Analysis of Results 

Analysis of Results 

The Key to Age-Locked Videos 

In order to formulate a quantitative assessment of risk that the viral video challenge genre may pose, I                                     turned to YouTube’s intrinsic safeguarding tool: ‘Age-Lock’. According to YouTube, “Age-restricted                       content” is content that “doesn't violate our policies, but may not be appropriate for all audiences”                                

( YouTube Age Restriction ). These “age-restricted videos are not visible to users who are logged out, are                                 under 18 years of age, or have Restricted Mode enabled” (Ibid). YouTube has de ned the stipulations                                 for age-restricted videos as something that contains at least one of the following: “vulgar language,                               violence and disturbing imagery, nudity and sexually suggestive content or portrayal of harmful or                             dangerous activities” (Ibid). Violating videos may be agged in a number of ways such as “video title,                                   description, metadata, Community Guidelines reviews,” in order “to identify and lter out potentially                           mature content” (Ibid). Therefore, by aggregating which videos had an ‘Age-Lock’ imposed by                           YouTube, we may come to understand which challenges generally tend to consistently present more                            

“harmful or dangerous activities”. Particularly as the platform relies heavily on public perception and                            

participation through the ‘report’ module available on each video. While age-restricted videos are “not                            

appropriate for all audiences” they are not directly “violating” their policies. Therefore one must                            

question why YouTube permits the publication of content that is both “not appropriate for all                              

audiences” and depicts “harmful or dangerous activities”.  

As the only videos to have age-restriction imposed upon them fall into either the Harmful or                                 Dangerous category proposed above, it is clear that despite YouTube’s “Policies on harmful or                             dangerous Content” there is still a lack of a rmative action in the case of regulation. Indeed, the rst                                     line of their policy states that, “content that aims to encourage dangerous or illegal activities that risk                                   serious physical harm or death is not allowed on YouTube” ( YouTube Policy on Dangerous and                               Harmful Content ). However, the fact that YouTube has simply restricted the access to these videos to                                 users over the age of 18 instead of banning them completely raises several questions of regulatory                                 culpability. 

Major Risk to Minors   

The most important aspect of Internet regulation that this paper is concerned with is the protection of                                   the numerous minors that regularly use the platform. As stated above, YouTube has some safety nets                                 built into its policies in order to protect children from the many harmful videos are frequently                                 uploaded on the site. One such example is the platform’s restriction on “dangerous or threatening                               pranks: Pranks that lead victims to fear imminent serious physical danger, or that create serious                               emotional distress in minors” ( YouTube Policy on Dangerous and Harmful Content ). Moreover, the                           platform’s guidelines stipulate that uploaders are warned not to “post content showing a minor                             participating in dangerous activity, or encouraging minors to engage in dangerous activities. Never put                             minors in harmful situations that may lead to injury, including dangerous stunts, dares, or pranks.”                              

(Ibid). YouTube ’s nal policy for the protection of children is that the video should not depict acts that                                    

“could be easily imitated by minors” (Ibid). 

However, despite YouTube ’s apparent desire to impose regulatory services of child-protection, they are                           at best unsuccessful. Disregarding the likliehood that underaged users may provide false ages for their                               accounts, thereby cheating the system, there are other ways that children could access age-restricted                             videos with ease. Indeed, a simple Google search of “watch age restricted youtube videos” results in a                                   full page of instruction videos and ‘how-to’ pages, with each o ering several methods of evasion , . The                            

    fact that many of the search results yielded links to YouTube instruction videos shows that there is little                                     cohesive regulation for the protection of minors online.  

Indeed according to Dubit and Sherbert’s study of 5,000 families in the US and UK, “29% of 2-5                                     year-olds and 25% of 6-7 year-olds are watching videos online every day, rising to 33% for 8-10 year-olds                                    

5

Bidasaria, Gaurav. “7 Ways to Watch Age Restricted YouTube Videos Without Signing In.” TechWiser, 22 May 2018,  techwiser.com/watch-age-restricted-youtube-videos/. 

6

wikiHow. “How to Bypass Age Restrictions on YouTube Videos.” WikiHow, WikiHow, 23 Dec. 2018,  www.wikihow.com/Bypass-Age-Restrictions-on-YouTube-Videos.Proxy, Smart DNS.  

7

Watch Age Restricted YouTube Videos Without Signing In.” YouTube, 24 Mar. 2018, 

www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNNeGgqYpnI.  

and 45% for 11-14 year-olds” (Dredge, Stuart. The Guardian . 7 Oct. 2014). Therefore there is a                                 signi cant number of children that are subjected to YouTube’ s age-restrictions and unable to view                             videos that may fall into the Harmful or Dangerous categories. However, if these children are not                                 watching videos on their parent’s account, at any point they would be able to access age-restricted                                 content after a swift Google search. Not to mention the multitudes of mirror platforms such as                                

‘www.nsfwyoutube.com’ whose tagline is “Watch YouTube videos without signing in/up for                       YouTube account. Bypass registration trick!” (www.nsfwyoutube.com). Websites such as this, that are                         available on Google’s front page, pose a great threat to at-risk children as they allow them to access                                     Dangerous content, which they may attempt to reproduce. 

Active Actors   

Upon completing the study, I was left with the 100 most viewed viral video challenges on YouTube . One                                     key nding was the frequent recurrence of speci c actors. Running the list of publishers through the                                 DMI Triangulator tool there were several notable ndings. Of the ten challenges, two accounts                             reappeared within 40% of the challenges. The image below shows the result of this triangulation. 

The accounts that recur most frequently were ‘fernan oo’ and ‘guava juice’. Both of these publishers                               have received over 5 Billion views between them, and have over 32.9 Million and 13.5 Million                                 subscribers respectively. Therefore, due to their high view count one must suggest that they are                               established microcelebrities. The channel ‘Guava Juice’ is based in the Philippines, but operates in                             English, and o ers a variety of platform speci c content such as vlogs, music videos and various                                

“challenges”. Indeed, ‘Guava Juice’ utilised the a ordances of YouTube to create a curated playlist of                               over 263 videos with 20,540,461 views. 

