Sunday , August 18 2019
Home / unitedstates / James Cunningham Charles and Tati Westbrook: Beauty YouTuber Drama, he explained

James Cunningham Charles and Tati Westbrook: Beauty YouTuber Drama, he explained



[ad_1]

On May 6, at the end of the ice cream of the Met Gala, Charles Beauty of YouTube James Arles typed a wish on Instagram. Charles, a very successful vlogger who can not even drink legally yet, wanted to be lightning for "influential media representation" – or, in other words, become more famous, traditional platforms of fame, than he already has.

Four days later, the beauty guy YouTuber Tati Westbrook granted the wish, but most likely not the way Charles envisioned.

Charles is a 19-year-old blog feeling that the subscriber base runs more than 13 million deep. He lives in a strange pocket of fame which is relatively unknown to people over the age of 30 but the inevitable peacock of a person to anyone born after 1995. He first found popularity through Instagram, achieving viral success by making a picture in the yearbook. From there, he exploded on social media and elsewhere, as CoverGirl named him the company's first ambassador.

Charles quickly parlayed that into a successful YouTube channel, where he creates makeup and looks vlogs about his personal life for his fans (he calls "sisters"). Since he got his goods and his silhouette boards, and now there is even a national tour of his own. His videos, like "FaceTune Battle" and "Why I'm Going to Be Single Forever" regularly rake in more than 5 million hits, with some videos reaching 20 million hits. Now he is also "singing". (This is a generous way to put it, in our opinion).

Meanwhile, Westbrook, 37, maintains a similar audience, a smaller mother. She has been running the GlamLifeGuru channel since 2010, accumulating to the north of 6 million followers with her makeup tips and skin care. And although her photos and videos are simple and positive, her beauty-loving viewers are devoted enough to protect their beauty idol at all costs-and strong enough to handle the great damage to the night.

So, when Westbrook brought up a 43-minute emotional video on May 10, described when "The Next Friend" Charles betrayed her trust, the fallout was immediate. It was not only about interpersonal drama, however – Westbrook provoked even greater flames by digging into what she claimed was the behavior of Charles' prey in an attempt to pressure straight men to have sex with him.

"If I had not done this video, and I did not say things publicly, I think I feel worse," she said. "You do not get the success that James Arles has without knowing how to work for someone, and I do not want to be a slave."

Since Westbrook released the video, Charles has bled more than 3 million subscribers from his channel and become a villain in the YouTube community. Celebrities and cosmetic brands were symbolically arrested in solidarity with Westbrook, and some of his closest friends knocked him down in public. And more and more people came out to add to Westbrook's claims about Charles' tendency to slide into their DM, unwanted and distracted.

This confrontation has all aspects of traditional feud and the friendship story is gone, and that's part of the attraction. Charles's view of declining decline in real time is like watching a train accident – it's hard to take a look at this explosive self-destruction, even if you do not have connections to the beauty community of YouTube.

But Feud Charles-Westbrook is also looking as good as all the profitable ways YouTube works. The platform may reward authenticity and encourage gurus like Charles to open up their personal lives as well as their jobs. However, the YouTube audience can easily make the script and run their favorite personality – and destroy not only their public image, but their entire livelihood.

The feud between Tathy Westbrook and James Charles was about business. Or so we thought.

To understand what had caused Westbrook to call Charles and how he had hurt Charles to the extent that he had, was to understand the action of YouTube's beauty community. Westbrook is the rare YouTube beauty guru who does not take sponsorship money from brands to promote their products on her videos. Although she gets products to review PR departments of cosmetic brands, she was very determined not to get compensation from them, even including screenshots of email correspondence from the brands to prove it.This was true since she started vlogging in 2011, Explain her popularity and establish her as a reliable figure.

In addition to the revenue of YouTube ads, Westbrook's average videos amount to about a million hits – her income continues from her company, Halo Beauty, a vitamin / supplement beauty brand she launched in 2018. Doctors say beauty supplements are not regulated and there is no scientific evidence to suggest they do Their numerous claims in another article. What matters here is that Westbrook owns and manages Halo Beauty, and it is also the only brand that it promotes, empowers, and stands fully by.

Charles Charles, an old friend of Westbrook, was on the same page. But at this year's music festival, which took office on April 19, Charles visited her in a devastating blow: he filmed an ingram ad for the vitamins of Sugarburger and Beauty, competing for beauty.

It's a big dis-world of paid content, especially one's friend, Westbrook noticed. On April 22, she presented a large number of stories about Instagram, about the time she felt an undefined friend. But it was not hard for fans following her to know who Arles was talking about. (There was a precedent here: Westbrook filmed a video in April 2018 about a sense of betrayal by another friend and guru, Manny MUA, who also promoted SugarBear.)

