• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Theme Park Worldwide

hannypanda said:
I know someone was asking about Shawn's European road trip yesterday, apparently he's going tomorrow.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Why shouldn't he?

I mean, you have argued that even if a crime hasn't been committed it doesn't make it alright but that is your morality and you are free to unsubscribe and never watch him again. Even the racist texts are a matter of personal morality. I know people who say racist things sometimes and I express my disagreement, but it doesn't nullify their humanity in my eyes. They have redeeming characteristics even if they might be ignorant in certain areas for various reasons, discerning between correlation and causation being the big one.

Even the point about using their 'status' to appear more attractive is moot as far as I'm concerned. How many people join bands to appear more attractive? Hell, even Sartre said something along the lines of his becoming famous and a philosopher was to attract women. He became a thinker when it dawned on him at an early age that he was classically 'ugly'.

None of this makes stalking okay, and it is a crime. None of this makes being sexually inappropriate with underage people okay, but that is also a crime. As others have said evidence...innocent until yadda yadda yadda.

If the accused is convicted then removing him (or her) appearances is probably a wise move, maybe a necessary one. Until then, he's going to film himself talking about theme parks.

Okay, he has a platform with young people, but if it's just him and Charlotte from now on, that's all he can do. Until he starts being overtly critical of Black Mamba for no apparent reason there's not much more that can be done other than individuals deciding that they don't want to watch this person anymore. Even then, I'd put it down to an inferiority complex...
 
Trooper said:
Why shouldn't he?

I mean, you have argued that even if a crime hasn't been committed it doesn't make it alright but that is your morality and you are free to unsubscribe and never watch him again. Even the racist texts are a matter of personal morality. I know people who say racist things sometimes and I express my disagreement, but it doesn't nullify their humanity in my eyes. They have redeeming characteristics even if they might be ignorant in certain areas for various reasons, discerning between correlation and causation being the big one.

Even the point about using their 'status' to appear more attractive is moot as far as I'm concerned. How many people join bands to appear more attractive? Hell, even Sartre said something along the lines of his becoming famous and a philosopher was to attract women. He became a thinker when it dawned on him at an early age that he was classically 'ugly'.

None of this makes stalking okay, and it is a crime. None of this makes being sexually inappropriate with underage people okay, but that is also a crime. As others have said evidence...innocent until yadda yadda yadda.

If the accused is convicted then removing him (or her) appearances is probably a wise move, maybe a necessary one. Until then, he's going to film himself talking about theme parks.

Okay, he has a platform with young people, but if it's just him and Charlotte from now on, that's all he can do. Until he starts being overtly critical of Black Mamba for no apparent reason there's not much more that can be done other than individuals deciding that they don't want to watch this person anymore. Even then, I'd put it down to an inferiority complex...
Click to expand...
I just simply stated he was going, didn't offer any opinion so I'm not sure why the long defensive post.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
 
Obviously I don’t watch the vlogs I think I’ve seen 1 or 2 in passing. But from what I could tell the reason it has lasted so long is from what I’ve been told is the guests and other people who appear keep it fresh. So obviously a long term viewer will disagree and that’s fine but I’m just wondering how long the new format of just him and his partner will last. Surely I’m guessing people must get bored of seeing the same parks over and over again each week with nothing new happening. Obviously I could be completely wrong but as I said I’m not a viewer so I have no idea what people like.
 
Personally I don't care about other people being in the vlogs. It depends who it is, and I haven't seen that many people on the whole, I'm OK with it being just Shawn.

You also don't see the same parks over and over again each week.

He goes to California in January, he goes again at six months later for example. Different seasons, rides are closed, new rides are open. New merchandise is available. Generally it's different and you learn something new most times he vlogs.

There's a channel out there who do a live stream from a Disney park in Florida every Friday. Personally I can't get enough of Disney parks, so that's fine for me but Shawn is no way near as repetitive even with Alton Towers.

He also shows inside hotels when he can and also the shops. Perfect for me.
 
Last edited:
hannypanda said:
I've often wondered how vlogging works in that way, i.e. what is right/wrong.

