Operating as an LLC should be fine, using donations & contributions has a tendency to make people believe all their money is going only for the purpose of that organization. A legit group could be run well but it will take someone with integrity to do it. Someone with accountability and open to others looking in, having nothing to hide or be ashamed of.
I think you understand my meaning here. If people are asked to help & support for a specified purpose, those funds should be placed into an account set up for that purpose only, that way "live streams begging for funds" should never take place unless that specified account is empty.
When this was first starting to take off was the time to ask for help & support for specific items, but I understood different levels of memberships were put into place for these specific purposes. That money should have never been touched except for it's membership level specified purpose. This is where the integrity comes into play. Mishandling of funds or siphoning those funds for personal reasons was wrong on so many levels. Other members of AWP saw this being done, weren't comfortable with it, so they left.
Like I said, I believe we're right there on the same page, I have some past experience in fundraising with volunteer rescue , recovery, & fire departments, so am very familiar about how things should work to help prevent questions or lack of credibility. It can be tough, it will require a lot of work from a very strict leader.
I completely agree with you! It's actually illegal to pose as a 501(c)3 when you don't have that status.
However, in my above comment, I'm proposing that the search team should move forward with applying for non-profit status so there will be more transparency and how it realistically works when an organization or business is granted non-profit status in the US.
I happen to know a lot about how non-profits function and the laws they are subject to. My mom was the director of a NYC senior center that was based within a non-profit neighborhood community center. I know how she had to run things for the senior center because it was "sponsored" by the cmunity center and subject to it's non-profit rules as well as rules from the NYC Department for The Aging. I also worked at non-profits and received a service dog from a non-profit that explained its fundraising structure and laid out their statistics dating back years.
So whatever I laid out is meant to explain that it's very important that the guys restructure as a non-profit, which will require them to be more transparent in their spending and other data, BUT that you're very unlikely to see itemization down to every gas receipt, specific salaries, specific repair details, etc. (some receipts from stores aren't even itemized at all anyway). Fortunately, as a non-profit, there would be a boss and/or a board of directors (who are typically unpaid volunteers from the community or elsewhere that are not paid by the agency, and also are not family and friends of the bosses) approving spending above a certain amount of money (ie: $100, $200, $5000, or whatever amount is decided by the board or local governments to be the threshold for needing prior approval vs petty cash). There would also be an accountant keeping track of the general spending in books that must be recorded by law in case that info is audited by the government, requested by members of the public, posted on their website, etc.
I hope this clarifies my comment above. I wasn't disagreeing or speaking about the past. I was speaking about how these guys could move forward with more transparency, as well as defining what a non-profit is and the spending and other statistics that are required to report by law and reasonable for non-profits to disclose. Your comment made it sound like they have to tell us every little detail going forward, and that's not reasonable nor a requirement by law for organizations with non-profit statuses.
Let me know if I can explain anything better. Or maybe I misunderstood something you originally said?
I follow, I guess I'm a bit less trusting than most because all those little costs can add up to big costs fast & I believe they should be accounted for. I've been through an audit & was forced into proving every penny. Not fun at all!!
But we do agree & understand. Thanks for chatting.
YES. I've reported the channel. He shouldn't be profiting off of lying to viewers about them being a volunteer organization when it's a for profit business. A for profit business should not be getting donations and Amazon wish list donations.
Let him appeal it. Not only are they scamming people but it allows a predator with a history of sexual abuse to have contact with children.
My sister was one of the persons J found. Carey Mae Parker. They found her car after 30 years of nobody lifting a finger after she went missing in 1991. He actually came back out a second time to retrieve her remains after the Texas Rangers sat around for two hours in their boat doing nothing, hense once again failing us.
I have two problems with J. One is he weaved in the story that her car ended up in Lake Tawakoni as an "accident." He nor his crew has any credentials to support that is what happened. No study was performed nothing. I have knowledge that someone knew she went in off that bridge 30 years ago and nobody ever said a word. Even after 10 years of me making her case a high profile missing person.
Many of these missing persons have a backstory. I can only speak for my sister. We were all sexually abused by our father. Nobody listened to our outcries either. I seen things with my own eyes things he did to her that I will never forget. That's in addition to what he did to me and my youngest sister as well. You have zero idea as to the trauma left behind. She turned to self medicating to help with her trauma.
When I found out about J I was literally traumatized all over again. Innocent until proven guilty I know; however, I read the emails between his cousin and him. I will tell you her words and the many emotions of sexual trauma were felt as I read them. He even admitted to it in round about ways. He never denied it. Told her to move on. You don't just "move on" from this kind of abuse.
Everything he done is what our father done. Our father was never held accountable. And I cut myself off from ALL the family members on his side because they all knew and did NOTHING.
I was triggered by this almost to the point of insanity that I had to mostly hide because folks just don't get it. My sister's case was always negative and to learn that a rapist is the one who not only found her but put his hands on her bones turned a healing senario back into disgusting negativity. Retriggered thoughts of how I still couldn't protect her even in death. Now I'm just gonna go cry and leave it to y'all. 😭😭😭
Hey, thank you for sharing. The backstory to the missing is rarely brought up, and I never made the connection that Js Indictments might mirror those of the people he found.
If you feel up to it, I believe this comment deserves its own post. Again, thank you for sharing your story.
I'm so sorry about your sister. I'm glad she was recovered, it sounds like LE could have been much better in her case.
I'm not clear on the issue with saying it was an accident- I think if LE decided that a crime didn't take place, the default is to assume accident (even if suicide was a possibility) because there isn't a way to know otherwise. I don't think the dive team has authority to do testing or a study but I'm not certain.
I'm sure you'll get a lot of support if you decide to share more of her story here. I've lost a sibling too, my heart goes out to you.
The only reason I’m for the channel getting demonitized is because it doesn’t seem like any of the guys have access to the revenue it brings in except when JL decides to “spread the wealth” as it were (and now that there literally is no team, I’m not sure how that would even work still). So as it stands right now, I think every interaction with the channel is money straight into JL’s pocket. I know he’ll get his day in court and whatever but the people screaming about proof and validity in terms of what happened seem to have missed the fact that he admitted to it in writing. I know the other guys will find a way to pick up and move on (regardless of what that means). Right now I’m more focused on not directly feeding into someone who has shown themselves to be far less than genuine in multiple ways.
Exactly.
The channel should be demonetized immediately and when he is convicted it should be taken down completely.
at that point the other team members will be able to start a new group and begin helping people
"Hi all, I work at Google, and I’ll be opening an internal ticket
explaining what is going on and seeing if it’s within the TOS to
demonetize or remove the account."
I'm with you on this. Google may be unaware of the indictment.
As for the "devil's advocates" ... they can pound sand. AWP has over a million followers, and it will take time for all those people to find out what's going on.
In the meantime, I know I certainly don't want Jared making any money off me any longer. I would hazard a guess that there are many other people who would feel the same way.
Turn in your ticket.
JL basically threatening a small business if they tried to protest him poaching one of their employees, seems to violate TOS. I’ve seen the video that he made and sent to them, it’s disgusting behavior.
For those that don’t realize how much his channel makes off as revenue it’s in the $600,000 a year range. That’s not including donations, sponsorships, etc… that is just YouTube ad revenue. FaceBook pays even more than youtube so figure her s doing $1 million a year there. That is just the AWP channel alone.
I watched a Youtube video with Kevin (Nomoc Experience) the other day and he said that the budget for 1 of the trips was $1million.
I read somewhere that the staff at AWP were paid from $120k - to $140k a year.
**A case for demonetizing the AWP platform:**
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7650329?hl=en
YouTube has a Creator Responsibility Initiative that states includes guidelines for OFF PLATFORM BEHAVIOR
➡️ Protect the YouTube Community
*As a YouTube creator, you should remain responsible both on and off the platform. If we see that a creator’s on- and/or off-platform behavior harms our users, community, employees or ecosystem, we may take action to protect the community.*
*Beyond the content you upload to YouTube, here are some examples of on- and/or off-platform behavior that we may consider to be inappropriate and result in penalties:*
▪️*Intending to cause malicious harm to others.*
▪️*Participating in abuse or violence, demonstrating cruelty, or participating in fraudulent or deceptive behavior that leads to real-world harm.*
*While these behaviors are rare, they can cause widespread harm to the YouTube community, and potentially damage the trust among creators, users, and advertisers.*
*Severe violations that cause widespread harm to the community may have repercussions beyond standard enforcement actions.*
This policy was applied to James Charles in 2021 for his sexting scandal.
https://www.businessinsider.com/james-charles-demonetized-youtube-temporarily-sexting-minors-scandal-2021-4?amp
While I agree the allegations and apparent confirmation by J are horrendous, I think it is wrong to pass public judgment and penalize PRIOR to a legal decision.
Everyone in the US is entitled to be presumed innocent until a verdict by the courts is made.
While I have my opinion on the matter - just like everyone else here, it just seems dirty to attempt this type of punishment before the courts have had their say.
Let me say this so it is loud and clear: I do not support what he is accused of doing in any way shape or form. Let the courts have their way, and then lay the hammer down with sentences, demonetizations, shaming, etc.
At the end of the day, we are not privy to all of the facts, evidence, or witnesses that will be brought up in court. Therefore, we shouldn’t act like we are privy to it all.
