The Kensington neighborhood in Philadelphia is one of the most brutally obvious signs of America’s public health crisis. The so-called “open air drug market” in the middle of the country’s sixth most populous city is where hundreds of people use drugs, some of whom are unhoused, usually without being arrested by the police. It is a failure of our health care system, our cities, and our drug enforcement policies on public display.

For some, it’s also a content farm, where they turn other people’s misery into engagement and profit.

As I am writing this, 675 people are watching a YouTube livestream from a channel called USALIVESTREAM of a camera that is panning back and forth over the corner of Kensington Avenue and East Allegheny, where there’s a SEPTA train station that people congregate around. As is normal on YouTube, to the right of the video is a chat where viewers can talk to each other, and pay to post stickers and “super chats,” highlighted messages that cost as much as $500. The revenue generated from this chat is split between YouTube and the YouTube channel owner. YouTube and the channel owner also make money via pre-roll ads viewers have to watch before the video starts. It is a live version of a growing trend, mostly on YouTube and TikTok, where people make videos of people in distress, specifically in Kensington.

The dire situation at Kensington is such that the live feed is always capturing multiple people who are clearly in distress, slumped over while they’re standing, asleep in camping chairs, or using drugs. None appear to be aware they are being filmed and exploited as a form of entertainment.

read more: https://www.404media.co/youtube-is-monetizing-the-suffering-of-an-open-air-drug-market/

  • SeedyOne@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Someone making money off this is MAYBE fourth or fifth down the line of issues with the entire situation. It’s a slap in the face for humanity that our focus is more about the people filming and hosting it. What a world.

  • VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    usually without being arrested by the police

    That’s the good part, though. Problematic drug use is a health problem and should be treated as such rather than a criminal and moral one.

    And that’s not even mentioning what often happens when cops interact with members of any marginalized group…

    • r3df0x ✡️✝☪️@7.62x54r.ru
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree that the use of drugs should be decriminalized, but it should also come with other responsibilities. For example, a government organized intervention and mandatory rehabilitation. Depending on how much money the person has, they should be required to pay for it. Or they should be expected to pay it back over time.

      We should have a welfare state. It should also come with responsibilities.

      • VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        use of drugs should be decriminalized, but it should also come with other responsibilities

        Do you want to do that with alcohol and tobacco too, or just the ones that the rich and powerful consider taboo?

        For example, a government organized intervention and mandatory rehabilitation.

        One size fits all mandates are a recipe for disaster. Depending on the individual case, you end up either violating the patient’s right to bodily autonomy, refusing needed help because the mandate says it’s not time yet or both.

        Better to leave the medical decisions to medical professionals. They’re much better at it than even the best politicians and/or parliamentarians.

        Depending on how much money the person has, they should be required to pay for it

        Absolutely not. Means testing like that breeds resentment and often leads people between a rock and a hard place where they’re too wealthy to get it for free but not wealthy enough that they won’t have make sacrifices they might not think to be worth it.

        Rich or poor, cost should never be a determining factor in whether or not to seek needed healthcare.

        We should have a welfare state. It should also come with responsibilities.

        People have enough responsibilities already without the government making demands in order to give them healthcare that they need.

        When someone needs help battling addiction, the caring thing isn’t to check whether they’ve worked hard enough to be allowed to work hard.

        • r3df0x ✡️✝☪️@7.62x54r.ru
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          People forfeit bodily autonomy when they prove that they can’t take care of themselves. At that point they must be placed into conservatorship of someone who can make decisions for them.

          • VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            No. Absolutely not.

            Terminal cancer patients can’t take care of themselves either, do you want to take their rights away too?

            What about people with disabilities that require constant care, should they become “wards of the state” with fewer rights than children again like in the bad old days?

            • r3df0x ✡️✝☪️@7.62x54r.ru
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Progressives who don’t believe in God support murdering disabled people through programs like MAID, which is just rehash of Action T4.

              Disabled people with families who take care of them don’t need government assistance. Unfortunately there are some people who need the government to take care of them.

              I should also point out that if someone relies on their family for care, they only have the rights that their family allows them.

  • Jay@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Here in Germany there is a television station that likes to produce similar trash formats. Whole seasons show people on the streets struggling with addiction and the problems of homelessness.

    Even though I think it’s important that we don’t forget this part of society, it always had a strange aftertaste to me. What is described here sounds like the next stage in this display of human tragedy for the purpose of entertainment.

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Exposure brings attention, attention brings solution. To be ignored is to never be fixed

    • Jay@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even though I agree with you that you shouldn’t look away, there are two things that bother me:

      If I understand correctly, this is completely unmoderated. This means it is up to the viewer how they interpret what they see.

      In addition, the income should be made available to solve the problem. But it seems like someone is just putting it in their pocket.

      • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think the income from this would make the slightest dent…

        Also, moderation? I haven’t seen the stream but I imagine people stumbling, or performing sexual acts in exchange for drugs and such. There aren’t many ways to ‘interpret’ it imo, at least not worse than it is

        • Jay@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          And if it were just a few dollars that were made available to the social workers there… That would be something, right?

          And by moderation I mean that someone should explain what you see and thus point out dangers. Over and over again. They should try to rule out that anyone has fun watching these sad fates.

          • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I totally agree, a charity trying to raise awareness and help the problem should be running it.

            I’m watching now and from what I can tell it doesn’t appear to be a monetized account as no adverts have shown, there’s not been a single donation either only a lot of comments about how awfull the situation is. there are moderators in the chat though it’s impossible to tell on a recorded stream how many comments they’re removing.

            Really it’s just a street cam, you can see loads of them in all sorts of areas - it’s different because there are lots of people buying drugs and hanging around but they’re doing it on a public street so why should this one be any different to the popular time square or rue de mars streams?

            Overall my take-home is that after watching fifteen minutes of it I’m somewhat less likely to do heroin today, and that’s probably a good thing. These people’s lives haven’t changed because I’ve seen them buy and consume drugs, when you’re smoking crack on a cold street it’s not like every one in you life can’t tell. It’s sad but it’s a reality hiding from won’t help either.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      People don’t have a problem with the exposure, the have a problem with someone making money off it.

      • JoShmoe@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Although if I’m being honest, I’m a bit jealous that this even works. Just a bit. This does parallel snuff films though which absolutely disgusting. For all we know its directly connected to people who provide that dark web content.

            • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I know that you’ve been led into a weird way of thinking, likely by people who benefit by you being misled.

                • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I know what you mean but I don’t think so, I’m genuinely fascinated by the thinking behind the original comment.

                  I watched some of the recorded live streams and the people in chat are generally being respectful, some idiots of course but less than I’ve seen on volcano streams and NASA launches tbh. It really seems unlikely that there’s a shared audience with this and snuff movies.

                  Assuming, against all evidence, that they even exist. RedRoom was very clearly a LARP and while there have been many terrible things exposed as yet there has never been real evidence of anything resembling a murder for entertainment industry anywhere on the darkweb.

                  It’s an easy rumour to propagate because by it’s nature the expectation of proof is low, the classic ‘no for real my buddy saw it’ or ‘i can’t show you what I’ve seen, you don’t want to see it anyway…’ is all we can expect - it’s something salacious and scary, forbidden knowledge… The ultimate ghost story.

                  Except of course we should expect more evidence of it if it existed, police and news reports for example. The commonly used in media ‘my informant that looked at this thing that’s illegal said…’ when what they mean is ‘i looked but I don’t want to get arrested’ - where are the documentaries with blurred footage of laptop screens? Where are the police reports saying 'we need a whole load of money to investigate this genuine problem?

                  There’s no end of videos of people dying or being murdered online, but no evidence of any communities creating videos of murder for money. If that community does exist somewhere then it’s certainly not the same people running it as are restreaming livecams of a Philadelphia street corner.

      • Redrum714@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s a fucking YouTube stream who cares lol

        If you don’t want to be shown as a crackhead on the internet don’t be a crackhead in public

  • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    How is this YouTube’s fault. The person who set up the stream is the one picking the content YouTube don’t officially know anything about it.

    There’s many reasons to go after YouTube, but this isn’t one of them, this is stupid. What idiot wrote this, and do they not understand how the internet works?

    • HorseWithNoName@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      These arguments that always try to absolve giant corporations of any responsibility are so tired, and so nonsensical. They decided to start a company that hosts random people’s content, then they and the content creators can take responsibility for it and face the consequences of allowing for, and profiting off of, the exploitation of vulnerable people, bigotry, violence, hate speech, etc etc. There has to be a line drawn somewhere or else you end up with “free speech absolutists” who only allow alt right content on their platform. Gee, where have we seen that one before.

  • lloram239@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am sure the problem will magically fix itself when we switch the cameras off.

  • vsis@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I thought its purpose was anti-usa propaganda rather than profit. Now I see it can serve both purposes.

  • serial_crusher@lemmy.basedcount.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s good to bring exposure to these types of issues, even if the only way to do that is through a commercial platform. There’s nothing wrong with monetizing this.

    • skulblaka@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s nothing wrong with monetizing the filming of vulnerable people without their consent?

      Okay

      • serial_crusher@lemmy.basedcount.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Is it wrong to monetize newspapers or documentaries? This is journalism too, and the people who document it deserve compensation for the work they do.

      • rifugee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        And not even giving them a cut of the profits or helping them in any tangible way? Sure, sure, nothing wrong with that. If they didn’t want to be filmed, they should have stayed home…oh, right.

        Sometimes I think that instead of antacid’s, I’m taking crazy pills.

