Chud Fusk wrote: Honestly I think some day we are going to learn some gross shit about this dude.

I similarly thought a few times while watching some of these, "I wouldn't be surprised if...."
This video activated my creep detection alarms a little. It also answers this question more directly:

jfv wrote: Wed Aug 03, 2022 1:03 pm Is Mark making $ off of them through advertising revenue?

It's not unusual for YouTubers to do this, I know, but this is different than some vlogger.

I've worked in outreach in central London for many years after living a fringe existence during my 20s, so these videos weren't particularly revelatory to me. The faces change, but the stories (even on the other side of the Atlantic) are the same.

I didn't sense an obvious agenda / ideology from the interviewer; he lets people tell their story. The vibe that I get is that he's successful, functional and feels some kind of pull from his conscience to 'do something' about the suffering he sees, which is common in volunteers / employees for this kind of work. Ditto a certain kind of naivety, I suppose, but (IMO) that's an easy criticism to throw at somebody trying to engage w/ disfunctional, underclass people. You need that to bring a positive energy into the situation for any kind of change (however small) to happen. It often takes months to (essentially) resocialise people, sometimes years, which is why it's such difficult work and very few people manage to stick it out.

You can see in the interviews w/ Exotic that he's genuinely hurt about how she's thrown his help back in his face - I've seen that dynamic many times. In my experience, the moment you step outside of clearly defined boundaries (e.g.: we offer service x and y at z times, everyone gets treated the same, no exceptions) there's a 50% chance that any favours come back and bite you. Maybe he learnt his lesson from that - I could have told him that you can't trust a drug addicted prostitute with money, but you learn from experience, and (thank god) not everyone spends their lives in the gutter. Thank god most people are naive.

Sometimes the world is an ugly, sad place; most people ignore it. I say N.C for letting the camera roll and showing it.

M.H wrote: Sun Aug 21, 2022 1:53 pmDitto a certain kind of naivety... You can see in the interviews w/ Exotic that he's genuinely hurt about how she's thrown his help back in his face - I've seen that dynamic many times. In my experience, the moment you step outside of clearly defined boundaries (e.g.: we offer service x and y at z times, everyone gets treated the same, no exceptions) there's a 50% chance that any favours come back and bite you.

I agree with your analysis that he is grateful for his success and trying to give back to society in some way, but that naivete can be dangerous when stepping outside boundaries as you described. Laita is in a transactional relationship with his subjects, and a very different transaction than what would be appropriate in outreach. But in your situation you were not expecting anything in return from your clients, whereas he wants content, wants views, and at least with Exotic he really wanted a different outcome. He may have just had genuine hopes to positively affect her life (as all of us in the helping profession do, naturally) , or he may have become attached, maybe developed some expectations because of his financial investment, maybe purely emotional, who knows. But we do know that this doesn't happen when we don't cross boundaries and when we don't have dual relationships with people we are trying to help.

Mark Laita has a dual relationship with his subjects because while he may be trying to help them, he also has a business model that requires his subjects to share their vulnerability and trauma with an audience who has more than just altruistic interests. Now he is not a therapist or even an outreach worker (which I think is part of the reason he's ethically compromised) but he is still operating under the belief that this is potentially a positive thing, whether for the individuals or for society. If the former, he is poorly informed, and if the latter, that implies that these people are not part of society, or at least are not worth accommodating. I don't believe in sacrificing one person to save another, especially when the sacrificial subject has already been traumatized. Yes I know these are willing participants, but the concept of free will disintegrates in the light of addiction, trauma, economic insecurity, etcetera. Even drug-free and trauma-free people will sacrifice some part of themselves, whether for fame or for survival. I believe Laita is exploiting a situation, and I believe that exploitation is fundamentally immoral.