While I appreciate theme park vlogging is near impossible to control due to the sheer amount of people that pop up as unassuming extras, there have to be some form of rules. I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable as a parent if there was footage of my children out there on the internet without my consent. I wouldn't even like to guess how many unknowing individuals are included on the average vlog.

This is why I'm surprised that parks like Disney, Legoland etc (more family oriented parks) are comfortable with vloggers filming there. There are children everywhere, and I would imagine any sort of vlog of this nature would prove keen viewing to those with paedophilic intentions.
Click to expand...

I'm a documentary filmmaker so know the rules quite well..

It's not difficult to understand... It's filmed on private property so they must get the landowners permission of it is commercial (that includes getting as revenue from YouTube). Merlin have the right to take them to court or seek an order to get it removed. They should have warning signs filming is taking place if it has been granted. So this allows images for personal use.

Kids are a special cause and firstly you need to be DBs checked it's not a requirement but it helps if anything happens. You can't film minors without parents/Guardian/senior person such as a head teacher permission of it clearly shows them.

You can't interview people without a form of consent (asking a question).

Ok France...

The laws are odd... First of all did you know you can't film the Eiffel tower at night?

But anyone who appears in any commercial footage unless written permission is given has the right to claim copywrite! It's the subjects that have the power in France. Google the famous french kiss picture... The photographer had to give up £££££ because the couple who were featured having a kiss in front of the Eiffel tower!!!
 
hannypanda said:
With regard to the "rule book" comment, this was in reference to people comparing Shawn to a business. I have never once gave a detailed account of what Shawn should/shouldn't have done from the off here, however I have stated that I disagree with his actions, and suggested how he could have acted better. Many others agree with me. You know I have not written my own rule book, so you can keep your snarky comments to yourself.
Click to expand...

hannypanda said:
I will, however, comment on how the situation has been handled.

While Shawn is thankfully not accused of anything in regard to young women, there are now four individuals who’ve appeared regularly on TPW vlogs past and present that have been accused. This is an alarming statistic, and as such I believe Shawn’s actions have been questionable at best. The deleting/hiding of comments and blocking of individuals was in extreme poor taste. Regardless of whether the accusations are true or false, acting in this way only makes you look guilty. The statement itself came too late, felt cold and rehearsed and did not condemn any of the actions of the accused or address any of the victims. While I understand he is not commenting on any of the allegations, he should have at least apologised and stated TPW do not condone actions like this in any way, shape or form. Finally, his choice to attend parks and vlog this weekend was foolish and completely distasteful. His social media posts show that he is acting as normal, and I think we can all categorically agree that these are not normal times. While deep down he may care, doing this has given off the impression that he does not and is only focused on vlogging and in turn making money.
Click to expand...

Snark Snark.


You keep repeating the 'its not about criminal convictions' line but really, yes it is. That's how you hold people to account.
That's how you test the evidence and prove someone's guilt.
That's how you protect future victims.

I completely understand victims not wanting to come forward to support prosecution (although this is more than slightly undermined when they are willing to put their name to it on Twitter), but without it this will always be rumour, will always be hearsay. People can believe what they like, but the accused will have as much right to say he didn't do anything wrong as others will to say he did.

If someone involved in this is a sex offender/sex offender in waiting do you think for a moment that not being part of TPWW will stop that? Of course it won't, the predator will keep predating, they'll just find another way to do it and nothing in the long run is achieved. Prosecution goes a long way to managing that risk.

You've said before how hard it is to convict for these offences, the reality is it really really isn't. Inciting a minor to engage in sexual activity, where conducted through electronic communications, or other communications and harassment offences, can be incredibly easy offences to convict. All you have to do is not delete the evidence. (Nb the difficulty with such offences is usually identifying the suspect where the involved parties are strangers and communication means have been hidden or are not traceable which would not be the case here)

In fairness you've been far from the worst, but the demands and expectations about what should come of this and how a bloke on YouTube should have handled accusations about a friend have been mental.
 
pluk said:
Snark Snark.


