Findings:
The Challenges we Face
In order to provide the reader with a better understanding of the results to be discussed later in this paper, I will provide a short description of each video as well as justi cation for why they have been categorised as such. This will provide a cohesive cultural backdrop, as well as evidence of the impact that the viral video challenge genre has on contemporary culture through the use of relevant news sources and social media posts. Throughout this section, the popularised name of each challenge will be displayed on the top left with the average publication date along side it as a general indicator of the challenge’s peak success (mm/dd/yyyy). Below this will be a collection of screenshots that present the top ten most viewed videos within their respective challenge. These will be consistently presented in the same sequential format with the most viewed videos (ranked 1 to 5) on the left hand side, juxtaposed by the subsequent videos (ranked 6th to 10th) on the right.
Below is a timeline of each challenge based on their respective average publication date to provide a context for the study by outlining how the genre has manifested throughout the years.
Ice Bucket Challenge: 8/22/2014 18:02:00
The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge is one of the most successful examples of charity on social media. Indeed, the New York Film Academy argued that “no social media outreach has been (or will be) as e ective as the Ice Bucket Challenge craze which swept the globe in the summer of 2014” (Zeke. New York Film Academy Student Resources , 10 Feb. 2015). With this in mind, one must title the Ice Bucket Challenge as
the most in uential progenitor of the viral video challenge genre. Unlike its predecessor, the Harlem Shake which took social media by storm in 2013, the Ice Bucket Challenge features one participant at a time. This shines a spotlight on the individual participating and adds a more personal touch that may resonate more with users who are subsequently challenged.
The true origin of the Ice Bucket Challenge is frequently debated, but can generally be traced to a various number of charitable sources. However, it only gained signi cant traction when the challenge pivoted to provide charitable support for the disease amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Indeed, “many have come to associate it with fundraising for motor neuron disease charities after US golfer Chris Kennedy took part as his wife’s cousin su ers from the condition” (Martin, Graham. Third Force News . 26 Aug. 2014). Following a speci ed focus, there was a signi cant rise in social media users participating.
Upon receiving a nomination by a participant, users had the choice to either douse themselves with a bucket of ice water in order to show solidarity with those su ering from debilitating motor neurone diseases, or donate money to a speci ed charity. After accepting the challenge, participants have the option to nominate friends within their social media network. This allowed the challenge to propagate itself through numerous social media platforms, successfully raising over “$115 Million from 2014 Ice Bucket Challenge” in the USA alone ( ALS Association. 2014). This challenge also boasted signi cant success in Europe, with the Dutch charity ‘Stichting ALS’, raising the “magic number of € 1,000,000” ( Stichting ALS Nederland , 9 Nov. 2015). Therefore, despite its aws which have been discussed in the ‘self-schema’ section (p.15) it is clear that the Ice Bucket Challenge changed the social media landscape by introducing the viral video challenge genre as an important part of digital culture through its utilisation of new media a ordances.
What was di erent about this particular challenge was the media coverage that it acquired. This is in no small part due to the celebrity participation. Indeed, several news sources published articles that outlined notorious participants, thereby hurtling this particular challenge, (and by extension the concept of the viral video challenge genre,) into the pop-cultural sphere. (Cresci, Elena. The Guardian . 21 Aug. 2014).
Fire Challenge: 4/24/2015 15:45:42
The Fire Challenge is seemingly the direct anthesis of the Ice Bucket Challenge , both in purpose and practice. The aim of the challenge was to lm oneself doused in ammable liquid which would be subsequently ignited. While there would usually be water nearby to douse the ames, in reality it only takes moments for the participant to develop excruciating second-degree burns. According to news sources, an 11 year-old boy’s “body is now covered in second and third degree burns after he tried the “ re challenge”” ( NBC 6 South Florida , 1 Aug. 2014).