After speculation, some soul fans conclude that Charles was the culprit. It made Charles apologize.

"At the end of this week, I did a story of an ingram of sleep vitamins that I take because the brand helped me confidently when the audience around me became insecure," Charles said in a public apology following Westbrook's Instagram stories. "I did not receive money from this position," he added.

Westbrook did not react immediately. But, by the deeds of Charles and some Snapchat videos from the surrounding YouTuber named Gabriel Zamora who also had beef with the " Arles, she then raised the notorious YouTube video on May 10 and accused Charles of sending a fake apology trying to save his image.

"It's embarrassing, and you know that because of things I had to deal with in the past," she says in her response video. "You sold me, threw away our friendship, lied to me, invented a story, I knew it would be embarrassing … I know you bought easily."

Westbrook noted her friendship with Charles, which lasted two years, and how much she helped his career, to establish Charles' actions as unimaginable. When Charles Westbrook met, she was already a well-known name in the beauty community of Waitiber, while Charles was a fresh 17 year old. Westbrook invited Charles to appear in several of her videos, including one in which he made her wedding makeup, and to promote it through her YouTube channel, she helped build his brand. (Westbrook said her husband had even suggested Charles's advice). Westbrook also appeared on Charles's videos, as he did about three months ago.

Most importantly, Westbrook claimed that she never made it for the promise of any money. The fans of beauty and fans are precious about the nature of business relationships on YouTube and elsewhere, as well as ensuring that the people to whom they are connected are honest – that they are not just hanging out because they want to ride on the success of it, but because they are really friends. So Westbrook's claims that Charles betrayed her trust were enough to cause a stir.

In an attempt to control the damage, Charles raised a video of apology directed at Westbrook.

Although his response looked more than 41 million times, it received more than 2.7 million downvotes (compared to about 579,000 upvotes) – probably not the type of ratio he wanted. Meanwhile, Tati's channel has bloomed to more than 10 million subscribers, more than 4 million from when it first published the video.

Tatty Westbrook did it more than money. She began a discussion of Charles' troublesome behavior.

Westbrook called Charles' choice to shoot a SugarBear ad only the latest in a string of crude, even manipulative behavior, provoking claims that Charles uses his celebrity status to press men into sex. She claimed that Charles had a tendency to boast of approaching men approaching and then "cracking" their sexuality.

"You do it [pressuring men into sex] Accept them "You'll act sexually for your own good-even if they're straight-and you know what, it's not right," she said. "How dare you take it and laugh at it and do something after it? [jokes like this one] about it."

While Westbrook does not name names or mention specific cases, it seems that she may be referring to the relationship of Charles with a model named Gage. Gomez. Charles and Gomez were seen together in the same choir where Charles had photographed the advertisement for Schugerbier.

Shortly after they were seen together at the festival, Charles chirped-without naming Gomez-a boy he had seen was virtually deserted.

"Unfortunately I'm still very lonely, this boy has played me for months and he is an abominable artist … I am grateful to my friends with me to protect me," Charles Chuck (he has since deleted the tweet.)

After several social media moves, in which Gomez indirectly spoke of Charles as sexually aggressive towards him, Gomez published a video detailing his relationship with Charles. He said that when they met, Charles pursued him even though Gomez insisted that he was honest-and even to another Gomez repeatedly rejected the progress of Charles.

"He continued [insist] That he did not know or that he forgot I told him I was honest at first, "Gomez said [Coachella] Going to be a good time … There were some points where I guess he was not sure how I feel, even though I told him all the time I was not into, I guess you could say, "Experiment."

The situation Gomez describes does not look unique. Following the Westbrook video, other men said they had similar experiences with Charles that led to their progress over Instram DMs or other social media.

The highest profile of these statements comes from Perry Star, another huge YouTube star that has become a brand brand which has its career and fame ahead of time in Charles. In a tweet that has now been erased, Star – who is friends with Westbrook and was considered a friend with Charles – said Cherokee's behavior. Why did Charles and his friend not let Charles in their home.

"There's a reason he gave [Star’s boyfriend] Forbade James Charles to ever get to our house, "is He squeaked. "It's a danger to society [Westbrook] Said 100% true.

Charges against Charles occupy an area of ​​inappropriate behavior that our culture does not really understand. Charles was accused of using his fame to scare and make an unwanted pass on men online, which is unfortunate but not immediately punish as sexual assault. But the meager response indicates that Charles was tried in the court of public opinion – and lost.

James Cunningham Charles is a walking controversy

Charles has shed 3 million subscribers since Westbrook's video, some unfollowing because of the perversion of YouTube's branded content code – being good to your friends, not your wallet – and others becoming against him because of his supposed so-called behavior.