Next is ‘Fernan oo’, a microcelebrity based in El Salvador who produces mainly Spanish-speaking                           videos. The two most frequently occurring channels have generated millions of views from their                             participation in viral video challenges . ‘Fernan oo’ accumulated 23,713,986 views, while ‘Guava Juice’                        

acquired 53,899,913 views. As both of these channels are monetized, they each generate signi cant                             income from their involvement in viral video challenges . While one may argue that this is perfectly                                 anodyne as neither of them participate in overtly ‘ Dangerous’ challenges. Opting instead to generally                             take part in more Innocuous challenges, with the notable exception of both exploiting the success of the                                   Condom Challenge . However, one must note that both of these channels are complying with YouTube’s                               guidelines for their own bene t. This is because as previously stated in the ‘minors at risk’ segment of                                     this paper, many dangerous challenges are age-restricted and “age-restricted videos are not eligible for                             monetization” ( YouTube Age Restricted Content ). Therefore, there is nothing to say that these channels                             would not participate in overtly dangerous challenges if they were able to monetize them. Particularly                               as Guava Juice already has a playlist speci cally called “Do Not Do This!”                          

(https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLg8oaaTdoHzMxpqfzRHzxC-qf9Ej60dBK). 

Related Actor Networks 

One other notable actor in the viral video challenge genre is ‘PewDiePie’, one of the major actors on                                     YouTube with over 90 million subscribers. PewDiePie, or Felix Arvid Ulf Kjellberg posted two videos                               that made it into the dataset studied. One contribution is to the Charlie Charlie Challenge , and the                                   other within the Bottle Flip Challenge. Similar to ‘Guava Juice’, Kjellberg has taken advantage of                               YouTube’s a ordances and curated a playlist of challenge videos. These 24 videos have slightly over 1.5                                 million views and date from June 23rd 2014 to Feb 27, 2017.  

The popularity of PewDiePie emphasises the assertion made by Torres and Trinidad that “YouTube                             tends to recommend the popular channels because they are simply great within their genre, so                               YouTube promotes them.” (Torres & Trinidad. 2015, p.9). Therefore, when considering                       microcelebrities such as PewDiePie, Guava Juice and Fernan oo, one must note that YouTube’s                           algorithm favours high-pro le channels that frequently participate in the viral video challenge genre. In                             order to further prove this assertion, I have undertaken a study of my own. This is in order to better                                         understand the “social network structure”, of YouTube and the implications of the “small-world                           characteristics” that are present throughout the platform (Ibid). By utilising the preceding study by                             Torres et al., and publications by YouTube software engineers outlining the viewing patterns of                             YouTube communities I was able to produce ndings that con rm assertions that the platform’s                            

“recommendations will by nature connect channels that are more similar in content, but not directly                              

connected” (Torres & Trinidad. 2015, p.4). Below are two examples of YouTube’s “small-world                          

characteristics”, that manifest in “cliques and nodes” that “are linked to all others by relatively short                                

paths” (Ibid, p.1). 

Considering the presentation of ndings above, one may argue that despite YouTube’s e orts to restrict                               access to Dangerous challenges, they may actually be accountable for promoting their success. This is                               because, “YouTube’s recommendation algorithm” keeps “similar types of content together” (Torres et                         al. 2015, p.5). Therefore, by keeping this content together, YouTube may unintentionally redirect                           viewers intending to watch a Wholesome viral video challenge (such as the most viewed video in this                                   study, ‘ Water Bottle Flip 2 | Dude Perfect’ ) , to channels that propagate participation in more Harmful                                 videos (such as Fernan oo) with two clicks via PewDiePie. This attests to the power of big seed                                   marketing, where channels with high subscriber counts act as the big seed. This is particularly true for                                   Spanich-centric Channels who have a larger portion of channels associated with risk. 

Additionally, incentives in the form of monetization and “business tools” being “rewarded by                           YouTube” to accounts with more than 100,000 subscribers may contribute to the “genres and rising                               commercialisation” of the platform (Rogers. 2018, pp.4-6). This rising commercialisation may be                         leading to more radical forms of content creation. Particularly as YouTube’s “recommendation                         algorithm promotes divisive clips” (Lewis, Paul, and Erin McCormick. The Guardian . 2 Feb. 2018).                            

Indeed, the only deterrent that YouTube has implemented is the risk of demonetization for publishing                               dangerous challenges. They do nothing to stop the challenges from occurring. One may argue that                               with this current model we see a neoliberal free market that prioritises the generation of clicks over user                                     wellbeing. In theory, there is nothing to stop publishers from initiating a Dangerous challenge, and                               cashing in on the returns before the platform steps in to demonetize them after the challenge goes viral.                                    

Therefore one may argue that the publishers are not to blame for the recent trend of Dangerous                                   challenges as they are simply working within the parameters delineated by YouTube itself. Instead, it is                                 the community guidelines that must be adjusted further to discourage dangerous participation.  

Visualizing Views 

Undeniably, one of YouTube ’s most important datametrics is the view count. According to Rogers,                            

“those who run channels seek subscribers and views” (Rogers. 2018, p.4). YouTube con rmed this,                            

stating: “video views re ect how many times a video has been watched and can be an important                                  

measure of a video's overall popularity” ( YouTube How Video Views are Counted ). As view count                              

provides a quantitative indicator of cultural popularity, I have recorded and visualised the total views                              

for each of the videos that I have studied. Hopefully this will demonstrate the popularity of the                                  

challenge speci cally on YouTube. As can be seen from the images below, the popularity of rst viral                                  

video challenge, the Ice Bucket Challenge, is not to be understated. Indeed, it is the second most viewed                                    

challenge overall. Therefore it can be seen as a clear progenitor of the trend. One might suggest that the                                      

popularity of this challenge blazed the trail for the current environment of the viral video challenge,                                

genre that has since amassed a staggering 1,554,675,025 views.  

