YouTuber's Claims Spark Federal Funding Freeze

A recent video by Nick Shirley, a 23-year-old YouTuber, has led to a freeze in child care funding to Minnesota. Shirley, who calls himself an "independent YouTube journalist, " posted a 42-minute video on X and YouTube. In it, he and an older man, identified only as "David, " visited several daycare centers. They claimed these centers were empty despite receiving public funds. Shirley alleged over $110, 000 in fraud. The video quickly went viral, gaining over 131 million views on X and 2. 5 million on YouTube. Prominent conservatives, including Elon Musk and members of the Trump administration, amplified his claims. Vice President JD Vance even praised Shirley, saying he had done more useful journalism than some Pulitzer Prize winners. However, Shirley's allegations have not been verified. Some daycare centers have responded, saying Shirley visited outside of their regular hours. A CNN camera crew also filmed caregivers dropping off kids at one center, contradicting Shirley's claims. When asked about the evidence, Shirley said viewers could make their own analysis.Shirley's rise to prominence has been quick. He started as a vlogger, making shock-value videos and pranks. He took a break to serve a mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Chile. When he returned, his content became more political, focusing on topics like illegal immigration and the 2024 election. In October, Shirley was invited to a White House roundtable about the "antifa" movement. He introduced himself as a "100% independent YouTube journalist" and claimed he was often attacked while doing his job. However, research from the Harvard Kennedy School shows that protests during Trump's second term had a low number of injuries, property damage, or arrests. Shirley is part of a broader group of right-leaning journalists and political commentators who do not work for any particular outlet. The White House has embraced what it calls "new media, " giving them unprecedented levels of access. However, some media law professors have criticized these influencers for prioritizing fearmongering over fact-checking.