While the Ice Bucket Challenge provided a digital platform that encouraged people to gather in solidarity together for the good cause of saving lives, the Fire Challenge put lives in immediate risk of severe injury, or in extreme cases death. Clemson University has since stated the dangers of viral video challenges , and in particular the Fire Challenge : “while no o cial count is kept, several deaths around the world have been tied to the challenges, including at least one in South Carolina” ( Clemson University Medical Xpress . 2 Jul. 2018). What is particularly interesting about this challenge is the psychological reasoning of participation. Dr. Daliah Whachs argues that humans have “a growing drive to be liked and accepted,” going on to suggest that users may “make a video of ourselves that gives us, all of the sudden, instant attention, and it is now a driving force in our culture". (Bartels, Joe, and Dr. Daliah Wachs. KTNV , 22 Aug. 2018). It is rather tragic that viral video challenges are spread due to an inherent human desire to be accepted, and that this has since become a driving force in our culture. For
the viral video challenge genre, the more popular a challenge becomes, the more inclined social media users may become to participate. This is due to the vindication of participation that proliferation on social media promises. Indeed, the inherent desire for humans to be appreciated may be one of the most signi cant reasons behind the rise of the viral video challenge genre. Particularly with the prospect of participation culminating in measurable prestige through the form of social media datametrics (namely the appropriately designated ‘like’ module). Participation is therefore encouraged by the uncertain prospect of a viral video that will result in multitudes of likes. However, where the Ice Bucket Challenge harnesses this basic human desire for good, the Fire Challenge simply endangers those that are most at risk, such as young children or someone with an inherent desire to be liked.
Kylie Jenner Challenge: 5/1/2015 5:57:50
The Kylie Jenner Challenge was started in 2015 as a way to emulate the physical appearance of Keeping up with the Kardashians star Kylie Jenner, (see ‘ gure 7’ above). The purpose of the challenge was for participants to put their lips into a shot glass (or similar receptacle) and suck until it burst the blood vessels in their face, thereby resulting in swollen and engorged lips which vaguely resembled a crude approximation of Jenner’s signature facial feature. A dermatologic surgeon, Dr. Dendy Engelman, outlined the risk associated with the challenge Seventeen (the world’s “most vital young women’s magazine” with a reach to “almost 1 in 6 women from 16-24” ( Hearst Corporation . 2017)). Dr. Engelman warned that “not only can signi cant pain, swelling, and bruising result from these suction techniques, but there is potential risk for scarring and permanent dis gurement with repeated attempts.” (Denton, Elizabeth, and Dr. Dendy Engelman. Seventeen , 25 Apr. 2018).
One participant, 16 year-old Lexie Chadwick admitted that the reason she participated was because she “was bored and the challenge looked like fun” (Nicolini, Jill. CBS New York . 21 Apr. 2015). This challenge was not endorsed by its namesake, and Kylie Jenner tweeted the following shortly after the
rst outbreak of the challenge:
While not condoning the challenge, Kylie failed to rebuke it. One might argue that this seemingly ambivalent response did nothing to stop the spread of a challenge that multiple medical professionals have warned of. By omitting the dangers of the challenge from her tweet, Jenner may be accused of encouraging proliferation by furthering the discourse of the challenge. Ms. Jenner opened up about aesthetic insecurities; sharing in an interview: “I was 15 and I was insecure about my lips," going on to state that “I just didn’t feel desirable or pretty. I really wanted bigger lips.” (Weiner, Zoë, and Kylie Jenner. Teen Vogue . 2 May 2018). This further suggest that by not outrightly rebuking the challenge, Jenner would subconsciously encourage it by using her platform to popularise large lips by associating them with feeling “desirable or pretty”. This is correlation sets unrealistic expectations of beauty by popularising an aesthetic feature that may only be available through cosmetic surgery, or with the assistance of a shot glass. This is particularly harmful as Jenner’s lips were made by the former, and in “in May 2015” (the same month as the latest publication date within my dataset), “she admitted to having temporary lip llers”. (Robehmed, Natalie. Forbes . 14 May 2019).
This accusation of exploitative harm is augmented by the release of Jenner’s cosmetics range ‘Kylie Lip Kits’ that debuted November 30th, 2015, fewer than six months after the peak popularity of the viral challenge. By naming her cosmetics ‘Lip Kits’, Jenner evokes the popularity of a Harmful challenge that received several hundred million views across multiple social media platforms. Indeed, due to the success of her cosmetics company and the prioritisation of her gurative platform, Kylie Jenner is now the world’s youngest billionaire (Chaykowski, Kathleen. Forbes. 5 Mar. 2019). One would suggest that this might not have been possible without encouraging “people / young girls to look like” her by buying her signature cosmetics. Indeed this must be considered as exploitative because she is utilising a prestige pricing business model for a product, which Jenner designed to epitomise her own style. By exploiting the coverage of a challenge (with the ultimate goal to burst facial blood vessels) to bene t herself without using her platform to condemn the challenge, one might accuse Ms. Jenner of some measure of culpability for the current state of viral video challenges , and the popular media coverage surrounding them. This is because the Kylie Jenner Challenge is one of the rst instances of a successful
Harmful Challenge.