Despite the widespread popularity of the viral video challenge genre, there are several challenges with                               relatively few overall views. Namely: the Fire Challenge, the Tide Pod Challenge, and the Bird Box                                 Challenge. Indeed, these three lowest ranking videos have amassed only 19,955,153 views in total. The                               reason behind the signi cantly reduced number of views may be attributed to YouTube’ s crackdown on                               such dangerous challenges. Particularly as YouTube’ s policies on harmful or dangerous content                         explicitly cite two of these challenges as “extremely dangerous challenges” or “challenges that pose an                               imminent risk of physical injury such as the choking game, re challenge, detergent-eating challenges,                             the “no lackin’ challenge,” or hot water challenge” ( YouTube Policy on Dangerous and Harmful                             Content ).  

Therefore, one may suggest that the low view count is a testament to the success of YouTube’ s agging                                    

system, and the removal of content that violates their community guidelines. Furthermore the                          

platform’s policy goes on to suggest stipulation for mitigating circumstances. “A video that depicts                            

dangerous acts may be allowed if the primary purpose is educational, documentary, scienti c, or                            

artistic (EDSA), and it isn’t gratuitously graphic. For example, a news piece on the dangers of choking                                  

games would be appropriate, but posting clips out of context from the same documentary might not                                 be” ( YouTube Policy on Dangerous and Harmful Content ). This may attest to the low view count of                                   several Dangerous challenges. The majority of these videos are not participatory, but are generally news                               reports on the consequence of participation. Note the occurrence of news publications such as ‘Inside                               Edition’ that has two news videos featuring the Fire Challenge and the Bird Box Challenge . While these                                  

“EDSA” videos do not depict participation, one may argue that they are still detrimental as they often                                   use clickbait such as disturbing images of failed challenges in the thumbnail . Another popular type of                                 video format for the restricted challenges is a ‘vlog’ or ‘talk show’. These usually feature anecdotal                                 segments pertaining to participation in a challenge, or act as a warning viewers of the dangers of                                   participation. One notable example can be seen in the image below. 

One must question how these Dangerous challenges were able to obtain so many views. One must                                 discuss the consequences of allowing videos such as Holmes’. Despite the fact that he seems to deter                                   potential challengers, critics have stated that there may be more harmful forces at play. “Instead of                                 bandages, blisters, and burns, they see the videos like the re challenge as an opportunity for                                 popularity” (Marshall, Veronica. Valley News live , Aug 21, 2018). This is particularly true when                             considering the aforementioned: “ '                   x           ! ”   which depicts two individuals handling live ames. Speci cally, when the platform explicitly names                          

“Fire Challenge ” in its list of restricted content.  

Below is a further analysis of my view count study: 

Measuring Public Perception: Likes and Dislikes 

View count is not the only indicator of user engagement. Indeed, it has been suggested that views                                  

“indirectly measures a user’s engagement and happiness,” indeed, “the fact that a user watched a video                                 in its entirety is not enough to conclude that she actually liked it” (Davidson, James, et al. 2010, p.294).                                      

Therefore, I utilised more a “explicit feedback such as a thumbs up or a thumbs down of a video” to                                         provide a more explicit indicator of challenge success (Gamas, Alex. 23 Sept. 2016). This datametric                               accounts not just for user engagement, but also provides an indictment of general mood towards the                                 video, and by extension, the challenge on a whole. Inversely, the dislike count can be used to ascertain a                                       viewer's negative feelings towards certain challenges and videos. In order to either like or dislike a video                                   on YouTube , users must have an account. Therefore one argues that these datametrics, unlike views                               which can be attributed to individuals without accounts, provides a more coherent status of YouTube’s                               community. Therefore I have compiled the total likes over dislikes in order to ascertain how popular                                 certain challenges have become. However, this may not provide a de nitive indicator of mood towards                               challenges due to the disparity between the number of views and likes. Therefore, in order to account                                   for this I have created a separate visualisation for the ratio of dislikes to likes (see ‘ gure 34’).  

One consideration that must be accounted for when considering explicit feedback is the prerogative of                               the publisher to make certain datamatics available for user engagement. Fortunately only one video had                               disabled the likes and dislikes module, therefore the results of this analysis can be regarded as generally                                   reliable. The only exception can be found in the lower than expected like count of the Running Man                                     Challenge compared to its view count. This is because the 8th most popular video in this category                                   disabled user interaction. Indeed, it is likely that a video with 5,240,507 views (less than 50,000 fewer                                   than the following challenge) would achieve tens of thousands of likes. However, this video features a                                 police department participating in a challenge that was uploaded by the o cial YouTube account of                               Plymouth Minnesota: ‘PlymouthMNgov’. The reason for not incorporating comments or likes onto                         the video is surely to limit politically charged statements. Indeed,this video was posted July 6, 2016, at                                   the peak of the “Blue Lives Matter” political tension in America (see below).  

The Bottle Flip Challenge acquired the most dislikes, however when adjusted to a proportional formula                              

it appears that the number of dislikes is symptomatic of the view count. The most disliked video is the                                      

5th most viewed overall, by publisher user, Fernanfloo. This Spanish-language video depicts the user                            

participating in the Charlie Charlie Challenge. As this challenge has strong Hispanic roots, it is no                                

surprise that the most viewed video in this category is by one of YouTube’s highest subscribed                                

Spanish-speaking content producers. Furthermore, the Charlie Charlie Challenge has the second                      

highest number of dislikes. This may be due to the content of the challenge itself. The controversial                                  

nature of the challenge originates in its ease to be simulated, particularly when the video frequently                                

cuts between shots instead of long-takes. As previously stated there is a scienti c reason behind the                                

movement of the pencils therefore, one may suggest that there are two in uential reasons behind users                                

participation in this challenge. Firstly, they are doing so because participation in a viral video challenge                                

will result in prestige through association with an already viral trend (similar to the logic behind the                                  

marketing team of Rae Sremmurd). This may prove why this particular challenge was able to achieve                                

the third highest overall view count. The second reason is unfortunately no less sinister: that the                                

accounts behind the publication of these videos believe that they are convening with a Mexican                              

ghost-child either through religious belief, result expectancy or mass hysteria.  