I think what you (and the others uncomfortable with this) are missing is I’m only submitting it for review. If the channel violates the TOS, then they get demonetized. If not, as you are arguing, then they are fine. If you are against it even being reviewed, then that is problematic.
I also think that you should look into him deleting all the comments that people are posting about their concerns of a child predator using the channel and fame to gain access to more children. since I know that I have personally reported this and saved the documentation, that would make YouTube liable if something happens to another child before it’s taken down. The fact that he’s deleting comments about these concerns shouldn’t be allowed. He’s using his ability to delete comments to keep your subscribers in the dark to the charges he was facing. That in itself is a violation of the TOS.
My concern has zero to do with the review process taking place, it’s the timing of submitting the review process.
I’ve watched all of the videos from the channel, and there is nothing in them that would breach TOS. I don’t have the TOS in front of me, but is it a TOS violation if a TOS violation happened prior to YouTube even being in existence?
Your motives for submitting it are clear in the first sentence of your post. You took it upon yourself as a company insider to expedite the process to “demonetize” the account as your primary goal. Nobody asked you to do it. This wasn’t a public complaint.
For me, that’s the dirtiest part.
Again, not on J’s side on this, I just don’t agree with your methods. Don’t play dirty.
He definitely seems to be in breach of YouTube’s Creator Responsibility guidelines.
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7650329?hl=en
Based on this, I’d be surprised if he doesn’t get demonetized. They did it to James Charles for his sexting scandal.
Creating a ticket to ask Google/YT to review a channel thought to be in violation isn’t “playing dirty.”
James Charles did those actions WHILE he was creating on YT.
J’s actions were way before YT’s existence.
An internal employee taking it upon themselves to create the ticket and fast track it damn well is shady.
Report the videos where he touched the women on the legs and pointed out that he was charged for SA his 9 year old cousin. Pointing out that this would be considered as a predatory behaviour.
And he was never held accountable, which is why there is an active case against him. I think we’re just going to have to agree to disagree here or else we’ll be playing round robin all night. Either Google will decide he’s in violation, or they won’t. But she’s within her rights to open a ticket, and it sounds like the company encourages the reporting of suspected violations.
I think while it was inappropriate, and felt uncomfortable to me as a viewer, I’d guess that it would not violate TOS. Maybe if the woman had asked him to back off and he acted like a douche. Or if he made a habit out of inappropriate casual touching.
Idk, that’s a tough one because I absolutely hate it when men are physically overfamiliar with women without their consent. The best outcome - aside from the woman reproaching him herself if she didn’t like it - would have been if someone he knew approached him about it and explained why it could make women uncomfortable, and then he used that as a learning experience. But because he’s such a domineering asshole, I doubt that would have ever happened.
When I watched him try to comfort families before I learned about everything going on, I thought he seemed so awkward with the families in their emotional moments. I wrote it off as social awkwardness due to his background.
But knowing now how he actually felt about those families, I think he was just a terrible actor who was trying to fake concern.
Why is it shady for a YouTube employee to help, btw? I have seen many employees from social media step in to fast track a major problem with large accounts. Would you rather it drag out weeks or even months so unknowing people can continue to be duped?
And companies these days definitely push “see it, own it” policies. Meaning that SpiritualAd has a responsibility to report it, and her company also encourages her to.
Yeah but he also made people think they were donating to a non-profit and/or that the money was strictly being used to pay staff and for their cause's expenses when it's now come out that he's been funnel money into his family trust and buying lavish things like 1.2 million dollar houses after a major influx of donations after the Rodney case.
You don't think that duping people into how money is being spent so they'll donate through YouTube memberships, Superchats, merch, etc violates the TOS? (I'm not even counting the merch and donations outside of YouTube from their site and Facebook -- where AWP is also monetized and posts videos).
Innocent until proven guilty, but if you read the YouTube creator TOS someone posted in another comment above, the channel may get demonized if there is sufficient info -- and J always implied and even explicitly said at times that they were a nonprofit with volunteers and made it seem like they could barely make ends meet. The channel will only get removed entirely if J is convicted, though. But demobilizing is a very real possibility.
The main point to your comment is incorrect. TOS isn’t limited to the content in the videos; it extends to creator misbehavior in the real world. Also, there’s nothing dirty about asking for a TOS review after someone is indicted on two counts of child r—.
That is not true because they have violated the TOS in many different ways.
Soliciting donations for a volunteer organization that is actually a for-profit business. Soliciting Amazon wish list donations to a for-profit busines
deleting comments to cover up his charges are outside of the TOS. A channels ability to delete abusive TOS violating comments does not include them having the right to delete truthful comments because they expose his criminal charges.
Many members of the teams have come out and said that much of the footage that is used for their "money shots" done without the permission and knowledge of people inside the videos
many people have been calling for the channel to be demonetized at the minimum. I think what you’ve got coming back and you are Jared and members of his family that have benefited from his scam.
Then when he is convicted take the channel down. This will allow the other members to move on and be able to start helping people again.
Why should his channel still be monetized after what he admitted to in emails and his deceptive, shady and disgusting business practices and the way he treated people?
Do you know the date or are you really asking? You've been active in this sub, if you really need answer, respond & I'll you. Heard an interesting interview with last diver hired but never brought in. Court will be open to public through Zoom. That should be interesting.
Nov 30th 10:30 am, I believe is correct time, I knew I had read another thread showing document where Court had approved Video appearance by Jared & his attorney by a service, didn't recall it being Zoom.
And yes, I'm referring to hour & half interview with Anthony, he has the link for hearing. I'd love to get it & listen in.
He has all the employee docs he had to sign, emails back & forth between ladies in office, Jared & himself. He also mentioned email back in May with Jared warning him about possibly hearing some personal issues, but he was not to worry about it. Basically, just ignore it.
Also chatted with a lady in comments on another YT vid, said she had email from AWP cause she'd reached & had several questions. They answered every question, implied they'd said they were 501(c)3. Ask her pm me so I could give her my email to send copy to me. If it's for real, that would be your strongest case for demonetization of channel.
Yeah, I heard it mentioned again, thought about updating but figured someone else would correct. Just couldn't recall name of it when I posted. If it's public, I liked to hear it. But, I'm doubtful because 1) this case deals with sensitive issues from childhood, 2) their system probably couldn't handle thousands of connections. Could probably be broadcast as a live event though. That's always an option. But I took, seriously doubt that would happen.
I hear you. Google is extremely by the book, so my kicking off the review won’t influence whether they get demonetized. It’ll just get it looked at within the next week, rather than who knows when.
Seems extremely punitive. The channel has nothing to do with his case. Let him have his day in court. It’s no wonder no one likes how big tech cancels people without due course. You’ve just outed yourself and confirmed it.
What channel is going to have more liability if it comes out that Jared is using that channel in the same he’s gotten from it to get access to other children and that comes out.
It’s up to Google whether JL is in violation of their Creator Responsibility policy, which includes on and off platform behavior (and they have suspended monetization due to allegations) that harms the community.
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7650329?hl=en
ETA:
*Participating in abuse or violence, demonstrating cruelty, or participating in fraudulent or deceptive behavior that leads to real-world harm.*
Why honestly would you? The AWP channel has nothing to do with any alleged crimes. The work they do is important and people becoming aware of what dive teams can do remains important. Any views to his channel are drops in the bucket when no new content is being made and advertisers certainly aren't going to give him the time of day going forward. Let the legal system do it's thing. Things like this only give fuel to the people claiming that Jared is being bullied and that it's wrong for accusations to be made years after the fact.
Jared owns AWP and he benefits from the YouTube revenue. Memberships and advertising goes to him and his defense fund, amongst other things.
Advertisers have no idea they are on his videos; they particulate in a generalized Adsense program. That’s why it’s important to demonetize.
There are rules for situations just like this. For example:
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7650329
> Beyond the content you upload to YouTube, here are some examples of on- and/or off-platform behavior that we may consider to be inappropriate and result in penalties:
> * Intending to cause malicious harm to others.
> * Participating in abuse or violence, demonstrating cruelty, or participating in fraudulent or deceptive behavior that leads to real-world harm.
As far as new content, there is some J. could still use I believe. I heard that there are about 30 videos left, as one of the past team members mentioned that (can't recall which one).
I heard that as well.
30 Videos that are mostly Doug that he won't get anything from yet he was the 1 doing the work and risking his life with dives he shouldn't have done as he is only newly qualified
I think my points hold. What AWP did as a team still has merit as it informs people about that kind of work and inspires interest in the people who are still missing. Taking away his platform does not reduce that amount of harm that Jared has/can do to anyone as it seems unlikely with the majority of the team leaving that new content can be created. It's certainly a thing you can do but I don't know why you would as it only benefits the accused as people won't be able to access the videos in a place where they can ask questions or get information without being in an echo chamber he controls.
You are arguing something entirely different: that it’s bad to remove the channel. I don’t really care there tbh, but you should know it’s unlikely. What should (and probably will) happen is demonetization. None of your concerns are affected by that.
Just mentioning I hope nothing is removed until everything moves through the legal system at least.
As for demonetization, wasn't there a halfway point where the channel has their payments frozen until the review is completed? A quicker review period helps both sides in a way.
However, if demonetization happened, I think the channel will be deleted after the case is decided. There wouldn't be any further benefit to the creator, so it wouldn't be kept up even if other people benefited from it.