Surely Ms. Jenner should have used her social prestige to safeguard her younger fans. Jenner’s unique social standing allows her to utilize three quarters of Gillespie’s de nition of platforms, all of which she failed. She used her “computational platform” (social media), to promote her “ gurative platform”, (“a ‘platform’ for climbing the corporate ladder”); while falling short of the safeguarding responsibility that her “political platform”, (“where the ‘platform’ by de nition raises someone above the rest (and is rarely used to describe the beliefs of ordinary citizens”)) a ords her (Gillespie. 2010, pp 349-350). Jenner’s reaction towards the challenge, as well as the numerous inconsistencies of her social media platform use raises an issue of apathetic culpability when it comes to the condemnation of dangerous Internet phenomena. Perhaps if Ms. Jenner had used the platform that she inherited to issue a warning, or condemn this early example of a Harmful viral video challenge then the recent trajectory of the challenge genre might have been di erent. Instead, opting for the dubious route of equivocal sentimentality, thereby drawing public attention towards an internet phenomenon that set a dangerous precedent for mass participation in Harmful, and Dangerous challenges; Kylie Jenner became the world’s youngest “self-made billionaire”, and the trajectory for viral video challenge interaction was con rmed.
Charlie Charlie Challenge: 6/14/2015 20:16:24
The Charlie Charlie Challenge is a much simpler phenomenon. The setup of this challenge requires a piece of paper split into quadrants with ‘yes’ and ‘no’ in adjacent corners and two pencils balanced precariously at perpendicular angles. The participants would then attempt to ‘summon the Hispanic demon Charlie Charlie’ by asking yes or no questions. Charlie Charlie would then ‘respond’ through the movement of the pencil. This challenge was mainly propagated within the Spanish-speaking segment of the Internet. However due to several high-pro le English speaking actors, it rocketed into the forefront of popular digital culture. While this has traditionally been a household game in many Spanish-speaking countries, its introduction to the highly networked sphere of YouTube helped the challenge spread quickly. Perhaps due to the publication of a video by YouTube royalty PewDie. His contribution was the earliest example within my dataset and as the most subscribed YouTuber at the
time, his impact was surely in uential (see ‘ gure 10’). This can be con rmed by the study of
YouTube ’s recommendation network by Ian Torres and Jacob Trinidad. Here they stated that YouTube’s “network has small-world characteristics, as it contains cliques and nodes” that “are linked to all others by relatively short paths” (Torres, Ian & JacobTrinidad. 8 Dec. 2015, p.1).
Despite the seemingly Innocuous nature of the challenge, and its unique status as the only challenge on the list that does not require a physical participation, it still accumulated some concern. Particularly amongst religious communities. Despite the fact that the pencil’s movement was explained by scientist, Christopher French, the head of anomalistic psychology research unit at the University of London in the United Kingdom in the simple terms of: “Even the slightest [draft] or someone's breath will cause the top pencil to move” (Palermo, Elizabeth, and Christopher French. LiveScience , 3 June 2015). There was still signi cant fear within Christian communities who labeled it as “occult”. However the results of the challenge can be explained as ‘result expectancy’ whereby individuals may superimpose their own expectations. This expectancy has led to the hospitalization of four Colombian high school students who were “brought to the emergency room; screaming and babbling” (Baverstock, Alasdair.
Associated Newspapers . 10 June 2015). However physicians diagnosed this as “mass hysteria” due to result expectancy; not demonic possession.
Condom Challenge: 12/5/2015 10:58:52
There have been several iterations of the Condom Challenge, all of which pose potential choking hazards. The challenge that I am concerned with is not the one that consists of snorting a latex contraceptive through one’s nasal cavity, and pulling it out of your mouth (“yes believe it or not, this is an actual challenge that predates YouTube!” ( Gooch, Jamie. J. Daily Kent Stater . 29 Oct. 1993 p.11 )). While this challenge is unfortunately resurging, it has not achieved a consistently high amount of views (Hendricks, Sara. Business Insider . 2 Apr. 2018). Instead, this paper is discussing the water- lled
Condom Challenge whereby participants ll a latex condom with water, for it to be dropped over someone’s head, engul ng them in the sturdy contraceptive. While this is seemingly much safer than the other sort of Condom Challenge , this prank still poses serious risk. Asphyxiation is the main concern from physicians and parents. As the latex is watertight, it may block the airwaves of those taking part, leading to choking or death, therefore it has been assigned the Harmful categorisation.