  • DontTreadOnBigfoot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Who gives a fuck about the people suffering on the street; The real travesty here is that someone is getting paid for their work in reporting it!

    What an absolute stupid ass take…

  • PR_freak@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This might be a stupid question but how can drug addicts of this sort (the ones who tumble across sidewalks semi-unconscious all day) afford to buy drugs?

    They live in an open air drug market and I can’t imagine any charitable middle aged lady walking past giving them money. They for sure can’t work.

    How do they afford drugs?

    • Fisk400@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Crimes. Massive amounts of crimes. I think at this point most burglaries and muggings are due to drug addiction. Grab the stuff, sell it to a fence and buy drugs from a dealer. Often the fence and dealer is the same dude.

    • Fedop@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think that many people in this situation may work or have things to sell. This position is sometimes like a rapid decline, not a permanent state of being. Plus drugs are cheap, $20 could get you high all day.

    • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      My guesses:
      Panhandling (Thanks @Breezy@lemmy.world) on better streets without the associated stigma
      Stealing
      Recycling bottles found in the trash (at least where a deposit system exists)
      Doing odd jobs for small change.
      Skipping lunch for drugs.

    • boatsnhos931@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      My brother in Christ, it’s the oldest profession in the world…(a mouth is a mouth amirite LOL)

  • Fisk400@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The $500 donations must be money laundering. I can’t see a normal user on YouTube donating to a unmanned livestream and definitely not that amount of money.

    • figaro@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ever watch a vtuber stream? There’s apparently people out there with cash to just burn.

      • Fisk400@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Vtubers do things. They talk to the audience, play games, draw, cook and a bunch of other things. A lot of it is para-social which explains why some people donate a lot. This is a generic livestream of a street.

      • mPony@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Okay, maybe there are thousands of people out there who just like watching Vtube streams, with cash to burn, in this day and age. Or, maybe someone’s using livestream donations to launder money.

        Does either one make more sense? I think both are true, and the latter is far more probable.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Was in a WoW guild with a dude obsessed with a vtuber.

          Nerdy professions make lots of money for dudes who don’t get out a lot.

    • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think it’s just the journalist being silly, there is a tier on YouTube for a $500 donation because that’s part of the YouTube system but has anyone ever used it for this stream? Incredibly doubtful.

      I imagine like most webcam streams it makes very little money.

      Edit - I’ve watched some and looked through the vods, no adverts so it’s probably not monetized - likely due to showing drug use, also no one has donated in any of the sections I’ve looked at.

  • Waluigis_Talking_Buttplug@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    None appear to be aware they are being filmed and exploited as a form of entertainment.

    So someone is making money off of these people’s darkest moments and the comments here so fsr just breeze right fucking past that.

    • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are they though? Presenting this as some excess of capitalism is emotive but in reality they’re likely to be making almost nothing from it. Their motivations might well be to draw attention to a bad situation, they might even donate money to drug addicts for all we know or be one themselves (or possibly drug addiction charities).

      Seems like lazy journalism to write a whole story based on ‘i watched ten minutes of a live stream’ so I’m not willing to make judgements based on it.

    • SCB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      These streams are popular so rural people can shit on urban people. That’s really the entire point.

      These rurals also have similar drug abuse in their communities, but it’s hidden from them, and this let’s them pretend cities are hellscape.

      Most conflict in America exists because rurals are poor and ignorant but don’t like being perceived that way.

      • dan1101@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or maybe rurals just like living in cleaner quieter more natural places.

        • SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Some do, yeah. See when you’re painting with a broad brush and describing people as a bloc, you by your very nature are conceding nuances exist. This is why “Not all men” is so dumb.

          This fact does not change a single word of what I said above.

  • HorseWithNoName@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Finally someone is noticing this.

    I report this garbage every time it gets recommended to me on YT, which is way too often. These are real human beings going through the most difficult and humiliating experiences of their lives.

    One thing that’s always overlooked about homelessness is the complete, total, utter lack of any privacy whatsoever. It seems obvious when you say it out loud, but no one seems to acknowledge it. Imagine every bad day you have, you have an audience. When you wake up in the morning after a shit night of sleep, everyone gets to walk by you, judge you, and gawk at how shitty you look. I’m sure not everyone in these videos is homeless (likely fewer than people would automatically assume), but probably a significant enough number.

    The fact that there is anyone out there who believes treating people like they’re in a zoo and then profiting off of their suffering for “entertainment” is an actual, unfeeling psychopath.

    The worst part is that there are a bunch of channels like this and even more videos. They’re not limited to addiction but exploit any marginalized people they can. I blame Vice for having constant drug/addiction content with no real message besides “watch this person shoot up for some reason. No, we’re not blurring their face.” Wtf.

  • tory@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe instead of censoring the internet more we can get the people in these situations some help?

    No? We’re gonna ignore it and force you to ignore it as well?

    Okay then…