You keep repeating the 'its not about criminal convictions' line but really, yes it is. That's how you hold people to account.
That's how you test the evidence and prove someone's guilt.
That's how you protect future victims.

I completely understand victims not wanting to come forward to support prosecution (although this is more than slightly undermined when they are willing to put their name to it on Twitter), but without it this will always be rumour, will always be hearsay. People can believe what they like, but the accused will have as much right to say he didn't do anything wrong as others will to say he did.

If someone involved in this is a sex offender/sex offender in waiting do you think for a moment that not being part of TPWW will stop that? Of course it won't, the predator will keep predating, they'll just find another way to do it and nothing in the long run is achieved. Prosecution goes a long way to managing that risk.

You've said before how hard it is to convict for these offences, the reality is it really really isn't. Inciting a minor to engage in sexual activity, where conducted through electronic communications, or other communications and harassment offences, can be incredibly easy offences to convict. All you have to do is not delete the evidence. (Nb the difficulty with such offences is usually identifying the suspect where the involved parties are strangers and communication means have been hidden or are not traceable which would not be the case here)

In fairness you've been far from the worst, but the demands and expectations about what should come of this and how a bloke on YouTube should have handled accusations about a friend have been mental.
Click to expand...


If you read back what I've said, the only thing I've specifically said he should have done is apologised and stated he did not condone any of the actions. With regard to everything else I've just stated that I disagreed with it.

We obviously disagree on a number of points here, and I'm not getting into an argument about it. I only wish that those who were affected came forward sooner as it would have been a lot easier to convict then.

The fact is it SHOULD be easy to convict, but given the circumstances it's going to prove difficult as the evidence will have been deleted/contact details would have changed. In the case of @Panda she even had evidence of the person admitting to it, and yet the person was not convicted. If that isn't black and white I don't know what is.

While people may have had different expectations of Shawn, I'm personally amazed that he hasn't made more of an effort to protect his brand prior to all this coming out. Back in the day he was working at AT and doing this when he could, but once he left AT and TPW became his sole income stream (with an increasing number of subscribers) then he should have protected his brand better. This isn't a criticism of Shawn himself, after all he's a young lad with probably very little business acumen, but I'd have at least thought he'd have been advised better by his peers/parents. At the end of the day, if this goes t*ts up then he has no income at all, and he's potentially burned any bridges in the only industry he's ever had any interest in.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
 
It is a very difficult position for them to be in.
Personally i would love to see all the affected females to go to the police as a group. And let it be investigated just like @pluk says.

However one of them has had a bad experience with reporting it, i think fobbed off is an understatement. So i can see how this add to the other issues they have in reporting it to the police.

We must remember we are onlooker to this. What happens with the incident are in the hand of the people personally involved.

All we can do is say as a community, the behaviour that is being alleged is not welcome in our community. And to vigilant to any signs that it could be happening in the future.



Sent from my SM-J600FN using Tapatalk
 
hannypanda said:
The fact is it SHOULD be easy to convict, but given the circumstances it's going to prove difficult as the evidence will have been deleted/contact details would have changed. In the case of @Panda she even had evidence of the person admitting to it, and yet the person was not convicted. If that isn't black and white I don't know what is.
Click to expand...

Pandas are black and white, yes.:grin:

...and if you read @RoyJess post you'll see that similar, if not sexual, offences can and do get convicted.

It's one person's experience and won't necessarily be indicative of most people's.
Obviously I have no clue about anyone's individual case so would have no idea about the reasons for its failure, but (outside of simple harassment) these current cases are not time limited offences so a delay should not significantly affect the chances of success and the change in contact details wouldn't likely be a problem as they are known to each other. If all those reporting as victims have deleted all their messages then that would be somewhat unfortunate, and to someone from the outside viewing impartiality would probably be harmful to their likelihood of accepting the validity of the claim over the accused.

As a side, you previously took exception to Shaun not sharing a crime or case number. As he's not a victim he wouldn't have one. It sounds like at best he is an informant, not even a witness, so the police would thank him for the info and add it to any existing report in the victims name or use the information to attempted to identify and contact the victim to record the offence.