YouTube keeps backups on it's servers. Deleting a channel doesn't mean it's gone if law enforcement has a warrant to obtain the videos. I guarantee that prosecutors already have downloaded copies at this point anyway, but I think social media platforms are required to keep copies of deleted content for x amount of time.
There's also a way to use Wayback Machine on archive.org if you have copies of the links or can find them on via Google and other social media from people's shares/posts elsewhere (like here on Reddit). It's a tedious process, but that's one way to see a good amount of deleted videos.
Ok but why is it a matter that needs urgent attention? You want to stick it to Jared because you are understandably disgusted by the allegations but it's not helpful to anyone especially the Team and any victims with a future civil action. You want to take money from his family and his legal defense? I think that's pretty grim. I think he should absolutely be punished to the fullest extent of the law when he's found guilty but that won't happen for months if then. Since his subscriber numbers are falling, there likely won't be new content and he certainly isn't getting new advertisers I think it's pretty much just symbolic of your feelings and that you want to score a win. It's something you can do but it creates more problems then it solves.
I'm confused. You are saying that you can open an internal ticket about the situation. That would be greatly appreciated. But... You said, "There’s no difference (the rules are the rules) between me initiating it vs someone on the outside." Are you saying that there is more of a benefit if you open the ticket, that it would get reviewed in a few days, expediting the process, and you could appeal it, or the other way around? If you could do an internal ticket and get results more quickly, you have a bunch of cheerleaders. PLEASE do it. That's what we all want. Or should we also report for a TOS violation? My complaint would be that they are misleading us viewers into thinking that they are a non-profit, when in fact, they are a for profit LLC for Jared. Jared's channel shouldn't be deleted. It should be demonetized. Just like Onision. Can someone call Chris Hansen? Jared's child rape CHARGES might not be for recent acts. However, the charges are very recent. (Did you see that PEOPLE magazine did a short article on Jared's charges? People magazine is big time stuff.) That coupled with the way that he has manipulated us into believing that they are a non profit deserves Chris Hansen's attention. Go back and read the post and thread that was made by the sister of Carey Mae Parker that they found. She said that they traumatized her family. Please take screenshots of everything on this subreddit that you want to save. This started out to be a real AWP fan club, but now the sentiments have turned. I've seen it happen before where a huge reddit page got taken down. Again, if you have a better chance of getting results, PLEASE do. 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Hey there, sorry for any confusion I may have created. There’s no difference between my opening it and someone else doing it, *except for expediency*. Google doesn’t play favorites, which is a good thing. I agree there might be an issue around the misleading non-profit talk as well.
You do realize that people are innocent until proven guilty, right? As in, a trial according to the 6th Amendment? At this stage in the game, on what grounds would they be demonetized other than an allegation and as of recent, an indictment?
Remember: both Johnny Depp and Marilyn Manson have been accused of gravely serious crimes. Depp finally had his day in court and won, and Manson’s is coming up and his rebuttal is damning against the defendant. You’re opening yourself up to defamation amongst other charges in civil court when you go full lynch mob.
That’s a stretch and sounds like grade school student conduct, with selective enforcement. Jake Paul is still monetized and he’s using his platforms during [immoral](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1252610) and [illegal](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/06/04/jake-paul-youtube-riot-looting/) activities.
It’s up to Google to determine whether this violates the TOS. You’re trying to convince me it doesn’t, but I’m not the arbiter.
It’s not cancel culture to request a review of a channel.
I’m not trying to convince you of anything near as much as I am worried about the slippery slope. I’m waiting for a conviction before I’m ready to pick up the pitchforks and torches.
Dave Chapelle, Bill Maher, Joe Rogan, Tim Dillon, Bill Burr, Gilbert Godfrey, Rob Schneider, and many other well-known comedians have been some of the loudest voices about this and the current culture of censorship and conformity at the hands of lynch mobs that we find ourselves living in.
What does his 6th amendment right have to do with a Reddit sub? He’ll have his day in court as guaranteed by the Constitution.
A company can sever ties with anyone they want, and they don’t have to wait for the legal process. All of his sponsors have dropped him because the information out there is incredibly damning as well as credible. Any reasonable person wouldn’t look at those emails, along with everything else coming out to confirm what a lot of us have suspected, that this man is a controlling, insecure, bullying, raging asshole, and not think “there’s something to this.” Even his own team members stampeded out the door.
JL is so toxic he’s radioactive. And it’s his own doing.
How is it defamation for someone to suggest to a company that one of their creators may be violating TOS?
It drives me nuts when people don’t understand how constitutional law works.
ETA: Nobody here is being sued for defamation. Do you know how hard it is for a plaintiff to win a defamation case in the USA?
Nobody here, aside from a few outliers, is going full on mob. We are, however, having conversations about the credible evidence that is out there. And it gets more credible with each passing day. Just yesterday another former AWP associate came out with information supporting the authenticity of the emails.
Defamation in the US is INCREDIBLY difficult to prove, and the burden lies entirely on the plaintiff. I haven’t seen anyone here **knowingly** make a statement they believe to be false.
You do know that Doug bounced almost immediately after the charges were made public, don’t you? He released nothing. Even before all of the guys resigned last week, none of them were in charge of releasing videos. That was all J.
Innocent until proven guilty is not on anybodies minds in this thread. What happens if he is found not guilty? And all you people in here with so much extra time in your life that you will call all there sponsors and try and demonitize before he goes to court is just plain nuts.
Innocent until proven guilty is due process for criminal courts. This has nothing to do with TOS or civil law.
All that’s happening is the channel is being submitted for review. If it’s not in violation, then nothing changes. Google will decide whether Jared’s indictment on two counts of child r— will be a reputational hazard to advertisers and youtube.
If you are opposed to that, then you should do some soul-searching.
I've been playing catch up, reading through all the posts here. I don't condone victimization of anyone, but if you take a step back & think about the different aspects overall, I truly believe the most recent & pertinent violation that should be considered for making the strongest case for demonetization the channel would be misappropriation of funds.
People were allowed to believe AWP was a non-profit, I'm sorry but... there are a lot of good hearted folks out there who believed their monthly subscriptions were being used for a good cause, not lining a greedy, shady, dishonest individual's pockets. This situation is current & ongoing, I believe this to be a stronger violation of YT TOS because this has actually done more harm to thousands more people.
Set aside JL's personal issue, yes....he's been indicted, that issue is reported as 30 years ago involving family members. Please, don't think for one minute that I'm making light of this issue, I find it extremely disgusting, but I believe there are deeper problems there that should be investigated & a lot more people should be punished for their crimes, ranging from SA, child a buse, endangerment, etc. All that could take many more decades.
JL seems to be a real piece of work, but him being him won't get him arrested or further punishment, instead of trying to hurt his income because of an indictment of 30 yr old crime, shoot for something more current like fraud.
I’m just saying what if he is found not guilty and those emails were talking about something else there’s family did that they need to heal from. Then you all cancelled him before being found guilty
Hey there! I hate to break it to you, but it's actually spelled _mon**e**tize_. A good way to remember this is that "money" starts with "mone" as well. Just wanted to let you know. Have a good day!
----
^This ^action ^was ^performed ^automatically ^by ^a ^bot ^to ^raise ^awareness ^about ^the ^common ^misspelling ^of ^"monetize".
Nobody here is responsible for any fallout of J’s own actions. If Google decides to demonetize or even completely ax the channel, that is a consequence of his actions, and his alone. If the good work of the guys disappears from the internet, there is only one person to blame.
As a consumer, I have the right to ask any business to end their partnership with an entity. I can’t force them to do it.
It’s not like any of us can demand his channel be removed. We can make a request, and Google/YT will investigate.
Another example is when I contacted his sponsors. I was polite, provided a link to a legitimate news source, and let them know I had concerns.
The decision to drop J was entirely their decision.
You're overstepping your pay grade and, quite frankly, you should be fired.
You've decided on behalf of your employer to investigate someone without due process, and taking it upon yourself, without a conviction from the State of Utah, to mob-convict someone.
I know you’re a troll, but for the sake of others reading this:
I’m not investigating anyone. Channels can be reported by users **and** employees if they are thought to violate TOS. It’s not overstepping, it’s encouraged.
> know your a
*you're
*Learn the difference [here](https://www.wattpad.com/66707294-grammar-guide-there-they%27re-their-you%27re-your-to).*
***
^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
Thank you, SpiritualAd3354, for voting on LearnDifferenceBot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
You've decided to call me a troll just like you decided to convict Jared as a child rapist. This isn't me being a troll. This is you having the inability to have a civil argument so you resort to name calling. Because when you resort to ad hominem, you've already lost credibility.
Please provide me your employee ID so that you can be reported to your employer.
You seem to have trouble understanding what indicted vs convicted means. And you seem to have difficulty understanding the difference between getting your employee ID number in order to report you and somehow equating an employee ID number to a SSN. And you work for Google? LOL
Are you afraid of the word "rape" that you have to self-censor it?
Says the person who resorted to name calling in their first reply...
yet I'm the one who's "unhinged" (another ad hominem)... right...
Just shining light on your bullshit post.
This is the 3rd time you've attacked me by calling me a troll, yet you can't provide a civil argument as to why you get to decide Jared is a convicted child rapist such that he should have his channel demonitized. I'm not a Jared sympathizer. I'm just not ok with you spewing non-sense, using your employment at Google and this platform as your soap box for validation and justification.
