Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
lmmomSD wrote:And "Toodler Bath Disaster" is not OK. Period. Using Gaines in the tub in the thumbnail, even with lots of bubbles is so not right.
Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
idk, I didn't really have a problem with it. She's wearing a bathing suit and that was pretty clear in the thumbnail but I can see where you're coming from.
lmmomSD wrote:And "Toodler Bath Disaster" is not OK. Period. Using Gaines in the tub in the thumbnail, even with lots of bubbles is so not right.
Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
idk, I didn't really have a problem with it. She's wearing a bathing suit and that was pretty clear in the thumbnail but I can see where you're coming from.
Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
This is a business for them and I'm sure they follow their analytics very closely. They know the demographics of who's viewing, sharing, and embedding their videos. These family YouTubers have to know that they're exposing their kids to all kinds of stuff by putting "toddler" and "bath" together in the title. I would say that the title alone is some serious pedophile click bait. They've been doing this for far too long to pretend they're naive. There's no way a reasonable person would use common pedophile search terms in the titles of public videos of their kids unless they're unaware or purposefully capitalizing on it. They'll have to answer to their grown kids one day when they're old enough to realize that mom and dad were earning a living by violating their privacy. I really wonder how these parents envision that future conversation with their children? How are they going to explain that they put their babies on what is essentially a self-published reality show from the moment they were conceived? How can someone with a PhD in child psychology think any of this is acceptable parental behavior?
lmmomSD wrote:And "Toodler Bath Disaster" is not OK. Period. Using Gaines in the tub in the thumbnail, even with lots of bubbles is so not right.
Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
idk, I didn't really have a problem with it. She's wearing a bathing suit and that was pretty clear in the thumbnail but I can see where you're coming from.
Sent from my VS990 using Tapatalk
This is a business for them and I'm sure they follow their analytics very closely. They know the demographics of who's viewing, sharing, and embedding their videos. These family YouTubers have to know that they're exposing their kids to all kinds of stuff by putting "toddler" and "bath" together in the title. I would say that the title alone is some serious pedophile click bait. They've been doing this for far too long to pretend they're naive. There's no way a reasonable person would use common pedophile search terms in the titles of public videos of their kids unless they're unaware or purposefully capitalizing on it. They'll have to answer to their grown kids one day when they're old enough to realize that mom and dad were earning a living by violating their privacy. I really wonder how these parents envision that future conversation with their children? How are they going to explain that they put their babies on what is essentially a self-published reality show from the moment they were conceived? How can someone with a PhD in child psychology think any of this is acceptable parental behavior?
I'm sorry, I genuinely didn't realize that was a pattern for them. I've definitely seen other channels getting heat for (what I consider to be) worse titles/thumbnails, but it's not really something I've noticed from C&K specifically. I know a lot of this conversation takes place in the member's only (50+ posts) section though, so I'm definitely less informed when it comes to this issue. Then again, exploitation is exploitation. I just didn't immediately see it that way.
I think maybe what I'm trying to get at is that I think the content was fine (no nudity, etc), but I didn't consider the fact that the title could attract some sketchy people.
HashtagBlessed wrote:Redfin is pretty good about updating as soon as the MLS is updated, I think with our home purchase it might have taken 24 hours before the listing showed as "pending." If a home is priced competitively and it's going to sell quickly, usually the sellers put it on the market on a Thursday, have an open house on Saturday or Sunday, and look at their offer(s) on Monday. I will be very curious to see if the listing changes to pending by Wednesday or Thursday. They might just be working out the details. Otherwise, I'm assuming they didn't get any offers, or at least not offers close enough to asking, and they might be in it for the long haul. The first two weeks are very telling and if it reaches the two week mark without a contract pending, they might be looking at a price drop. Or they'll be stuck waiting 30-60 days before the right offer comes along, which might not be conducive to their contingent offer on the house they want to buy.
Their area looks a little unusual market-wise to me. There are many, many homes for sale and lots of them have been for sale around a year. That would be unheard of where I live, things go fast. Since their house is nothing super special, it might take a long while. The thing they've got going for them is its inexpensive, and the schools are highly rated. Based on what they paid a few years ago, after paying the agents and all of that, they'll make no money on that house. I'm surprised they can afford to go from the 200s to 600s.
We don't know for sure that they're going to the $600Ks. There was a house people thought they were getting that was listed at that, but they said the house they had made the offer on wasn't posted online. So everyone is assuming that that's what they're going for. But nobody really knows.