As a sporadic Facebook and YouTube, but my twitter, user who pays TPWW no more than a glance if something interesting pops up as I'd suspect is the case for the vast majority, I'd have no idea that this was going on if I hadn't read it here. I did go looking for comments, and did find some on both Facebook and YouTube so he's clearly not deleting them all, but there were far from prominent. So maybe what he has done has protected his brand quite well, even if it's not to your taste?
 
hannypanda said:
I just simply stated he was going, didn't offer any opinion so I'm not sure why the long defensive post.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

There were, as you said, earlier posts referring to this trip but, honestly, having read Panda's post... what I thought you were saying about whether he should go or not is irrelevant.

The point that stuck out in her post was that making it public on twitter etc is a way to keep each other safe primarily and, whilst I have my own opinions about cancel culture etc, I can't argue against that because the system is very flawed and I do get that you can't necessarily wait for the legal process.

I still agree with most of what I said but I have to admit they're rather minor points in the grand scheme of things.
 
I can’t understand what else Shawn can do his put a statement out saying his helping the police and can’t comment any further. His already said it will be just him and Charlotte in vlogs for the foreseeable future.
His also managed to add over 1000 subscribers to his channel.
 
Themeparksandy1981 said:
I can’t understand what else Shawn can do his put a statement out saying his helping the police and can’t comment any further. His already said it will be just him and Charlotte in vlogs for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...
I would suggest some of the following would restore trust:
  • A frank and open video on all his channels apologising for failures that allowed his channel to be used for nefarious purposes, explaining what steps he's taken to ensure it won't happen again. There's been no apology for the victims so far. (Note: I don't expect or want him to apologise for the actions of others, but acknowledging his brand facilitated abuse would be a step forward)
  • An explanation of the racist claims. Either they're real or fake. Which one?
  • A safeguarding policy for the organised meetups. I think formalising what precautions are being taken to protect people, especially minors, would be a sensible idea.
Maybe there's other things people could suggest.
 
Alsty said:
I would suggest some of the following would restore trust:
  • A frank and open video on all his channels apologising for failures that allowed his channel to be used for nefarious purposes, explaining what steps he's taken to ensure it won't happen again. There's been no apology for the victims so far. (Note: I don't expect or want him to apologise for the actions of others, but acknowledging his brand facilitated abuse would be a step forward)
  • An explanation of the racist claims. Either they're real or fake. Which one?
  • A safeguarding policy for the organised meetups. I think formalising what precautions are being taken to protect people, especially minors, would be a sensible idea.
Maybe there's other things people could suggest.
Click to expand...

He probably been advise not to publish any comments until any investigation or legal action has been completed. Depending on any outcome, will depend what sort of statement he may put out.

Themeparksandy1981 said:
His also managed to add over 1000 subscribers to his channel.
Click to expand...

As the saying goes, there is no such thing as bad publicity o_O
 
RoyJess said:
He probably been advise not to publish any comments until any investigation or legal action has been completed. Depending on any outcome, will depend what sort of statement he may put out.



As the saying goes, there is no such thing as bad publicity o_O
Click to expand...
That's because he has addressed it on Twitter. I don't even follow him on Twitter and neither will the majority of his subscribers so they are oblivious to any ongoing issues.

Hopefully he has addressed the issues internally and with it being him and Charlotte going forward, I see no issues. However if other individuals are working behind the scenes during the investigation on Superchats etc then that becomes a big problem.
 
Ils said:
That's because he has addressed it on Twitter. I don't even follow him on Twitter and neither will the majority of his subscribers so they are oblivious to any ongoing issues..
Click to expand...
You see, that's part of the problem. He can't claim to be transparent if he keeps quiet on YouTube in the hope people don't hear about it from other sources. It's important to face the music even though it will be challenging.
 
He did address it on Twitter, but it really should be his pinned tweet. The tweet has slipped way down his timeline now, and it may not look like he's addressed it at all to people who've only just found out about this.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
 
The reason he's addressed it on Twitter is that's where the fire has started, Given he had one of the accused deleting comments for him, I don't think he'll be facing up to the situation anytime soon on his main platform.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top