As an avid gamer and consumer of YouTube culture, I‘ve watched with fascination the swirling controversies surrounding Utah mommy vlogger-turned-commentator Katie Joy Paulson of the channel Without a Crystal Ball. Over 181,000 subscribers strong, Paulson covers tabloid-style news and drama surrounding YouTube and reality TV stars. However, many fellow YouTubers and viewers argue her reporting methods and ethics are highly questionable.
Who is Katie Joy Paulson?
Katie Joy Paulson, 35 years old, joined YouTube in 2017 primarily posting daily family vlogs detailing her life as a stay-at-home Mormom homeschooling mother of two in Utah. Her channel experienced slow initial growth, amassing only 2,000 subscribers in her first two years. However in 2019, Paulson pivoted into tabloid commentary attracting widespread attention – along with backlash. Her subscriber count now tops 181,000 with her videos tallying between 30,000 to 150,000 views each.
| Year | Subscriber Count | Viewership Range Per Video |
|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 0 | 0 views |
| 2018 | 2,000 | 100-500 views |
| 2019 | 11,000 | 1,000-5,000 views |
| 2020 | 75,000 | 10,000-50,000 views |
| 2021 | 120,000 | 30,000-100,000 views |
| Current | 181,000 | 30,000-150,000 views |
Paulson positions herself as an investigator delving into scandals, leaks, and drama surrounding reality stars, family vloggers, controversial social media figures, and other online celebrities. She intersperses video commentary in front of graphic backdrops with alleged insider evidence and documents, laying out shocking allegations and conclusions.
Pattern of Controversies and Criticism
However, Paulson continually attracts fierce backlash from the very YouTube community she covers along with her own viewers. Since 2019, controversies and critics have hounded the divisive commentator:
| Year | Controversy/Lawsuit | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 1st defamation lawsuit filed by reality TV star Tanya Jeffers of Little Women franchise | Unknown financial impact, video evidence made private |
| 2020 | 2nd defamation lawsuit filed by family YouTube vlogger Tati Westbrook | Ongoing, subscriber loss correlated |
| 2020 | 1 week YouTube channel suspension for harassment and cyberbullying | Income loss for one week |
| 2021 | Arrested on child abuse charges | Fox 13 alters description, video made private |
| 2022 | YouTube community backlash over controversial Josh Duggar trial coverage | Income and viewership spike |
In the wake of her arrest on child abuse charges later dismissed with a fine, Fox 13 Salt Lake City tellingly changed her description in their reporting from "YouTuber and independent journalist" to simply "YouTuber". The platform suspension and lawsuits clearly correlate with dips in subscribers and viewers.
However, backlash against her coverage sparking ethics questions results perversely in spikes in traffic and revenue. Her viewers crave the non-stop messiness and drama swirling around Paulson herself as much as the stars she covers.
Privacy vs. Public Interest?
One lighting rod incident stems from Paulson revealing the alleged location of a child removed from their home by Child Protective Services in a child abuse investigation. Fellow YouTubers and commentators immediately criticized Paulson for failing to conceal the sensitive personal information of abuse victims whose safety relies upon anonymity.
Paulson raised impassioned freedom of speech defenses while doubters characterize her as ruthlessly chasing content clout over child welfare – a pattern seemingly confirmed by later events.
Troubling Pattern: Child Abuse Charges and Jokes
In 2021, home state authorities in Utah arrested Paulson herself on charges of child abuse. While eventually dismissed with a fine for disorderly conduct, Paulson appeared in her local Fox 13 news coverage with missing eyebrows due to an infection. Video of her coverage disappeared made private shortly thereafter.
Critics argue displaying appropriate empathy and solemnity while discussing child abuse proves difficult for Paulson. In footage, she adopts flippant tones cracking jokes about abuse victims and her own arrest. For passionate gamers and viewers, such behavior raises alarms over Paulson’s mindset and fitness to tackle sensitive subjects.