Katie saying their kids were in bed early tonight at 7:30 as early. I wonder what time they go to bed since for a toddler/infant that is not that early. They don't have dinner together often?
I guess I can't blame them for going after the kid audience since the adult audience is growing slowly. They've really hit a plateau with their channel and it has to be frustrating. If you look at the graphics on Social Blade at the area where they look at views, they had been steady growing until July 2016 and now it has been a downward growth to view counts equal to July 2015. This is not a good if things don't turn around soon for what I believe their overall future in YouTube. Basically their income is becoming a fraction of their 2016 with the last few months views/subscribers. *I am going to say I am not an expert on YouTube, just making an opinion based off of a Social Blade graph:)
lmmomSD wrote:We don't know for sure that they're going to the $600Ks. There was a house people thought they were getting that was listed at that, but they said the house they had made the offer on wasn't posted online. So everyone is assuming that that's what they're going for. But nobody really knows.
Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
I would be surprised if they purchase a house at this price, but I could be wrong. This would be a leap of faith their YouTube channel will grow well in the future.
HashtagBlessed wrote:This is a business for them and I'm sure they follow their analytics very closely. They know the demographics of who's viewing, sharing, and embedding their videos. These family YouTubers have to know that they're exposing their kids to all kinds of stuff by putting "toddler" and "bath" together in the title. I would say that the title alone is some serious pedophile click bait. They've been doing this for far too long to pretend they're naive. There's no way a reasonable person would use common pedophile search terms in the titles of public videos of their kids unless they're unaware or purposefully capitalizing on it. They'll have to answer to their grown kids one day when they're old enough to realize that mom and dad were earning a living by violating their privacy. I really wonder how these parents envision that future conversation with their children? How are they going to explain that they put their babies on what is essentially a self-published reality show from the moment they were conceived? How can someone with a PhD in child psychology think any of this is acceptable parental behavior?
Here's the thing and I know some posters don't like or agree with the ethics of vlogging being brought up on these boards because it's essentially a moot point. Moot as in it applies to every single gossip board on here and is not a unique/individual criticism that can be levied at one single channel.
However, in the case of Katie I have to disagree. I think it can be levied at her in a separate and individual way precisely because she has a PhD in child psychology. It actually blows my mind that she isn't able to (or is in denial about) see the unique juxtapose position she's in, or have the objectivity that her academia has given her to 'step outside the box' as it were. In fact, I would find it fascinating if she used her knowledge on child psychology to discuss her views/thoughts/concerns in a sit down video on her own channel some day. At the very least it would be something her kids could look back on as a counter balance vlog and see that their mother at least thought about it all enough to make a video about it. Or is it simply that she doesn't have any concerns at all? If that's the case I'd probably feel a bit iffy about wanting her to be my child's psychologist which may sound dramatic but that's just my opinion.
HashtagBlessed wrote:This is a business for them and I'm sure they follow their analytics very closely. They know the demographics of who's viewing, sharing, and embedding their videos. These family YouTubers have to know that they're exposing their kids to all kinds of stuff by putting "toddler" and "bath" together in the title. I would say that the title alone is some serious pedophile click bait. They've been doing this for far too long to pretend they're naive. There's no way a reasonable person would use common pedophile search terms in the titles of public videos of their kids unless they're unaware or purposefully capitalizing on it. They'll have to answer to their grown kids one day when they're old enough to realize that mom and dad were earning a living by violating their privacy. I really wonder how these parents envision that future conversation with their children? How are they going to explain that they put their babies on what is essentially a self-published reality show from the moment they were conceived? How can someone with a PhD in child psychology think any of this is acceptable parental behavior?
Here's the thing and I know some posters don't like or agree with the ethics of vlogging being brought up on these boards because it's essentially a moot point. Moot as in it applies to every single gossip board on here and is not a unique/individual criticism that can be levied at one single channel.
However, in the case of Katie I have to disagree. I think it can be levied at her in a separate and individual way precisely because she has a PhD in child psychology. It actually blows my mind that she isn't able to (or is in denial about) see the unique juxtapose position she's in, or have the objectivity that her academia has given her to 'step outside the box' as it were. In fact, I would find it fascinating if she used her knowledge on child psychology to discuss her views/thoughts/concerns in a sit down video on her own channel some day. At the very least it would be something her kids could look back on as a counter balance vlog and see that their mother at least thought about it all enough to make a video about it. Or is it simply that she doesn't have any concerns at all? If that's the case I'd probably feel a bit iffy about wanting her to be my child's psychologist which may sound dramatic but that's just my opinion.