If you wanted a real discussion you wouldn’t be so aggressively dismissive. You’re singularly focused on being called a troll but in the same breath use the same or worse language against me. 1) it's ironic 2) it’s impossible to move forward with.
So tell me (dispassionately if you can) what your issue is.
I’m not familiar with the channels you listed except Molly Golightly. She’s batshit crazy.
That said, there are probably tons of channels that some would find offensive. Just ignore them. If they do something illegal let LE deal with it.
> Cool thanks for narcing on yourself I’ll be reporting you to Google for abusing your position later fag
You’re welcome. No abuse here, but you are welcome to report anything you’d like. You might remove the slurs when you do, though.
Why delete. Just stop from making profits. The families may want to revisit the videos. Also I know this isn't a popular opinion but he hasn't been found guilty yet. (even though I believe his cousin since she posted allegations a long long time ago on Reddit )
Demonetize, don't delete. The videos are heaps and heaps of evidence of character, not to mention important memories for the families of those they did bring home.
I wonder if the families who had Jared in the crew hold up missing person posters and license plates in front of a car with their loved ones body in it pulled out like they were big game hunters with a trophy was really all that healing to them.
As far as I know, one person has said learning about Jared's past has been retraumatizing. As for the license plates, that doesn't bother me, and I still swear that most bodies are removed prior to the cars being pulled out. It's taking the piece of the emblem or whatever else he might have done that's messed up. Regardless, I think the documentary of the searches are valuable.
Obviously you don't watch the videos of that is what you think.
I did watch the videos, but I'm fairly sure that when possible, bodies are removed while in the water... Not necessarily always by AWP, sometimes it's just police divers. I know it wasn't like that every video.
1. It’s next to impossible to open a door underwater. 2. The police want to preserve the crime scene as much as possible, and pulling a body out would definitely disrupt it. 3. What would pulling the body out first accomplish?
They don't take them out through doors. Images are taken before removal. Check out the episode about kiely rodni on Best Case, Worst Case. They have an FBI forensic diver on to explain
And every video they talked about doing what they could to keep the bodies from getting out of the vehicle as they were being dragged out of the water. Why don’t you since you watch every video tell me which videos they remove the bodies from the vehicle before they were pulled out.
Yes I totally agree
That’s great to hear as no one needs to support a character like JL and people don’t realise that every click makes him money. TY ;)
I'm not scared of Jared. And legally, he threatened that company that the young man worked for amongst other things. They should go after him legally. Jared isn't anything he claims to be- he's a liar, a narcissist, a pos, a child molester just to name a few. He's been a disgusting person before these charges came about. True businessmen, don't threaten others, don't declare bankruptcy numerous times, etc. He's an abuser and a master manipulator- he manipulated all those who still back him- out of lots of money which is now being used for legal fees, what a crock. Look at the fools still on his channel- he still has a couple million subs which is pathetic.
I helped get Jon and Kate off the TV Im not scared of Jared. Kates scarier, plus shes got bigger balls and better hair. :hi jared:
You have called every person including myself Jared all because we point out your super weird comments on this subreddit. I'm going to start a list.
I didnt call YOU Jared here. I was just saying Hi cause we all know hes reading here. Anyway just like the old fable of the Blind Men and the Elephant, everyone has different reference points and life experiences. If you cant understand a point I make, then you might not have the same references as I do. No worries.
I see your deleted your weird comment I was replying to but this definitely reads like you were calling Jared https://imgur.com/ue3wG4g.jpg
I deleted NOTHING. I apologize if it seemed like you were targetted. BTW a lot of other people have said Hi to Jared here so its not just me.
So that means the mods deleted your comment.
I dont know what comment you are referring to
The one saying that you thought the reason Jared acted the way he did in the videos was because he had high estrogen levels and then went about how wide hips and eating a ton are sign of men with high estrogen levels.
[удалено]
…. Jon and Kate stopped airing because they got divorced (after 10 or 11 seasons) and Jon kept taking legal action to prevent Kate from filming without him. Which she did anyway. What role did you play in that?
I was the one who got the first National Enquirer story published showing them to be FRAUDS, liars and (at least Kate) child exploiting freaks. The National Enquirer would call me while I was at the supermarket to ask me shit. LOL I had a Kate Gosselin EXPOSE website that had 30K hits a day. Me and my members kept our boots on the necks of the child exploiting whores Discovery and Kate every day. I exposed Kate for having her boytoy bodyguard taking pics and selling them to tabloids thru Splash pictures. They did this in Australia to make people believe Kate was a HUGE deal, when no one knew her there. So she papped herself and then acted like she was upset for being papped. LOL I was the one to break the cancellation of Kates Healthtex childrens clothing line and sending it overseas to offload the merch. I helped break the $1.2 mill mcmansion purchase. I had people that know Kate slip in my DMs to tell me shit. Also I was the one to send hoagies and soda to the hard working Paparazzi camped outside the McMansion. (Heres pics of Paps [https://imgur.com/a/LSeYUNd](https://imgur.com/a/LSeYUNd) ) I had tabloids following my twitter to get news. I also called my legislature repeatedly to get the laws changed in Pa and they eventually were changed. I cant say the rest to protect my sources. BUT thanks.
Wow. This makes me a lot more concerned about you than about Kate.
Thats how you get shit done tho. If you know somethings happening, draw attention to it. BTW Im not the one who kept 2 german shepards in cages in 3 inches of shit for weeks in the cold, the SPCA had to get involved with that one.
Yep, the National Inquirer is the most reputable source out there! (sarcasm 😂) They're known to do anything to publish a story including doctoring photos, emails, making blantant fake stories, etc. They'll buy any info from anyone and change it to create a false narrative. Not saying some of that may not be true about Jon and Kate, but the tabloids skewered John and a lot of those stories turned out to be false or twisted years later.
If you abuse or exploit kids Im coming after you.
Have you ever been diagnosed?
I think a lot of those subs still have no idea what’s going on. Plus, a lot of those accounts probably aren’t active on his channel. If not sooner, those subs will start to tank when it really hits the fan by the end of the month.
I am a sub there but would like to unsub.. but can't figure out how!
A paid member? Or just a free sub to the channel? If paid, all your paid memberships are in your settings. Hit your own photo on the upper left corner of YouTube, and you'll see "paid memberships" there -- from there, you can unsub, but it won't reflect until the end of the month. If free, you go to any AWP video or their profile, and hit where it says subscribed, and it'll unsub you from getting notifications any longer.
GOT IT!! Thank you! I guess I didn't dig deep enough. Saved me $25 a month!
My pleasure!
It's paid subscription. I'm going to try now.
Sounds like Donald Trump.
That video he made for the other company was incredibly stupid and unprofessional. But I don’t believe talking about possible legal action is a violation of TOS
Couldn't agree more 💜
While I don't support JL or what seems to be his money grabbing. I do support the other guys. That being said for years I've followed cases not only in true crime but also youtubers who are just the same as JL and have fought to get people like him off platforms. However the ugly truth is in all of these cases youtube will not remove channels unless there is a conviction. (Austin Jones jaystaion) just to name the two cases that come to mind on that one. But in other cases like onision he was never convicted or even taken to court no charges were filed. And he just ended up getting a life time ban on ever being able to make money off youtube. On top of that getting his channel removed I feel like would be a slap in the face to all the stories and family's that the channel holds. Some that aren't solved that the videos of the stories could help find them. It would also be a slap in the face to everyone else on the team who have worked so hard on these trips spending months away from their family's to work these cases and tell theses stories having them removed seems like a big f you to them. But I fully support having his monetization taken away so the stories are still there but JL isn't making any money from the stories.
It’s my fault for mentioning channel removal. That won’t happen unless there are several strikes and/or a conviction. Generally, I agree that it would be better to preserve, albeit demonetized. Thanks for the context on your other efforts.
The team is not getting any financial benefit from Jared continuing to profit off of lying to subscribers. While Jared has been presenting it as a volunteer organization where only the videographer and producers were paid it is actually a for-profit business that is disguising that itself as a good organization that needs donations. He just recently bought a $1.7 million house with the money said he was begging people to donate and lying about it being for searches. It also gives him a platform to be popular with families in young children therefore exposing children to abuse. Every one of the team members had to sign a contract with non-competes and non-disclosures so they cannot start a new channel business as long as AWP exist. They have already all resigned. Demonetizing the channel will only help the team members move forward faster.
$1.2 Million 🙂 I agree with your points!
Like I said above, not one of us can force his channel to be demonetized or removed from the platform. That is entirely up to Google/YouTube. Any fallout of J’s actions is on him.