But this number may not include the bigger names who no longer want to link themselves with YouTube Youtuber. As the previous editors have noted (there is an up-to-date thread on the latest Twitter and Instagram updates), brands such as Spora, Smashbox, Olta and Beauty Panty, and celebrities such as Hadid, Kyle & Mendes retired in the Social Media following the video of Westbrook. Losing these celebrity followers shows them fans and celebrities that they do not support James; Same with brands and customers.

Former fans on social media take it even further, destroying their goods in James C. Arles and color palettes. Charles is now a prominent example of "influential media representation", but for negative reasons.

He has been a lightning scandal before me; In 2017, for example, when he gave a racist joke about the seizure of Ebola from Africans, while on a flight to Africa, which encountered a negative response:

And again at the end of last month, when he announced a national tour of his performances, where he would conduct the meetings and "sing"; Tickets were going as high as $ 500, but after a backlash And mockery Above the true value of the event, Charles eventually lowered the VIP ticket prices to $ 250.

For the most part, however, Charles mainly of base fans have to defend their idol. And this also led to controversy. In November, for example, Charles launched his first silhouette and reacted defensively Negative reviews. Fans rushed to back it up, whipping his visitors online via social media posts and comments.

Some fans of Charles stand by him even now, leaving comments on the Instagram of Westbrook and calling her a bully for hate on your favorite YouTubeTuber:


James & Charles fans are on Tattie Westbrook's instagram page.
Instagram

Charles' young career suffered from a pattern of offense and apology, each time with a promise of being better. But it was two long years of pas pas after pas pas. The dramatic distance other celebrities, and the people throwing money at Charles, place among themselves, indicate that Charles crossed a line that he could not cross.

Becoming influential means making yourself branded. James Cunningham Charles is finding it the hard way.

What stands at the heart of the scandals of Charles is that he does not see himself as a business beyond which, of course, he sheds. His smaller disputes, like Ebola's "joke" and tour prices, have already shown a short-sighted view of his behavior reflecting his brand. But his inability to separate his personal issues from his business views may be because the line is nonexistent.

And that's because how youTubers become famous.

Back in the day, fashion and beauty magazines like Vogue, Harper's Bazaar, Allure, Glamor, and Cosmopolitan used to teach the public what fashion was, what was good to put on our face, and what we needed to buy look great. But after the financial collapse of 2008 left its mark on consumers as well as on advertisers, growth on democratic platforms like YouTube, Snapchat and Instagram have quickly begun to disrupt the beauty industry.

Consumers no longer need a magazine to tell them what to purchase, what is good and what can be skipped. In contrast, no one should be printed in a magazine to be considered an authority. Beauty gurus – or influencers, as they are already known – provide a promise: that they give honest opinions about products that they will not be affected by the advertiser dollar (though it has changed over time) and that they resemble you and me and all the other people who look at them Than of some beauty editor who paid high wages in a glass tower.

But sell not stop beauty products: the beauty and the gurus themselves have become products.

BeauTubers' authority is born from a perception of authenticity, and many gurus emphasize their authenticity by opening up their personal lives on screen. They reveal their darkest secrets, talk about their miscarriages, or list their plastic surgery. They kept reassuring their subscribers that they would not have gotten this far without them. They ask their subscribers to choose their make-up look. Some even ask their cubicles to appear on their channels.

The thought is that since they share all parts of their lives supposedly to be completely honest, beauty gurus are honest about the products they support or use. Because just like the Kardashians, some of the most powerful influencers in the world, beauty gurus want to sell you intimacy and friendship. It is in their interest to be serious in their vulnerability.

Charles, with 16 million subscribers (before the Westbrook video), has reached the point where he has become more of a guru – hence the "tour" and the encounter and disillusionment. His fans admire him as a personality beyond the make-up he creates (although they also love these). But Feud Westbrook suggests he lost it.

YouTube's equation is that registration and registration become an important way to show loyalty and support to YouTuber, built by confirming their perceived preparations. Subscribing to a channel is also a palpable way for vlogger to prove their value – it is similar to evaluation, and often comes with ad revenue to match.

The other side of this, then, is the cancellation of the registry. In the case of Charles, the mass exodus was a strong demonstration against him. Former fans would have taken a position to tell Charles that he was no longer the faithful and unsettling idol they had once thought he was; He was no longer a face they wanted to spend time watching or investing money. As the numbers went down, so did the Walger shares of Charles.

And that's exactly why Westbrook's video hit him so much; it was the account of someone who knew him on a personal level, which, according to Charles, had a dark side that fans did not know existed under jokes and mummies. Suddenly, the "friend" they knew, Tatty knew, was not what they thought he was, because he was exposed by his real true friend, who also appears in his videos. Westbrook called Charles as someone she could not trust-and three million others followed.

[ad_2]
Source link