Next time they ask for questions for a Q&A PLEASE someone ask Katie this!!
HashtagBlessed wrote:This is a business for them and I'm sure they follow their analytics very closely. They know the demographics of who's viewing, sharing, and embedding their videos. These family YouTubers have to know that they're exposing their kids to all kinds of stuff by putting "toddler" and "bath" together in the title. I would say that the title alone is some serious pedophile click bait. They've been doing this for far too long to pretend they're naive. There's no way a reasonable person would use common pedophile search terms in the titles of public videos of their kids unless they're unaware or purposefully capitalizing on it. They'll have to answer to their grown kids one day when they're old enough to realize that mom and dad were earning a living by violating their privacy. I really wonder how these parents envision that future conversation with their children? How are they going to explain that they put their babies on what is essentially a self-published reality show from the moment they were conceived? How can someone with a PhD in child psychology think any of this is acceptable parental behavior?
Here's the thing and I know some posters don't like or agree with the ethics of vlogging being brought up on these boards because it's essentially a moot point. Moot as in it applies to every single gossip board on here and is not a unique/individual criticism that can be levied at one single channel.
However, in the case of Katie I have to disagree. I think it can be levied at her in a separate and individual way precisely because she has a PhD in child psychology. It actually blows my mind that she isn't able to (or is in denial about) see the unique juxtapose position she's in, or have the objectivity that her academia has given her to 'step outside the box' as it were. In fact, I would find it fascinating if she used her knowledge on child psychology to discuss her views/thoughts/concerns in a sit down video on her own channel some day. At the very least it would be something her kids could look back on as a counter balance vlog and see that their mother at least thought about it all enough to make a video about it. Or is it simply that she doesn't have any concerns at all? If that's the case I'd probably feel a bit iffy about wanting her to be my child's psychologist which may sound dramatic but that's just my opinion.
My honest assessment is that very few people would be able to walk away from money that is that plentiful and that easy, even if you're an otherwise normal person who would normally be able to see the ethical problems of putting your kids on the internet every day for public consumption. They're able to both stay at home with their kids and only have to upload a 10 minute vlog every day to afford this affluent lifestyle. It would be very easy to ignore the moral dilemma and live in a state of denial about what you're doing. And there is ego involved.
They're able to pay their bills thanks to this weird voyeuristic reality TV culture that we all participate in and that keeps us watching their videos and putting money in their pocket. However I don't think they're appreciating quite yet the fact that internet fame is fleeting and this will absolutely not be a 10 or 20 year career. I think their numbers are illustrating this. Katie and Cullen are both college educated and were older and more established when their internet fame hit, and Katie has a PhD in child psychology, so I think there is a different standard. But I think what their case illustrates is that it doesn't necessarily matter if you're educated and have worked a normal job, if the money is good enough you will throw it all out the window to live this strange YouTube life. And I do think Katie is absolutely negatively affecting her professional image and consequently her ability to be hired in the future by participating in this and using her kids in this way. People in her field are held to a high professional standard because of what they do for a living. Thumbnails with your kid screaming and click-bait titles do not look good. I'm assuming that's part of the reason why they don't use their last name in the vlogs the way other channels do.
Their current home is on the market now for $269,000. Why does anyone think they are looking to purchase a home for $600,000? Even if they did not owe a mortgage on the current home it would seem odd to me that they would go up almost $400,000 in looking for a new home. Has anyone else seen the listing? The photos make the house look spotless LOL.
HashtagBlessed wrote:This is a business for them and I'm sure they follow their analytics very closely. They know the demographics of who's viewing, sharing, and embedding their videos. These family YouTubers have to know that they're exposing their kids to all kinds of stuff by putting "toddler" and "bath" together in the title. I would say that the title alone is some serious pedophile click bait. They've been doing this for far too long to pretend they're naive. There's no way a reasonable person would use common pedophile search terms in the titles of public videos of their kids unless they're unaware or purposefully capitalizing on it. They'll have to answer to their grown kids one day when they're old enough to realize that mom and dad were earning a living by violating their privacy. I really wonder how these parents envision that future conversation with their children? How are they going to explain that they put their babies on what is essentially a self-published reality show from the moment they were conceived? How can someone with a PhD in child psychology think any of this is acceptable parental behavior?