Community Comments   

Similar to likes and dislikes, the comment count of a video provides invaluable insight into user                                 engagement. YouTube has corroborated this in a public statement: “comments are an important way                             creators build and connect with their audiences” (Fox, Chris. BBC . 28 Feb. 2019). However, a                               signi cant percentage (14%) of the videos had comments disabled. This may lead to incomplete                             ndings that do not truly re ect the connection between creators and their audience. The ndings                               below may at rst seem inconsistent with previous indicators of popularity, however there is a distinct                                 reason for this. In an attempt to increase their child protection service, YouTube started to regulate                                 comments on videos with minors. In a statement from February 2019, a spokesperson stated that                              

“we’ve been taking a number of steps to better protect children and families” on the platform,                                

“suspending comments on most videos that feature minors,” (Binder, Matt. Mashable . 28 Feb. 2019).  

With the exception of the Mannequin Challenge ’s 7th most popular video, and the aforementioned                             restrictions imposed by PlymouthMNgov , all of the other challenges with comments disabled feature                           minors. These minors appear either as the focal point of the channel (seen by actors such as                                   MattyBVlogs and That's Amazing ) , or feature in compilation videos, or alongside the owners of the                               channel such as TheEllenShow where Ellen interviews the two sixteen year olds credited with starting                               the Running Man Challenge. 

While YouTube will argue that these measures were taken in order to better protect the regular users of                                    

their platform, one must question their priorities. The platform has taken the onus upon itself to                                

protect children from predatory comments by banning comments on videos with minors. However                          

many of the videos portray young children show them participating in risky challenges such as the                                

video ‘ Kylie Jenner Challenge Fail (Compilation)’. This has the comment feature disabled due to its                              

depiction of minors, yet these underaged individuals are nonetheless taking part in a Harmful                            

challenge that doctors have repeatedly warned against.  

While on the one hand, we must commend YouTube for their recent steps to better protect children                                   and families through regulatory practices. On the other hand, they are still hosting videos that show                                 children participating in Harmful challenges. This seemingly directly contradicts their assurance that                        

“YouTube has long prohibited videos which promote harmful or dangerous activities and we routinely                             review and update our enforcement guidelines to make sure they’re consistent and appropriately                           address emerging trends” (Hamilton, Isobel. Business Insider Nederland. 20 Jan. 2019). If the platform                             was truly interested in producing consistent results then it would be impossible to view Harmful or                                 Dangerous challenges at all. Instead, they simply hand out “strikes” to rule breaking channels. These                               strikes mean that users “won't be able to upload videos, live streams, stories, or create custom                                 thumbnails or Community posts - for one week” ( YouTube Community Guidelines Strike Basics ). This                             comes with a 90 day probation period during which if a user has another strike they su er the above                                       consequence for an additional week. If a user receives three strikes within this 90 probation then their                                   account is permanently terminated. However, this is not a signi cant deterrent. This does not stop                               channels from uploading dangerous content, instead it just limits the timeframe in which they can post                                 such “harmful or dangerous activities” ( YouTube Policy on Dangerous and Harmful Content ). In                           theory, if a user wanted to cash in on a popular trend that goes against YouTube’s guidelines then they                                       would be able to do so up to four times a year (365/90). As the most viral video challenges that have                                       occurred in one year is four, YouTube is clearly in need of reassessing its regulation. The platform surely                                     must protect its users instead of promoting loop-holes for content producers. As these publishers are                               the reason that viewers come to the platform, one must argue that YouTube is yet again prioritising                                  

nancial gain over user well-being. 

The Lengths we go to: Discussing Duration  

The average duration of the most popular viral video challenges promises interesting assessment,                           particularly when considering the impact that the compilation video has on the genre.   

Compilation videos have the additional advantage of being long enough for multiple monetization                           characteristics, and o er a convenient selection of curated challenges for viewer consumption. Thereby                           making them a particularly popular format within the viral video challenge genre. Additionally, further                             contributing factors to the increased trend of what YouTube calls “longform videos” or “videos that are                                 10 minutes or longer” may be due to one of the platform’s money-making strategies ( YouTube Manage                                 ad Breaks in Long Videos ). This general trend of longer videos may be attributed to the introduction of                                     mid-roll ads on YouTube. Mid-roll ads can only be added to longform videos and allow content                                 creators to “enable ads during the middle of the video ("mid-roll"), not just at the beginning” (Ibid). 

Another reason for the increased popularity of the compilation video may be attributed to the                               popularity of Twitter’s short video service Vine which had a duration limit of 6 seconds. Twitter                                 announced the closure of Vine on 27th October 2016 ( Fox, Chris. BBC News, BBC, 27 Oct. 2016).                                  

This was only three days before the average publication date of the Mannequin Challenge . Perhaps it                                 may be an extreme notion to correlate the closure of Vine, which “became the Vine Archive in January                                     2017”, with the brief year-long hiatus of viral video challenge popularity in 2017 ( Twitter Vine FAQs ).                                