Running Man Challenge: 6/2/2016 2:02:36
The Running Man Challenge is a dance challenge that involves dancing on the spot to a 1995 song: “My Boo” by Ghost Town DJs. The fad can be traced back to two student-athletes at the University of Maryland named Jared Nickens and Jaylen Brantley. Unlike the previous challenges, participation in the Running Man Challenge requires no setup. Equipped with only a phone capable of playing music and recording video, and the ability to jog on the spot, a participant has the potential to go viral. The ease of participation, along with the associated song itself which is extremely ‘catchy’, certainly contributed to the rapid success of the challenge. The popularity of the challenge can be measured by the recent commercial success of the song “My Boo”. Indeed, “More than 20 years later, thanks to the
Running Man Challenge , it hit number 29” on the ‘Billboard Top 100’, beating its previous peak at number 31 in 1995 when it was released. (Praderio, Caroline. Business Insider . 13 June 2016).
According to Billboard, “The vast majority” of the Running Man Challenges “ are on Instagram” (Weiner, Natalie. Billboard . 18 May 2016). This may attest to the high percentage of “compilation” videos present on YouTube . Indeed, the challenge itself is generally quite short with the original video lasting fewer than 10 seconds. Therefore many compilation channels such as “Best Sport Vines” were able to cash in on the success of the challenge by compiling several of the “best” Running Man Challenges.
Bottle Flip Challenge: 11/25/2016 13:26:12
Like the previous challenge, the Bottle Flip Challenge performing a dangerous activity is not a prerequisite for participation. The purpose is to take a partially lled plastic water bottle and holding it by the lid, ip it 360° so that it lands on the base without toppling over. The trend has been traced back to a high school talent show performance by Mike Senatore. The video entitled ‘Senior Talent Show Water Bottle Flip AK 2016’ gained over 8 Million views on YouTube alone, and started an international sensation. Similar to the Running Man Challenge , the Bottle Flip Challenge requires very few tools to participate. All that is needed is a plastic water bottle, a video recorder and skill. The latter can be acquired at a much later date. Senatore stated that “The bottle- ipping started” the previous year “during a chemistry class” as a way to pass time (Jones, Jonathan. Charlotte Observer . 29 May 2016). It
is interesting that something so simple became so popular. One must suggest that the simplicity of the trend is what allowed it to spread so widely. Indeed, the ease of participation, partnered with the skill required to produce a consistent performance is what contributed to its viral success. Out of the 100 videos studied, this challenge has the most views amongst its most popular videos. Like the previous challenge, the Bottle Flip Challenge search query returned a high volume of compilation videos, generally from the same publishers instead of unique participants. However, one must argue that the reason that this challenge received more net views than previous challenges was because of the potential for improvement. While it can be suggested that the skill required to complete a successful Running Man Challenge plateaus with a binary categorisation of successful or unsuccessful, the Bottle Flip Challenge o ers a greater variety of outcomes, generally referred to as “trick shots”. These trick shots can refer to anything from landing the bottle upright on an uneven surface to landing the bottle on its cap. Throughout the titles of this challenge in particular we can see the prevalence of superlatives, praising skill and trick shots, instead of the schadenfreudian grammar of failure that is frequently applied within the examples above. Instead of presenting failure (like many of the most popular Kylie Jenner Lip Challenges ), the thumbnails of Bottle Flip Challenge frequently show impressive trick shots in action, instead of gruesome clickbait.
Despite its Wholesome classi cation, and its dwindling reliance on schadenfreude, the Bottle Flip Challenge (like all of the challenges prior), has faced scrutiny from the media. Indeed this pressure resulted in it being banned in several schools. A principle con rmed that his school “suspended the taking of water bottles around the site in order to avoid problems created by litter, messing about in lessons and pupils indulging in the current craze of ipping bottles with all the intended and unintended consequences this produces,” (Samuels, Gabriel. The Independent. 5 Oct. 2016). While one may argue that this challenge is justi ably banned from schools as it may distract pupils from class, no further persecution of the challenge was encouraged outside of school grounds. Indeed, the simplicity and ease of the Bottle Flip, as well as the rising popularity of the viral video challenge genre prior to this particular challenge’s proliferation, is surely a contributing factor to its widespread popularity and by extension, simple, safe participatory-based challenges.