Here's the thing and I know some posters don't like or agree with the ethics of vlogging being brought up on these boards because it's essentially a moot point. Moot as in it applies to every single gossip board on here and is not a unique/individual criticism that can be levied at one single channel.
Whether they are educated or not (Bonnie, DB, E&J) they all use their children as cash machines and don't care if they are exploiting them or not. I have written to them warning about what harm can come of this (sent video links from other vloggers who who were targeted by pedophiles) and not only did they not reply but they continue to film their children. It just goes to show you that even a PhD does not necessarily give you brains or common sense.
However, in the case of Katie I have to disagree. I think it can be levied at her in a separate and individual way precisely because she has a PhD in child psychology. It actually blows my mind that she isn't able to (or is in denial about) see the unique juxtapose position she's in, or have the objectivity that her academia has given her to 'step outside the box' as it were. In fact, I would find it fascinating if she used her knowledge on child psychology to discuss her views/thoughts/concerns in a sit down video on her own channel some day. At the very least it would be something her kids could look back on as a counter balance vlog and see that their mother at least thought about it all enough to make a video about it. Or is it simply that she doesn't have any concerns at all? If that's the case I'd probably feel a bit iffy about wanting her to be my child's psychologist which may sound dramatic but that's just my opinion.
My honest assessment is that very few people would be able to walk away from money that is that plentiful and that easy, even if you're an otherwise normal person who would normally be able to see the ethical problems of putting your kids on the internet every day for public consumption. They're able to both stay at home with their kids and only have to upload a 10 minute vlog every day to afford this affluent lifestyle. It would be very easy to ignore the moral dilemma and live in a state of denial about what you're doing. And there is ego involved.
They're able to pay their bills thanks to this weird voyeuristic reality TV culture that we all participate in and that keeps us watching their videos and putting money in their pocket. However I don't think they're appreciating quite yet the fact that internet fame is fleeting and this will absolutely not be a 10 or 20 year career. I think their numbers are illustrating this. Katie and Cullen are both college educated and were older and more established when their internet fame hit, and Katie has a PhD in child psychology, so I think there is a different standard. But I think what their case illustrates is that it doesn't necessarily matter if you're educated and have worked a normal job, if the money is good enough you will throw it all out the window to live this strange YouTube life. And I do think Katie is absolutely negatively affecting her professional image and consequently her ability to be hired in the future by participating in this and using her kids in this way. People in her field are held to a high professional standard because of what they do for a living. Thumbnails with your kid screaming and click-bait titles do not look good. I'm assuming that's part of the reason why they don't use their last name in the vlogs the way other channels do.
nc_mom wrote:Their current home is on the market now for $269,000. Why does anyone think they are looking to purchase a home for $600,000? Even if they did not owe a mortgage on the current home it would seem odd to me that they would go up almost $400,000 in looking for a new home. Has anyone else seen the listing? The photos make the house look spotless LOL.
If I remember correctly, a poster here found one of the houses they showed themselves touring and it was listed for about $600,000, so that's why people think that might be their price range.
Double post, sorry. But today was a classic example of the narcissism involved in vlogging. I get that it's "sharing our daily lives", but I just can't imagine thinking that random strangers are going to be interested in the healing of my cold sores and intricate details of my toothache. When I was talking to my daughter about vlogging, it was to show a special needs young woman trying to navigate the world, looking for work, etc. But she was over 18, and said no, and I stood by that, and after watching more vlogs, I am really, really glad she made that decision. And at no time did I think _my_ life was so fascinating that anyone else would be interested in my Target runs and doctor appointments. I just can't wrap my head around that kind of thinking.
And why was Cullen pushing SO hard for that couple to vlog? Does he need an entourage like Bryan?
jenboghel01 wrote:Their video from yesterday only has 12,827 views... yikes
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thats weird bc they are avg around 50-80k most times. I did a quick little look on daily Bumps channel and looks like they only have 60k views from yesterday, Ellie and Jared only have about 65k, bratayley is at 91k, Samika is only at 5k!! Everyone seems wayyyyy down yesterday.. i'm thinking its a YT glitch?
MommaLindsey2 wrote:I literally died inside when that sweet little girl who is getting cancer treatment poked Cullen's fever blister and then put her finger in her mouth.