Yet the sudden fall of a digital communicative tool that had “more than 1 billion loops”, “played every                                    

day”, from over “200 million active monthly users”, undoubtedly resulted in a niche for a social media                                  

tool that could be easily and e ectively utilised by content creators (Lynley, Matthew. Tech Crunch. 5                                

May 2015),(Smith, Craig. DMR. 22 Mar. 2019). Therefore, one may suggest that the absence of viral                                

video challenges in 2017 may be at least partially linked to the mass diaspora of social media users that                                      

were evicted from the platform of digital congregation that Vine a orded. Indeed, the prevalence of                              

Vine is noted within the videos studied. There are four di erent videos within the dataset that                                 explicitly name Vine compilation videos ( ‘Kylie Jenner Lip Challenge                     EXTREME FAILS     Compilation       - #KylieJennerChallenge!     ALL VINES ’ / ‘Charlie Charlie Pencil Game Vine                   Compilation | Charlie Charlie Challenge Vine Compilation [HD]’ / ‘Running Man Challenge Vine                           Compilation’ & ‘Adults React to Running Man Challenge Vine Compilation (ft. SING IT! Cast)’ ), and                              

ve further videos that o er compilations not exclusive to Vine. 

Interconnected Caption Content   

Popular videos prove a valuable breeding ground for the promotion of other products. This can be                                 seen by the quantity of external links in the caption section of the top 100 viral video challenge videos.                                      

Of the 100 available captions, only 23% did not contain a hyperlink to either an external website, or the                                       user’s alternate channel. As 77% of video captions contain hyperlinks, it is clear that content creators                                 exploit their popularity in order to further their commercial success, either through linking viewers to                               their other accounts, or through including third party advertising. This corroborates the ndings of                             Gary Geisler and Sam Burns who, in their research into the ‘Conventions and Strategies of the YouTube                                   Community ’. Here they cite “many examples of tagging behaviors that indicate tags are being used in                                 ways that do not enhance the description of the video”, but instead exploit YouTube’s a ordances for                                 personal gain (Geisler, Gary, & Sam Burns. 2007, p.480). 

Tantalizing Titles   

One of the rst things that a viewer sees when they search for a video is the title. This means that                                           content creators are eager to create intriguing titles that will exploit views out of intrigue. This dark                                   pattern that many channels employ is called “clickbait”. Critics have outlined several di erent models                             of clickbait speci c to YouTube. Indeed, Zannettou et al. suggested that content creators have the                              

“ultimate goal” of increasing “their ad revenue by ensuring that their content will get viewed by                                 millions of users.” (Zannettou, Savvas, et al. 2018, p.103). They go on to describe the clickbait patterns                                   that “YouTubers deliberately employ” in three separate ways: “(i) use of eye-catching thumbnails, such                             as depictions of abnormal stu or attractive adults, which are often irrelevant to video content; (ii) use                                   of headlines that aim to intrigue the viewers; and (iii) encapsulate false information to either the                                 headline, the thumbnail or the video content (Ibid). All three of these tactics frequently appear within                                 the viral video challenge genre. These de nitions of clickbait are particularly relevant when considering                             the Dangerous category such as the Bird Box Challenge, or the Tide Pod Challenge (see below) .  

As the examples above demonstrate, clickbait is a common characteristic of the viral video challenge,                              

becoming increasingly associated with microcelebrity contribution to the genre. Using the above image                          

as an example, I argue that by addressing the challenge and adding clickbait to the thumbnail of a video                                      

with an ambiguous title, one must argue that well known microcelebrities such as Shane Dawson,                              

PewDiePie and Fernan oo continue to propagate the dissemination and public discourse surrounding                        

the cultural popularity and continued participation of the viral video challenge genre. In order to                              

display how frequently clickbait occurs within the genre I have compiled a binary list of videos which                                  

use titles or “headlines that aim to intrigue the viewers” (Zannettou et al. 2018). One clear way to do                                      

this was to address the use of capitalization in the title. This is useful as it highlights how frequently                                      

YouTubers employ dark patterns in order to acquire more views. 

Conclusion   

In conclusion, it is undeniable that the viral video challenge genre has made a signi cant impact on                                   social media. However throughout this study, one must note the repeated inconsistencies in the                             classi cation of the genre with many news sources and trade publications failing to nd a consistent                                 de nition, instead oscillating between phrases such as ‘meme’ or ‘trend’ simply just ‘viral video’.  

Time and time again we have seen that exploitation of the viral video challenge genre has powerful                                   economic potential, not just for content producers with monetized accounts, but also to marketing                             teams backed by big brands. This has been proven by persistent success through association with a                                 challenge. In the best case we have the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge that is most frequently accredited as                                     the pioneer of the genre. This challenge raised over $100 million for motoneurone charities worldwide,                               while simultaneously spreading awareness for the disease by creating a challenge that was “watched by                               440 million people a total of 10 billion times” ( ALSA.org ). However, while the rst challenge provided                                 recognition and nancial support to a charity, subsequent instances of the viral video challenge                             increasingly seem to bene t a small minority of actors. This can be seen throughout each challenge as                                   individual users rush to participate in viral video challenges while they are at peak success, without                                 much regard for the well being of their viewers who may be encouraged to participate based on the                                     titular challenge nudge. This is particularly true for major microcelebrities such as Shane, PewDiePie,                             or Fernan oo. All of whom can be described as big-seed marketers for their own brand. 

Additionally, there has been signi cant commercial success for actors outside of YouTube’s platform                           limitations. Success through genre proximity can be traced to Kylie Jenner, who became the youngest                              

“self-made billionaire” from the launch of her lip care cosmetics less than 6 months after the                                

“#KylieJennerChallenge” emerged. Likewise, one can correlate the success of musical artists to the                           appearance of their song in a challenge. The Running Man Challenge facilitated the commercial                             success of 1995 song ‘My Boo’ by Ghost Town DJs, decades after its initial release. The success that the                                       viral video challenge genre has on songs has not gone unnoticed by advertising professionals. Indeed,                               the marketing team behind Rae Sremmurd single handedly masterminded the commercial success of                           the song ‘ Black Beatles’ through associative proximity to a successful challenge. 