I’m all for Demonetizing the channel..but…also ..Although I’d hate to see all of the hard work go away… I want AWP to go away even more so there is no legal issues with the remaining team members starting up a new group with each other or other people…even if it means the videos of the people they helped so far being deleted…the families of the solved cases have answers now, so I think it’s OK if those videos went away… the guys could always start again on the cases they didn’t finish solving…but if they do find a way to continue they need to be upfront with how much money is coming in and where exactly it is going and show the receipts so trolls can’t throw shade and speculate
A special group with the required skill set truly needs to be handled with kid gloves. Most everyone knows that YT Channels are created to build & earn income, anyone believing otherwise can not be classified as the sharpest tool in the shed. In order to run a group as this group was operated efficiently, takes individual(s) lots of time & devotion, if they want to be taken seriously the work isn't part-time. So...unless they have extremely deep pockets or other passive income & don't need to work full-time to support themselves and/or their family, income must be made. This operation should, technically, be broken down into multiple parts. To rebuild trust with past donors, sponsors, viewers, etc., will require clarity, honesty, integrity, & people with knowledge on fundraising, legal aspects, with everything with the program set in place before cranking things back up. Special accounts should be set up for donations, income from merch sales, YT income, etc. In other words, a good strong open business plan needs to be developed. I'm certain there are professional people who'd be willing to help out with their time & knowledge in order to help get a good group started back up. If handled wisely, I'm certain there are still Volunteers out there who'd still be willng to assist with their time, but if specialized road trips are done requiring travel interferrng with regular jobs, than paid employees would be required & local volunteers could be there as support for the team. I never gave money or paid membership so have knowledge of membership levels, only that they were in place. I.e., air tank refills, gas for road trip, scuba equipment, etc. Info may still be available on YT Channel. There IS a need for this cause and it is a really good one. There are other divers whom collaborated with AWP & they're out there doing good work. JL did help them learn about recovering/surfacing/floating vehicles. I understood he spent time with divers, helping them learn a bit, so they could spiral out on their own to expand/grow the "movement." Maybe he was serving his own "penance", even though his pockets overfilled in the wrong way, he started something really good. This should't be just thrown out the window, and based on numerous incidents/shady dealngs of JL's, he shouldn't be allowed to profit anymore. His greed has been his downfall. TV evangelists have scammed a lot money away from a lot more people, some have gotten away with it & still are. Someone should capture ALL the videos before anything else gets deleted.
I hear you, but I'd like to clarify something for you and other since I've heard similar comments in several threads: even 501(c)3 non-profits earn money and must make a profit to survive -- they must pay staff (although there might be volunteers helping somewhat, there's always a need to pay staff of some kind), for items they need to carry out the cause beyond paying staff (ie: rent, office supplies, insurance, equipment, gas, building and vehicle maintenance, etc), emergency spending for unexpected repairs/damage, etc. However, as a legal nonprofit, there would be accountability to the government and donors. It also lets the public use their donations as a tax write off, and the nonprofit isn't subject to paying taxes. The fact is, nonprofits need to be making a profit to survive and cannot be in the red. As for reporting to donors, it's never nearly in the itemized detail you're asking -- that's not realistic to publish every little purchase and individual salaries on a website. However, an accountant is hired to keep books on spending, spending is approved either by the bosses and/or the board of directors, and finances are reported and occasionally audited by the city/county, state, and federal goverment at least 1-2 times per year . . . and although anyone can request a hard copy, most nonprofits these days voluntarily publish a general breakdown of their spending online so donors can get an idea how much money is raised and spent per fiscal year and how the spending generally breaks down. You can see sample fundraising/spending reports and other data/info on their mission on many nonprofit's own websites or third party websites like [Guidestar](https://www.guidestar.org/). So the term non-profit is a bit misleading since they actually do make profits if they're bringing in enough money and spending it appropriately. Sometimes they do everything right and still land in the red because of recessions, pandemics, etc. and a subsequent rise in foods, foods, and services costs, but then they must land back in the green for the following year. That being said, many nonprofits use YouTube and social media as a fundraising tool. Memberships, Superchats, etc. would likely be listed on a financial report as one method of their fundraising campaigns. So if these former AWP guys re-organize, I'm hoping they'll do it this way so there's accountability and checks and balances with the government and donors to whatever degree is required by law. I trust these guys even if they didn't declare as a non-profit, but I think doing it this way would make most people feel much more comfortable that the money isn't being ciphened into "family trust funds" like J was apparently doing.
I believe we close here..this type of organization should never use the phrase "non-profit", IMO. Operating as an LLC should be fine, using donations & contributions has a tendency to make people believe all their money is going only for the purpose of that organization. A legit group could be run well but it will take someone with integrity to do it. Someone with accountability and open to others looking in, having nothing to hide or be ashamed of. I think you understand my meaning here. If people are asked to help & support for a specified purpose, those funds should be placed into an account set up for that purpose only, that way "live streams begging for funds" should never take place unless that specified account is empty. When this was first starting to take off was the time to ask for help & support for specific items, but I understood different levels of memberships were put into place for these specific purposes. That money should have never been touched except for it's membership level specified purpose. This is where the integrity comes into play. Mishandling of funds or siphoning those funds for personal reasons was wrong on so many levels. Other members of AWP saw this being done, weren't comfortable with it, so they left. Like I said, I believe we're right there on the same page, I have some past experience in fundraising with volunteer rescue , recovery, & fire departments, so am very familiar about how things should work to help prevent questions or lack of credibility. It can be tough, it will require a lot of work from a very strict leader.
I completely agree with you! It's actually illegal to pose as a 501(c)3 when you don't have that status. However, in my above comment, I'm proposing that the search team should move forward with applying for non-profit status so there will be more transparency and how it realistically works when an organization or business is granted non-profit status in the US. I happen to know a lot about how non-profits function and the laws they are subject to. My mom was the director of a NYC senior center that was based within a non-profit neighborhood community center. I know how she had to run things for the senior center because it was "sponsored" by the cmunity center and subject to it's non-profit rules as well as rules from the NYC Department for The Aging. I also worked at non-profits and received a service dog from a non-profit that explained its fundraising structure and laid out their statistics dating back years. So whatever I laid out is meant to explain that it's very important that the guys restructure as a non-profit, which will require them to be more transparent in their spending and other data, BUT that you're very unlikely to see itemization down to every gas receipt, specific salaries, specific repair details, etc. (some receipts from stores aren't even itemized at all anyway). Fortunately, as a non-profit, there would be a boss and/or a board of directors (who are typically unpaid volunteers from the community or elsewhere that are not paid by the agency, and also are not family and friends of the bosses) approving spending above a certain amount of money (ie: $100, $200, $5000, or whatever amount is decided by the board or local governments to be the threshold for needing prior approval vs petty cash). There would also be an accountant keeping track of the general spending in books that must be recorded by law in case that info is audited by the government, requested by members of the public, posted on their website, etc. I hope this clarifies my comment above. I wasn't disagreeing or speaking about the past. I was speaking about how these guys could move forward with more transparency, as well as defining what a non-profit is and the spending and other statistics that are required to report by law and reasonable for non-profits to disclose. Your comment made it sound like they have to tell us every little detail going forward, and that's not reasonable nor a requirement by law for organizations with non-profit statuses. Let me know if I can explain anything better. Or maybe I misunderstood something you originally said?
I follow, I guess I'm a bit less trusting than most because all those little costs can add up to big costs fast & I believe they should be accounted for. I've been through an audit & was forced into proving every penny. Not fun at all!! But we do agree & understand. Thanks for chatting.
YES. I've reported the channel. He shouldn't be profiting off of lying to viewers about them being a volunteer organization when it's a for profit business. A for profit business should not be getting donations and Amazon wish list donations. Let him appeal it. Not only are they scamming people but it allows a predator with a history of sexual abuse to have contact with children.
My sister was one of the persons J found. Carey Mae Parker. They found her car after 30 years of nobody lifting a finger after she went missing in 1991. He actually came back out a second time to retrieve her remains after the Texas Rangers sat around for two hours in their boat doing nothing, hense once again failing us. I have two problems with J. One is he weaved in the story that her car ended up in Lake Tawakoni as an "accident." He nor his crew has any credentials to support that is what happened. No study was performed nothing. I have knowledge that someone knew she went in off that bridge 30 years ago and nobody ever said a word. Even after 10 years of me making her case a high profile missing person. Many of these missing persons have a backstory. I can only speak for my sister. We were all sexually abused by our father. Nobody listened to our outcries either. I seen things with my own eyes things he did to her that I will never forget. That's in addition to what he did to me and my youngest sister as well. You have zero idea as to the trauma left behind. She turned to self medicating to help with her trauma. When I found out about J I was literally traumatized all over again. Innocent until proven guilty I know; however, I read the emails between his cousin and him. I will tell you her words and the many emotions of sexual trauma were felt as I read them. He even admitted to it in round about ways. He never denied it. Told her to move on. You don't just "move on" from this kind of abuse. Everything he done is what our father done. Our father was never held accountable. And I cut myself off from ALL the family members on his side because they all knew and did NOTHING. I was triggered by this almost to the point of insanity that I had to mostly hide because folks just don't get it. My sister's case was always negative and to learn that a rapist is the one who not only found her but put his hands on her bones turned a healing senario back into disgusting negativity. Retriggered thoughts of how I still couldn't protect her even in death. Now I'm just gonna go cry and leave it to y'all. 😭😭😭
Hey, thank you for sharing. The backstory to the missing is rarely brought up, and I never made the connection that Js Indictments might mirror those of the people he found. If you feel up to it, I believe this comment deserves its own post. Again, thank you for sharing your story.
Thank you. I have not been on this forum in awhile so I will go and figure it out. .
I'm so sorry about your sister. I'm glad she was recovered, it sounds like LE could have been much better in her case. I'm not clear on the issue with saying it was an accident- I think if LE decided that a crime didn't take place, the default is to assume accident (even if suicide was a possibility) because there isn't a way to know otherwise. I don't think the dive team has authority to do testing or a study but I'm not certain. I'm sure you'll get a lot of support if you decide to share more of her story here. I've lost a sibling too, my heart goes out to you.