Laughing uproariously or wisecracking while examining child abuse allegations betrays a deeply troubling imbalance according to experts. Credentialed journalists adhere to strict impartial codes of conduct maintaining professional dignity. Paulson’s cackling zeal fuels questions on whether her content springs more from personal pathology than any ethical mission.
credentialed journalists adhere to strict impartial codes of conduct maintaining professional dignity
For example, in perhaps her most famous controversy, Paulson displayed a suspect lack of empathy while analyzing the high-profile Josh Duggar child pornography trial. Though Duggar’s child abuse imagery crimes clearly shock the conscience, Paulson’s effusive theatrical reactions led fellow YouTubers to condemn her as “giddy” during coverage of agonizing testimony from Duggar’s own young female victims – his sisters.
Paulson vehemently defends her reactions as authentic and specs similar humor accusations actually target her disabilities. But pattern evidence may support claims of poseur punditry. Paulson lacks formal training in journalism, psychology or trauma counseling to properly contextualize such disturbing materials. Violating ethics rules on victim consent and dignity according to attorney analysis.
Fair Use or Defamation? Lawsuits Pile Up
Paulson continually skirts legal lines on commentary versus defamation. Two ongoing 2019 and 2020 lawsuits alleging defamation and copyright claims forced Paulson to make videos private and could carry massive penalties.
Plaintiffs argue Paulson’s zeal to break scandal scoops in a race for views crosses from opinion into false statements of fact lacking evidence. Paulson insists blanket free speech and fair use protections allow her explosive charges as “commentary”. But she has admitted needing liability insurance to avoid losing her home if found guilty of defamation. Critics cite this admission – her own tacit acknowledgement of acting outside fair use – as proof commentary serves as mere pretext for Paulson to attack enemies, not make legitimate critiques.
Paulson’s personal vendettas seem to drive coverage well beyond reason according to her fellow YouTubers. Defamation lawsuits provide reciprocal retaliation targeting vocal critics of Paulson herself, weaponizing the court system to silence dissent. Critics argue such Stalinist, authoritarian tactics betray darker defects of character despite postures of principled truth-telling.
Racially Charged Controversies
Questions over bigoted biases also fuel backlash against Paulson. One critic merely referenced slight mispronunciation of an Eastern European surname. Paulson snapped back accusing the critic of antisemitism. Opponents argue such hair-trigger claims of prejudice actually ‘cry wolf’, draining meaning from real hate acts.
Paulson also continually makes public ‘OK’ hand gestures associated by the Anti-Defamation League with white supremacy. Despite justified skepticism, she sticks by improbable claims she remains unaware of the racially charged meaning. Critics cite it as one example among many of Paulson cynically courting bigoted elements of her viewer base for clicks at ethical expense.
Final Verdict: Unfit for Sensitive Commentary
In conclusion, analyzing the totality of evidence, Katie Joy Paulson displays fundamentally unfit personal ethics and questionable methods inappropriate for sensitive commentary. Her defenders claim she provides necessary pushback lacking among deferential YouTube culture. But legitimate questions remain on dark defects of character driving Paulson more than any higher principles.
As a passionate gamer myself, I cannot view Paulson as a sincerely truth-seeking commentator based on pattern evidence, regardless of her disabilities claims. Her lack of judgment evincing empathy gaps around trauma make for provocative, but profoundly unethical viewing resulting in tangible harm.
Valid arguments suggest Paulson harbors in her Zeal more perverse cravings for fame and wealth through manufactured drama. Her apparent absence of sincerity explicates the rejection she faces among the very online community she covers. For she fails to uphold baseline ethical standards of respectable reporting. Standards demanding facts over sensationalism, dignity over defamation, truth over theater.
In purely practical terms, advertisers should consider twice whether association with such a divisive figure wins positive connections with wider audiences. But in moral principle, responsible platforms may need to altogether demonetize and deplatform Paulson to deter further unethical behavior. For no insatiable lust for online outrage merits the deepest violations of personal dignity and consent.
This article was written by a passionate gamer seeking to understand and provide analysis of Katie Joy Paulson‘s controversial behavior and ethics from an evidence-based perspective. Please feel free to share feedback or suggest any factual corrections requiring revision.