Moreover, even negative association seems to provide positive results for marketing teams. Experts have                            

announced that the popularity of the “ Tide Pod Challenge ” online “may be unexpectedly boosting                            

potential sales” (Marzilli, Ted. YouGov. 24 Jan . 2018 ). Likewise, one may propose that the success of the                                  

lm Bird Box is linked to the international notoriety of an eponymous viral video challenge. As I have                                    

proven that Net ix fraudulently claimed that they “didn’t know how” the Bird Box Challenge started,                              

this commercial success becomes even more exploitative and shocking. Particularly as this was a                            

challenge that was explicitly named in YouTube’s war on dangerous challenges. Indeed, as Net ix                             commissioned the original iterations of the Bird Box Challenge, one might accuse the streaming service                               of avoiding culpability once the challenge became deadly. 

While it is apparent that the consequences of a viral video challenge may be unpredictable, I argue that                                     any brand or cultural artefact that associates itself with a dangerous trend must be held accountable for                                   the results. When it comes to safeguarding, it is unacceptable for platforms to be reactionary. Instead                                 social media sites must be proactive in their pursuit of regulation. It is my rm opinion that good                                     regulation gets good results. This must be addressed before viral video challenges become routinely                             exploited by big marketing brands that have the backing of key cultural actors and microcelebrities.  

Furthermore, microcelebrities and content creators on a whole must take responsibility for their                           content. Clearly many of them do not fear YouTube’s sanctions, and even if they did there is nothing to                                       stop an unscrupulous user from publishing participation in a potentially dangerous challenge. While                           this video may become demonetized by YouTube, it would allow the publisher to achieve some level of                                   infamy if they were publicized in a news report. This in turn would increase their standing among the                                     platform’s community network, as well as contribute to the circulation of their channel.  

However before we exclusively accuse corporations and content creators of culpability there must be                             some form of introspective accountability. We cannot ask for regulation without education. To achieve                             this we must rst have a consistent form of content classi cation that represents the danger that the                                   viral video challenge genre may pose. Additionally, digital corporations must be more open about the                               consequences of these challenges. This is particularly important as up to now, the discourse                             surrounding the topic has been largely shaped by news outlets with a nancial agenda. These fear                                 mongering sources seem to prioritise reports of detrimental challenges because they are more likely to                               elicit a response. This has the dangerous e ect of platforming Dangerous and Harmful challenges that                               have resulted in serious injury to children (such as the shockingly recent tragedy of Timiyah Landers)                                 or in the wort case, death.  

Further avenues of study would be to focus on other video hosting platforms with less strict guidelines,                                   such as Dailymotion or Vimeo. This may provide a more comprehensive understanding of the climate                               surrounding the viral video challenge , and its place among contemporary digital culture. Indeed, the                             appearance of the viral video challenge genre would provide an interesting study across a range of                                 di erent platforms. This would provide information on platform-speci c nuances, while shedding                       light on how speci c social media ecosystems a ord the circulation of cultural content. 

Only time will tell how the viral video challenge will be subsequently exploited. One frightening future                                

involves fast food restaurants such as McDonalds sponsoring, or popularising dangerous challenges                        

through big-seed marketing and carte blanche marketing budgets. Surely there must be some                          

international regulation in place that will stop marketing companies from exploiting the genre to                             increase the revenue of a multinational corporation at the nancial and nutritional expense of viewers.  

Finally, the onus is surely on digital corporations to agree on regulation that will consistently protect                                 not only user’s wellbeing but also their agency. If they fail to do so, and we continue to permit                                       companies such as YouTub e were to prioritise their own nancial outlook above the safety of their                                 viewers, then the future outlook of the viral video challenge is ominous. Time and time again                                 corporations have repeatedly failed to adequately protect their users, leading to increasingly risky                           challenges appearing online. By failing to address the situation when it happened, social media                             platforms have rejected their roles as gatekeepers for society. I believe that by not condemning these                                 challenges, corporations involuntarily condone them. Dangerous and Harmful challenges have no                       place in contemporary society. Therefore, I wholeheartedly propose that if media corporations fail to                             act, then we must implore that international governments step in. Perhaps sanctions will be successful                               if they target the platforms that host the videos, instead of the individual users. Particularly as nancial                                   deterrents seem to be the only language that multinational corporations understand. I do not feel as                                 though this is excessive when considering the unpredictable consequences of the viral video challenge                             genre, and the impeccable memory of a digital culture that reveres risk, and glori es irony. 

Bibliography 

Abraham, Chris. “The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge Is the Perfect Meme.” Biznology, 26 Aug. 2014,  biznology.com/2014/08/als-ice-bucket-challenge-perfect-meme/. 

Adeane, Ant. “Blue Whale: What Is the Truth behind an Online 'Suicide Challenge'?” BBC News, BBC, 13 Jan. 

2019, www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-46505722. 

Adeyeri, Eb. “Ice Bucket Challenge: What Are the Lessons for Marketers?” The Guardian, Guardian News and  Media, 27 Aug. 2014, 

www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-blog/2014/aug/27/ice-bucket-challenge-lessons-marketi ng. 

AdHive.tv. “Video Bloggers - the Rising Stars and Future of Content Marketing.” Medium, Adhive.tv, 9 Feb. 

2018, medium.com/adhive/video-bloggers-the-rising-stars-and-future-of-content-marketing-dae1f6c6bc6b. 

Alexander, Julia. “Net ix Warns against Bird Box Challenge as Dangerous Trend Goes Viral.” The Verge, The  Verge, 3 Jan. 2019, 

www.theverge.com/2019/1/3/18166594/bird-box-challenge-net ix-tweet-instagram-tiktok-youtube-morgan-ad ams. 