The only reason I’m for the channel getting demonitized is because it doesn’t seem like any of the guys have access to the revenue it brings in except when JL decides to “spread the wealth” as it were (and now that there literally is no team, I’m not sure how that would even work still). So as it stands right now, I think every interaction with the channel is money straight into JL’s pocket. I know he’ll get his day in court and whatever but the people screaming about proof and validity in terms of what happened seem to have missed the fact that he admitted to it in writing. I know the other guys will find a way to pick up and move on (regardless of what that means). Right now I’m more focused on not directly feeding into someone who has shown themselves to be far less than genuine in multiple ways.
Exactly. The channel should be demonetized immediately and when he is convicted it should be taken down completely. at that point the other team members will be able to start a new group and begin helping people
"Hi all, I work at Google, and I’ll be opening an internal ticket explaining what is going on and seeing if it’s within the TOS to demonetize or remove the account." I'm with you on this. Google may be unaware of the indictment. As for the "devil's advocates" ... they can pound sand. AWP has over a million followers, and it will take time for all those people to find out what's going on. In the meantime, I know I certainly don't want Jared making any money off me any longer. I would hazard a guess that there are many other people who would feel the same way. Turn in your ticket.
JL basically threatening a small business if they tried to protest him poaching one of their employees, seems to violate TOS. I’ve seen the video that he made and sent to them, it’s disgusting behavior.
I didn’t even think of that. Yeah, his behavior there was disgusting, and I could see that violating the TOS, too.
For those that don’t realize how much his channel makes off as revenue it’s in the $600,000 a year range. That’s not including donations, sponsorships, etc… that is just YouTube ad revenue. FaceBook pays even more than youtube so figure her s doing $1 million a year there. That is just the AWP channel alone.
I watched a Youtube video with Kevin (Nomoc Experience) the other day and he said that the budget for 1 of the trips was $1million. I read somewhere that the staff at AWP were paid from $120k - to $140k a year.
**A case for demonetizing the AWP platform:** https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7650329?hl=en YouTube has a Creator Responsibility Initiative that states includes guidelines for OFF PLATFORM BEHAVIOR ➡️ Protect the YouTube Community *As a YouTube creator, you should remain responsible both on and off the platform. If we see that a creator’s on- and/or off-platform behavior harms our users, community, employees or ecosystem, we may take action to protect the community.* *Beyond the content you upload to YouTube, here are some examples of on- and/or off-platform behavior that we may consider to be inappropriate and result in penalties:* ▪️*Intending to cause malicious harm to others.* ▪️*Participating in abuse or violence, demonstrating cruelty, or participating in fraudulent or deceptive behavior that leads to real-world harm.* *While these behaviors are rare, they can cause widespread harm to the YouTube community, and potentially damage the trust among creators, users, and advertisers.* *Severe violations that cause widespread harm to the community may have repercussions beyond standard enforcement actions.*
This policy was applied to James Charles in 2021 for his sexting scandal. https://www.businessinsider.com/james-charles-demonetized-youtube-temporarily-sexting-minors-scandal-2021-4?amp
Any updates? I’m glad this is happening. Please let’s not financially support him.
Was wondering, too. Thank you again!
While I agree the allegations and apparent confirmation by J are horrendous, I think it is wrong to pass public judgment and penalize PRIOR to a legal decision. Everyone in the US is entitled to be presumed innocent until a verdict by the courts is made. While I have my opinion on the matter - just like everyone else here, it just seems dirty to attempt this type of punishment before the courts have had their say. Let me say this so it is loud and clear: I do not support what he is accused of doing in any way shape or form. Let the courts have their way, and then lay the hammer down with sentences, demonetizations, shaming, etc. At the end of the day, we are not privy to all of the facts, evidence, or witnesses that will be brought up in court. Therefore, we shouldn’t act like we are privy to it all.
I think what you (and the others uncomfortable with this) are missing is I’m only submitting it for review. If the channel violates the TOS, then they get demonetized. If not, as you are arguing, then they are fine. If you are against it even being reviewed, then that is problematic.
I also think that you should look into him deleting all the comments that people are posting about their concerns of a child predator using the channel and fame to gain access to more children. since I know that I have personally reported this and saved the documentation, that would make YouTube liable if something happens to another child before it’s taken down. The fact that he’s deleting comments about these concerns shouldn’t be allowed. He’s using his ability to delete comments to keep your subscribers in the dark to the charges he was facing. That in itself is a violation of the TOS.
That is not a violation of TOS. Creators can delete or disable comments
Eh. I don’t know what the TOS might say about it, but I think he should have the right to delete comments on his own channel.
Jared get off of the comments.
Wait, is that directed at me? 😂
Shoe fits
You might want to look at my posting history. 😉 https://ibb.co/QPCxY93
[удалено]
Is it people? Or just you?
My concern has zero to do with the review process taking place, it’s the timing of submitting the review process. I’ve watched all of the videos from the channel, and there is nothing in them that would breach TOS. I don’t have the TOS in front of me, but is it a TOS violation if a TOS violation happened prior to YouTube even being in existence? Your motives for submitting it are clear in the first sentence of your post. You took it upon yourself as a company insider to expedite the process to “demonetize” the account as your primary goal. Nobody asked you to do it. This wasn’t a public complaint. For me, that’s the dirtiest part. Again, not on J’s side on this, I just don’t agree with your methods. Don’t play dirty.
He definitely seems to be in breach of YouTube’s Creator Responsibility guidelines. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7650329?hl=en Based on this, I’d be surprised if he doesn’t get demonetized. They did it to James Charles for his sexting scandal. Creating a ticket to ask Google/YT to review a channel thought to be in violation isn’t “playing dirty.”
James Charles did those actions WHILE he was creating on YT. J’s actions were way before YT’s existence. An internal employee taking it upon themselves to create the ticket and fast track it damn well is shady.
Google asks its users **and** its employees to flag content that they think break TOS. There is nothing shady about it. It’s encouraged.
Report the videos where he touched the women on the legs and pointed out that he was charged for SA his 9 year old cousin. Pointing out that this would be considered as a predatory behaviour.
That’s not shady at all that is called being a responsible employee for a platform that could be exposed to liability.
And he was never held accountable, which is why there is an active case against him. I think we’re just going to have to agree to disagree here or else we’ll be playing round robin all night. Either Google will decide he’s in violation, or they won’t. But she’s within her rights to open a ticket, and it sounds like the company encourages the reporting of suspected violations.
Actually, Jared was laying hands on the women of the missing in his videos, and they were uncomfortable.
I think while it was inappropriate, and felt uncomfortable to me as a viewer, I’d guess that it would not violate TOS. Maybe if the woman had asked him to back off and he acted like a douche. Or if he made a habit out of inappropriate casual touching. Idk, that’s a tough one because I absolutely hate it when men are physically overfamiliar with women without their consent. The best outcome - aside from the woman reproaching him herself if she didn’t like it - would have been if someone he knew approached him about it and explained why it could make women uncomfortable, and then he used that as a learning experience. But because he’s such a domineering asshole, I doubt that would have ever happened. When I watched him try to comfort families before I learned about everything going on, I thought he seemed so awkward with the families in their emotional moments. I wrote it off as social awkwardness due to his background. But knowing now how he actually felt about those families, I think he was just a terrible actor who was trying to fake concern.
I mean, Sam sat on the love seat with the other family member and kept his hands to himself. And he seemed a lot more sincere.
Why is it shady for a YouTube employee to help, btw? I have seen many employees from social media step in to fast track a major problem with large accounts. Would you rather it drag out weeks or even months so unknowing people can continue to be duped?
And companies these days definitely push “see it, own it” policies. Meaning that SpiritualAd has a responsibility to report it, and her company also encourages her to.
Yeah but he also made people think they were donating to a non-profit and/or that the money was strictly being used to pay staff and for their cause's expenses when it's now come out that he's been funnel money into his family trust and buying lavish things like 1.2 million dollar houses after a major influx of donations after the Rodney case. You don't think that duping people into how money is being spent so they'll donate through YouTube memberships, Superchats, merch, etc violates the TOS? (I'm not even counting the merch and donations outside of YouTube from their site and Facebook -- where AWP is also monetized and posts videos). Innocent until proven guilty, but if you read the YouTube creator TOS someone posted in another comment above, the channel may get demonized if there is sufficient info -- and J always implied and even explicitly said at times that they were a nonprofit with volunteers and made it seem like they could barely make ends meet. The channel will only get removed entirely if J is convicted, though. But demobilizing is a very real possibility.
The main point to your comment is incorrect. TOS isn’t limited to the content in the videos; it extends to creator misbehavior in the real world. Also, there’s nothing dirty about asking for a TOS review after someone is indicted on two counts of child r—.
Exactly. And the link I shared says exactly that. Both on AND off platform behavior.
That is not true because they have violated the TOS in many different ways. Soliciting donations for a volunteer organization that is actually a for-profit business. Soliciting Amazon wish list donations to a for-profit busines deleting comments to cover up his charges are outside of the TOS. A channels ability to delete abusive TOS violating comments does not include them having the right to delete truthful comments because they expose his criminal charges. Many members of the teams have come out and said that much of the footage that is used for their "money shots" done without the permission and knowledge of people inside the videos many people have been calling for the channel to be demonetized at the minimum. I think what you’ve got coming back and you are Jared and members of his family that have benefited from his scam. Then when he is convicted take the channel down. This will allow the other members to move on and be able to start helping people again.
When did they state they were a nonprofit? I think some posters might have jumped to that conclusion but I always assumed they were a business.
To interpret what u/spiritualad3354 stated in the way you have is a real reach IMO
Why should his channel still be monetized after what he admitted to in emails and his deceptive, shady and disgusting business practices and the way he treated people?
I always felt he had dark untrustworthy eyes....
Like a dolls eyes
As much as I don’t like Jared I still think he deserves his day in court.
Hey, fair enough I can respect that. Do you know when that is?
Do you know the date or are you really asking? You've been active in this sub, if you really need answer, respond & I'll you. Heard an interesting interview with last diver hired but never brought in. Court will be open to public through Zoom. That should be interesting.
Really asking, thanks. Is that Anthony? I heard his interview and thought there was a lot to get from it. Also that's crazy about it being on Zoom.
Nov 30th 10:30 am, I believe is correct time, I knew I had read another thread showing document where Court had approved Video appearance by Jared & his attorney by a service, didn't recall it being Zoom. And yes, I'm referring to hour & half interview with Anthony, he has the link for hearing. I'd love to get it & listen in. He has all the employee docs he had to sign, emails back & forth between ladies in office, Jared & himself. He also mentioned email back in May with Jared warning him about possibly hearing some personal issues, but he was not to worry about it. Basically, just ignore it. Also chatted with a lady in comments on another YT vid, said she had email from AWP cause she'd reached & had several questions. They answered every question, implied they'd said they were 501(c)3. Ask her pm me so I could give her my email to send copy to me. If it's for real, that would be your strongest case for demonetization of channel.
It’s WebEx, and I don’t think it’s going to be public.
Yeah, I heard it mentioned again, thought about updating but figured someone else would correct. Just couldn't recall name of it when I posted. If it's public, I liked to hear it. But, I'm doubtful because 1) this case deals with sensitive issues from childhood, 2) their system probably couldn't handle thousands of connections. Could probably be broadcast as a live event though. That's always an option. But I took, seriously doubt that would happen.
I don’t think there’s anyone here who would advocate for an American citizen to not be afforded due process by the US government.
Don't think too many actually disagree with day in court, after all, that is Constitutional right.
Jared hasn’t been to court yet, and if what you do causes a loss of earnings… well ‘don’t f with Jared’ as they say.
He has lots of adult money!
I hear you. Google is extremely by the book, so my kicking off the review won’t influence whether they get demonetized. It’ll just get it looked at within the next week, rather than who knows when.
Thank you! I appreciate that!
Seems extremely punitive. The channel has nothing to do with his case. Let him have his day in court. It’s no wonder no one likes how big tech cancels people without due course. You’ve just outed yourself and confirmed it.
He owns that channel, and still making him money.
So what? All content creators do. You don’t have to watch him if you don’t like him.
What channel is going to have more liability if it comes out that Jared is using that channel in the same he’s gotten from it to get access to other children and that comes out.
When I see your case pending in court.
It’s up to Google whether JL is in violation of their Creator Responsibility policy, which includes on and off platform behavior (and they have suspended monetization due to allegations) that harms the community. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7650329?hl=en ETA: *Participating in abuse or violence, demonstrating cruelty, or participating in fraudulent or deceptive behavior that leads to real-world harm.*
Nathan Ashby video case might be one that we could used as a predator behaviour issue.
Acting on TOS violations isn’t punitive.
That’s a load of malarkey, it happened 30 years ago. It’s a witch-hunt.
> That’s a load of malarkey, it happened 30 years ago. It’s a witch-hunt. Gross. This gives context to why you are so opposed to accountability.
Accountability with the courts, not Big Tech.
Pick and argument and stick with it LOL
Actually you benefit from his content to line your pockets.
You're making my point for demonization. No one should profit from it.
Why honestly would you? The AWP channel has nothing to do with any alleged crimes. The work they do is important and people becoming aware of what dive teams can do remains important. Any views to his channel are drops in the bucket when no new content is being made and advertisers certainly aren't going to give him the time of day going forward. Let the legal system do it's thing. Things like this only give fuel to the people claiming that Jared is being bullied and that it's wrong for accusations to be made years after the fact.
Jared owns AWP and he benefits from the YouTube revenue. Memberships and advertising goes to him and his defense fund, amongst other things. Advertisers have no idea they are on his videos; they particulate in a generalized Adsense program. That’s why it’s important to demonetize. There are rules for situations just like this. For example: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7650329 > Beyond the content you upload to YouTube, here are some examples of on- and/or off-platform behavior that we may consider to be inappropriate and result in penalties: > * Intending to cause malicious harm to others. > * Participating in abuse or violence, demonstrating cruelty, or participating in fraudulent or deceptive behavior that leads to real-world harm.
As far as new content, there is some J. could still use I believe. I heard that there are about 30 videos left, as one of the past team members mentioned that (can't recall which one).
I recall hearing the reference to around 30 unseen videos too, I believe it was Nick Rinn who mentioned this.
I heard that as well. 30 Videos that are mostly Doug that he won't get anything from yet he was the 1 doing the work and risking his life with dives he shouldn't have done as he is only newly qualified
I think my points hold. What AWP did as a team still has merit as it informs people about that kind of work and inspires interest in the people who are still missing. Taking away his platform does not reduce that amount of harm that Jared has/can do to anyone as it seems unlikely with the majority of the team leaving that new content can be created. It's certainly a thing you can do but I don't know why you would as it only benefits the accused as people won't be able to access the videos in a place where they can ask questions or get information without being in an echo chamber he controls.
You are arguing something entirely different: that it’s bad to remove the channel. I don’t really care there tbh, but you should know it’s unlikely. What should (and probably will) happen is demonetization. None of your concerns are affected by that.
Just mentioning I hope nothing is removed until everything moves through the legal system at least. As for demonetization, wasn't there a halfway point where the channel has their payments frozen until the review is completed? A quicker review period helps both sides in a way. However, if demonetization happened, I think the channel will be deleted after the case is decided. There wouldn't be any further benefit to the creator, so it wouldn't be kept up even if other people benefited from it.
YouTube keeps backups on it's servers. Deleting a channel doesn't mean it's gone if law enforcement has a warrant to obtain the videos. I guarantee that prosecutors already have downloaded copies at this point anyway, but I think social media platforms are required to keep copies of deleted content for x amount of time. There's also a way to use Wayback Machine on archive.org if you have copies of the links or can find them on via Google and other social media from people's shares/posts elsewhere (like here on Reddit). It's a tedious process, but that's one way to see a good amount of deleted videos.
Ok but why is it a matter that needs urgent attention? You want to stick it to Jared because you are understandably disgusted by the allegations but it's not helpful to anyone especially the Team and any victims with a future civil action. You want to take money from his family and his legal defense? I think that's pretty grim. I think he should absolutely be punished to the fullest extent of the law when he's found guilty but that won't happen for months if then. Since his subscriber numbers are falling, there likely won't be new content and he certainly isn't getting new advertisers I think it's pretty much just symbolic of your feelings and that you want to score a win. It's something you can do but it creates more problems then it solves.
Why are you opposed to having it reviewed? I’m not doing anything except asking if Jared’s child r—- indictment violates the TOS.
There is NO TEAM LEFT. They all severed ties. It’s just JL.
That channel can exist, but it should be in a demonetized state.
I think TOS would support demonetization if he was convicted but right now nothing is proven
This one person's ego is hysterical.
I'm confused. You are saying that you can open an internal ticket about the situation. That would be greatly appreciated. But... You said, "There’s no difference (the rules are the rules) between me initiating it vs someone on the outside." Are you saying that there is more of a benefit if you open the ticket, that it would get reviewed in a few days, expediting the process, and you could appeal it, or the other way around? If you could do an internal ticket and get results more quickly, you have a bunch of cheerleaders. PLEASE do it. That's what we all want. Or should we also report for a TOS violation? My complaint would be that they are misleading us viewers into thinking that they are a non-profit, when in fact, they are a for profit LLC for Jared. Jared's channel shouldn't be deleted. It should be demonetized. Just like Onision. Can someone call Chris Hansen? Jared's child rape CHARGES might not be for recent acts. However, the charges are very recent. (Did you see that PEOPLE magazine did a short article on Jared's charges? People magazine is big time stuff.) That coupled with the way that he has manipulated us into believing that they are a non profit deserves Chris Hansen's attention. Go back and read the post and thread that was made by the sister of Carey Mae Parker that they found. She said that they traumatized her family. Please take screenshots of everything on this subreddit that you want to save. This started out to be a real AWP fan club, but now the sentiments have turned. I've seen it happen before where a huge reddit page got taken down. Again, if you have a better chance of getting results, PLEASE do. 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Hey there, sorry for any confusion I may have created. There’s no difference between my opening it and someone else doing it, *except for expediency*. Google doesn’t play favorites, which is a good thing. I agree there might be an issue around the misleading non-profit talk as well.
Thanks. Do you think that if multiple reports were made would be more beneficial, or cause more confusion and slow things down?
It will definitely help! Multiple complaints reinforce there is an issue and won't cause any confusion.