ALS Association “ALS Ice Bucket Challenge - FAQ.” 2014 ALSA.org,  www.alsa.org/about-us/ice-bucket-challenge-faq.html. 

ALS Association. “Your Ice Bucket Dollars at Work.” 2014 ALSA.org,  www.alsa.org/ ght-als/ibc-infographic.html. 

Andrews, Robin. “The Latest Viral 'Challenge' Is Unbelievably Dangerous.” IFLScience, IFLScience, 9 Apr. 

2019, 

www.i science.com/health-and-medicine/this-socalled-challenge-unbelievably-dangerous-incredibly-stupid/. 

Bartels, Joe, and Dr. Daliah Wachs. “Vegas Doctor Explains the Fire Challenge.” KTNV, 22 Aug. 2018,  www.ktnv.com/news/investigations/another-viral-video-challenge-burns-49-percent-of-12-year-old-girls-body. 

Baverstock, Alasdair. “Charlie Charlie Challenge Sends Teenagers into a Panic across the World.” Daily Mail 

Online, Associated Newspapers, 10 June 2015, 

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3116725/Children-hospitalised-mass-hysteria-mysterious-bruises-Mexican-d emon-video-Dominican-Republic-spawned-satanic-Charlie-Charlie-game-sending-teenagers-panic-world.html. 

Bhushan, Ambika. “Study: Children 'over-Imitate' Adults.” Yale Daily News Study Children Overimitate Adults  Comments, yaledailynews.com/blog/2007/12/06/study-children-over-imitate-adults/. 

Bidasaria, Gaurav. “7 Ways to Watch Age Restricted YouTube Videos Without Signing In.” TechWiser, 22 May  2018, techwiser.com/watch-age-restricted-youtube-videos/. 

Binder, Matt. “YouTube Will Now Disable Comments on All Videos Featuring Children.” Mashable, Mashable,  28 Feb. 2019, mashable.com/article/youtube-disables-comments-on-videos-featuring-minors/?europe=true. 

Bine, Anne-Sophie. “Social Media Is Rede ning 'Depression'.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 28 Oct. 

2013, www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/10/social-media-is-rede ning-depression/280818/. 

Bozdag, Engin. “ Bias in Algorithmic Filtering and Personalization .” Ethics and Information Technology, vol. 15,  no. 3, 2013, pp. 209–227., doi:10.1007/s10676-013-9321-6. 

Bronner, Simon J. Folklore and the Internet: Vernacular Expression in a Digital World . Edited by Trevor J. Blank,  Utah State University Press. 2009, pp.21-66 

Bruner, Raisa. “YouTube Has Banned Dangerous Pranks and Challenges.” Time, 16 Jan. 2019,  time.com/5504295/youtube-bans-challenges/. 

Bruns, Axel. Gatewatching : Collaborative Online News Production. Edited by Peter Lang, 2005. 

Chang, David. “3 Teens Arrested in 'Gallon Smashing' Incident.” NBC 10 Philadelphia, 22 Mar. 2013,  www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Police-Crackdown-on-Teen-Gallon-Smashers-198846901.html. 

Chaykowski, Kathleen. “The World's Youngest Billionaires In 2019: Meet The 71 Under Age 40.” Forbes, Forbes  Magazine, 5 Mar. 2019, 

www.forbes.com/sites/kathleenchaykowski/2019/03/05/the-worlds-youngest-billionaires-in-2019-meet-the-71- under-age-40/#777171f1411e. 

China Internet Watch Team. “Weibo Monthly Active Users (MAU) Grew to 431 Million in Q2 2018.” China  Internet Watch, 8 Aug. 2018, www.chinainternetwatch.com/26225/weibo-q2-2018/. 

Clemson University. “Deaths Tied to Viral Videos Inspire Prevention Research.” Medical Xpress - Medical 

Research Advances and Health News, Medical Xpress, 2 July 2018, 

medicalxpress.com/news/2018-07-deaths-tied-viral-videos.html. 

Covington, Paul, et al. “ Deep Neural Networks for YouTube Recommendations. ” Proceedings of the 10th ACM  Conference on Recommender Systems - RecSys 16, Sept. 2016, pp.1-8. doi:10.1145/2959100.2959190. 

Cresci, Elena. “10 More of the Best Celebrity Takes on the Ice Bucket Challenge.” The Guardian, Guardian  News and Media, 21 Aug. 2014, 

www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/21/10-more-of-the-best-celebrity-takes-on-the-ice-bucket-challenge-al s. 

Cruel, Jessica. “The #KylieJennerChallenge Is One More Example of Cultural Appropriation.” POPSUGAR  Beauty UK, 25 Apr. 2015, 

www.popsugar.co.uk/beauty/KylieJennerChallenge-One-More-Example-Cultural-Appropriation-37323134. 

Darus, Alex. “Momo Challenge Horror Film in the Works after Viral Videos.” Alternative Press, 17 May 2019,  www.altpress.com/news/momo-challenge-horror-movie-viral/. 

Davidson, James; Benjamin Liebald, Junning Liu, Palash Nandy, Taylor Van Vleet, Ullas Gargi, Sujoy Gupta, Yu  He, Mike Lambert, Blake Livingston, and Dasarathi Sampath. 2010. The YouTube video recommendation system. 

In Proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on Recommender systems (RecSys '10). ACM, New York, NY,  USA. 2010 pp. 293-296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1864708.1864770. 

Dawkins, Richard. The Selfish Gene . Oxford University Press, 1976. 

DelMonico, Dylan. “So Help Me God, I'm Going To Eat One Of Those Multicolored Detergent Pods.” The  Onion, 8 Dec. 2015, www.theonion.com/so-help-me-god-i-m-going-to-eat-one-of-those-multicolo-1819585017. 

Denton, Elizabeth, and Dr. Dendy Engelman. “See The Terrifying Way Some Girls Are Attempting To Get Kylie  Jenner's Famous Pout.” Seventeen, Seventeen, 25 Apr. 2018, 

www.seventeen.com/beauty/celeb-beauty/news/a30202/twitter-is-blowing-up-with-girls-trying-to-get-kylie-jen ners-lips-and-its-not-pretty/. 

Dewey, Caitlin. “A Comprehensive Guide to YouTube's Dumbest and Most Dangerous Teen Trends.” The  Washington Post, WP Company, 30 July 2014, 

www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2014/07/30/a-comprehensive-guide-to-youtubes-dumbest-a

nd-most-dangerous-teen-trends/?utm_term=.56cfe87 2f0. 

Diggins, Sarah. “The Most Infamous YouTube Challenges, Ranked by How Dangerous They Are.” Study  Breaks, 27 Feb. 2019, studybreaks.com/thoughts/ranking-favorite-internet-challenges-fun-deadly/. 

Dijk, Wilco W. Van, et al. “ Self-Esteem, Self-Affirmation, and Schadenfreude .” Emotion, vol. 11, no. 6, 2011, pp. 

1445–1449., doi:10.1037/a0026331. 

DMI. “DMI Tools Firefox Extension.” Digitalmethods.net, wiki.digitalmethods.net/Dmi/FirefoxToolBar. 

Dredge, Stuart. “YouTube Is Already Big for Kids, but It Wants to Be Even Bigger.” The Guardian, Guardian  News and Media, 7 Oct. 2014, 

www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/07/youtube-makes-its-move-into-childrens-tv-heres-why. 

Ewbank, Anne. “An Anthropologist Explains Why We Want to Eat Tide Pods.” Atlas Obscura, Atlas Obscura,  19 Jan. 2018, www.atlasobscura.com/articles/tide-pod-tasty-toxic-laundry. 

F. Heylighen, K. ChielensEvolution of culture, memetics R.A. Meyers (Ed.), Encyclopedia of complexity and  systems science , Springer, New York. 2009, pp. 3205-3220 

Faggiolani, C. (2011). " Perceived Identity: applying Grounded Theory in Libraries ". JLIS.it. University of  Florence. JLIS.it. Vol. 2, n. 1 (Giugno/June 2011).2 (1). doi:10.4403/jlis.it-4592. Retrieved 11 June 2019. 

Fox, Chris. “Twitter Axes Vine Video Service.” BBC News, BBC, 27 Oct. 2016,  www.bbc.com/news/technology-37788052. 

Fox, Chris. “YouTube Bans Comments on All Videos of Children.” BBC News, BBC, 28 Feb. 2019,  www.bbc.com/news/technology-47408969. 

Gamas, Alex. ‘How YouTube’s Recommendation Algorithm Works’. 23rd. Sept. 2016, InfoQ,  https://www.infoq.com/news/2016/09/How-YouTube-Recommendation-Works. 

Geisler, Gary, and Sam Burns. “ Tagging Video. ” Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on Digital Libraries - JCDL  07, 2007, pp. 480–480., doi:10.1145/1255175.1255279. 

Germain, Thomas. “How to Use Facebook Privacy Settings.” Consumer Reports, 23rd May, 2019. 

www.consumerreports.org/privacy/facebook-privacy-settings/. 

Gillespie, Tarleton. New Media Society 2010 12: 347 originally published online 9 February 2010. pp. 347-361 

DOI: 10.1177/1461444809342738 

Gladwell Malcolm. "She Stickiness Factor." The Tipping Point: How Little things Can Make a Big Difference. 

New York: Little, Brown and Co. 2000. 

Gooch, Jamie. J. Daily Kent Stater, Volume LXXII, Number 36, 29 Oct. 1993 p.11 

Grant Blank & Bianca C. Reisdorf: THE PARTICIPATORY WEB , Information, Communication & Society,  15:4. 2012, pp.537-554 

Hamilton, Isobel Asher. “YouTube Is Giving People 2 Months to Take down Videos of Dangerous Stunts like  Doing the 'Bird Box' Challenge While Driving.” Business Insider Nederland, 20 Jan. 2019, 

www.businessinsider.nl/youtube-updated-its-guidelines-to-ban-dangerous-pranks-and-challenges-2019-1/?inter national=true&r=US. 

Hartley, John. The value chain of meaning and the new economy . International Journal of Cultural Studies 7. 

2004, pp.129–141. 

Hearst Corporation. “Seventeen by the Numbers.” Seventeen Media Kit, 2017, 

www.seventeenmediakit.com/r5/showkiosk.asp?listing_id=5387886&category_code=digi&category_id=77067. 

Hendricks, Sara. “Here's Everything You Need to Know about the Condom Challenge - a Viral Trend That's  Making Teens Sick.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 2 Apr. 2018, 

www.businessinsider.com/what-is-condom-challenge-is-it-dangerous-2018-4?international=true&r=US&IR=T. 

Hern, Alex. “YouTube Bans Dangerous Pranks after Bird Box Challenge.” The Guardian, Guardian News and  Media, 16 Jan. 2019, 

www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/16/youtube-bans-dangerous-pranks-after-bird-box-challenge. 

Holm, Nicholas. Humour as Politics: the Political Aesthetics of Contemporary Comedy. Palgrave Macmillan,  2017. 

Horton, Adrian. “Teen Crashes Car after Driving Blindfolded for Bird Box Challenge.” The Guardian, Guardian  News and Media, 11 Jan. 2019, www.theguardian.com/ lm/2019/jan/11/bird-box-challenge-teen-car-crash. 

Jenkins, Henry, et al. Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture: with a New  Afterword. Vol. 15, New York University Press, 2013. 

Jones, Jonathan. Seen Water Bottle-Flipping Guy's Viral Video? He Shares Secret to Trick. Charlotte Observer, 

29 May 2016, www.charlotteobserver.com/news/weird/article79848532.html.