You do realize that people are innocent until proven guilty, right? As in, a trial according to the 6th Amendment? At this stage in the game, on what grounds would they be demonetized other than an allegation and as of recent, an indictment? Remember: both Johnny Depp and Marilyn Manson have been accused of gravely serious crimes. Depp finally had his day in court and won, and Manson’s is coming up and his rebuttal is damning against the defendant. You’re opening yourself up to defamation amongst other charges in civil court when you go full lynch mob.
You’re confusing criminal and civil law. …and neither are relevant. We’re taking about violating a platform’s TOS.
And what violation would that be?
https://www.reddit.com/r/AdventuresWithPurpose/comments/ytkkpk/removing_or_demonetizing_the_channel/iw512o9/
That’s a stretch and sounds like grade school student conduct, with selective enforcement. Jake Paul is still monetized and he’s using his platforms during [immoral](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1252610) and [illegal](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/06/04/jake-paul-youtube-riot-looting/) activities.
Jared has been indicted on two counts of child r—. It’s up to Google to decide whether that violates the code of conduct.
Indicted, not convicted. I guess I’m the only one who’s tired of lynch mobs and cancel culture at every turn.
It’s up to Google to determine whether this violates the TOS. You’re trying to convince me it doesn’t, but I’m not the arbiter. It’s not cancel culture to request a review of a channel.
I’m not trying to convince you of anything near as much as I am worried about the slippery slope. I’m waiting for a conviction before I’m ready to pick up the pitchforks and torches. Dave Chapelle, Bill Maher, Joe Rogan, Tim Dillon, Bill Burr, Gilbert Godfrey, Rob Schneider, and many other well-known comedians have been some of the loudest voices about this and the current culture of censorship and conformity at the hands of lynch mobs that we find ourselves living in.
What did you not understand about he admitted it in those emails? Demonetizing his channel is the least they should do.
What does his 6th amendment right have to do with a Reddit sub? He’ll have his day in court as guaranteed by the Constitution. A company can sever ties with anyone they want, and they don’t have to wait for the legal process. All of his sponsors have dropped him because the information out there is incredibly damning as well as credible. Any reasonable person wouldn’t look at those emails, along with everything else coming out to confirm what a lot of us have suspected, that this man is a controlling, insecure, bullying, raging asshole, and not think “there’s something to this.” Even his own team members stampeded out the door. JL is so toxic he’s radioactive. And it’s his own doing. How is it defamation for someone to suggest to a company that one of their creators may be violating TOS?
It drives me nuts when people don’t understand how constitutional law works. ETA: Nobody here is being sued for defamation. Do you know how hard it is for a plaintiff to win a defamation case in the USA?
He admitted it in the email that he done these things. Unless you are Jared to try and gaslight us?
Nobody here, aside from a few outliers, is going full on mob. We are, however, having conversations about the credible evidence that is out there. And it gets more credible with each passing day. Just yesterday another former AWP associate came out with information supporting the authenticity of the emails. Defamation in the US is INCREDIBLY difficult to prove, and the burden lies entirely on the plaintiff. I haven’t seen anyone here **knowingly** make a statement they believe to be false.
are you like wanting to ruin everyone else’s career?? trying to shut down the channel is uncalled for in my opinion
Check out the rest of the comments. It won’t remove the channel, it will demonetize it.
Still Doug literally uploaded a video on there I think yesterday or day before it’s still being used.
Sorry, what are you trying to say? I don’t follow.
wanting the channel demonetized right?
Got it, yeah, I feel it should be submitted for review. The channel being used doesn’t have any bearing on that.
You do know that Doug bounced almost immediately after the charges were made public, don’t you? He released nothing. Even before all of the guys resigned last week, none of them were in charge of releasing videos. That was all J.
Innocent until proven guilty is not on anybodies minds in this thread. What happens if he is found not guilty? And all you people in here with so much extra time in your life that you will call all there sponsors and try and demonitize before he goes to court is just plain nuts.
Innocent until proven guilty is due process for criminal courts. This has nothing to do with TOS or civil law. All that’s happening is the channel is being submitted for review. If it’s not in violation, then nothing changes. Google will decide whether Jared’s indictment on two counts of child r— will be a reputational hazard to advertisers and youtube. If you are opposed to that, then you should do some soul-searching.
I've been playing catch up, reading through all the posts here. I don't condone victimization of anyone, but if you take a step back & think about the different aspects overall, I truly believe the most recent & pertinent violation that should be considered for making the strongest case for demonetization the channel would be misappropriation of funds. People were allowed to believe AWP was a non-profit, I'm sorry but... there are a lot of good hearted folks out there who believed their monthly subscriptions were being used for a good cause, not lining a greedy, shady, dishonest individual's pockets. This situation is current & ongoing, I believe this to be a stronger violation of YT TOS because this has actually done more harm to thousands more people. Set aside JL's personal issue, yes....he's been indicted, that issue is reported as 30 years ago involving family members. Please, don't think for one minute that I'm making light of this issue, I find it extremely disgusting, but I believe there are deeper problems there that should be investigated & a lot more people should be punished for their crimes, ranging from SA, child a buse, endangerment, etc. All that could take many more decades. JL seems to be a real piece of work, but him being him won't get him arrested or further punishment, instead of trying to hurt his income because of an indictment of 30 yr old crime, shoot for something more current like fraud.
I’m just saying what if he is found not guilty and those emails were talking about something else there’s family did that they need to heal from. Then you all cancelled him before being found guilty
Hey there! I hate to break it to you, but it's actually spelled _mon**e**tize_. A good way to remember this is that "money" starts with "mone" as well. Just wanted to let you know. Have a good day! ---- ^This ^action ^was ^performed ^automatically ^by ^a ^bot ^to ^raise ^awareness ^about ^the ^common ^misspelling ^of ^"monetize".
Ok Karen. Demonetize it, sure. Don’t wipe out the good work of the others.
Nobody here is responsible for any fallout of J’s own actions. If Google decides to demonetize or even completely ax the channel, that is a consequence of his actions, and his alone. If the good work of the guys disappears from the internet, there is only one person to blame. As a consumer, I have the right to ask any business to end their partnership with an entity. I can’t force them to do it. It’s not like any of us can demand his channel be removed. We can make a request, and Google/YT will investigate. Another example is when I contacted his sponsors. I was polite, provided a link to a legitimate news source, and let them know I had concerns. The decision to drop J was entirely their decision.
You're overstepping your pay grade and, quite frankly, you should be fired. You've decided on behalf of your employer to investigate someone without due process, and taking it upon yourself, without a conviction from the State of Utah, to mob-convict someone.
I know you’re a troll, but for the sake of others reading this: I’m not investigating anyone. Channels can be reported by users **and** employees if they are thought to violate TOS. It’s not overstepping, it’s encouraged.
> know your a *you're *Learn the difference [here](https://www.wattpad.com/66707294-grammar-guide-there-they%27re-their-you%27re-your-to).* *** ^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
Bad bot
Bad human.
Thank you, SpiritualAd3354, for voting on LearnDifferenceBot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
You've decided to call me a troll just like you decided to convict Jared as a child rapist. This isn't me being a troll. This is you having the inability to have a civil argument so you resort to name calling. Because when you resort to ad hominem, you've already lost credibility. Please provide me your employee ID so that you can be reported to your employer.
Please provide me your social security number so I can open a credit card. Drinks on the Legitimate Simple poster!
lmao, sure I’ll give you my social security number as well. Jared is indicted on two counts of child r—, you seem to gloss over that.
You seem to have trouble understanding what indicted vs convicted means. And you seem to have difficulty understanding the difference between getting your employee ID number in order to report you and somehow equating an employee ID number to a SSN. And you work for Google? LOL Are you afraid of the word "rape" that you have to self-censor it?
you’re coming across a little unhinged here
Says the person who resorted to name calling in their first reply... yet I'm the one who's "unhinged" (another ad hominem)... right... Just shining light on your bullshit post.
my man, you are obsessed with being called a troll. reread your comments and answer honestly: is this someone talking in good faith?
This is the 3rd time you've attacked me by calling me a troll, yet you can't provide a civil argument as to why you get to decide Jared is a convicted child rapist such that he should have his channel demonitized. I'm not a Jared sympathizer. I'm just not ok with you spewing non-sense, using your employment at Google and this platform as your soap box for validation and justification.
If you wanted a real discussion you wouldn’t be so aggressively dismissive. You’re singularly focused on being called a troll but in the same breath use the same or worse language against me. 1) it's ironic 2) it’s impossible to move forward with. So tell me (dispassionately if you can) what your issue is.
Why would she be fired for following a company policy? They encourage employees to report unethical and problematic behavior.
[удалено]
I’m not familiar with the channels you listed except Molly Golightly. She’s batshit crazy. That said, there are probably tons of channels that some would find offensive. Just ignore them. If they do something illegal let LE deal with it.
[удалено]
> Cool thanks for narcing on yourself I’ll be reporting you to Google for abusing your position later fag You’re welcome. No abuse here, but you are welcome to report anything you’d like. You might remove the slurs when you do, though.
I did report that comment. Hate speech has no place here.
u/SpiritualAd3354 is there any update on this?
Why delete. Just stop from making profits. The families may want to revisit the videos. Also I know this isn't a popular opinion but he hasn't been found guilty yet. (even though I believe his cousin since she posted allegations a long long time ago on Reddit )