Brett Cooper — "Tinder for Kids" Is Putting Children in Danger | Episode 108

So, unfortunately, the horrors for parents never cease. And today, we need to talk about Tinder for kids. Now, Tinder for kids is a phrase that I thought, that I hoped, I would never have to utter. It was not even a phrase that came into my frame of being. But I mean, hey, it is 2025. Who is surprised at this point? Because Big Tech continues to profit off of the insecurities and the whims of children while telling parents that they are actively working on improving security and safety measures.

But it seems like every time, they always fall short. When is it enough? When do we step in? Actually, some countries already have. Now, before we dive into that and Tinder for children, make sure that you like this video and subscribe to the channel if you have not already. And of course, if you want to stay up to date on every single episode of the Brett Cooper Show, make sure to ring that notification bell. And if you want farm vlogs, behind-the-scenes content, and ad-free episodes, go check out cooperconfidential.com.

All right, so, just jumping in here, I want to put out a disclaimer. I always feel like that's important to do on these types of episodes. This might not be the video to watch with your young kids. But I actually, on the flip side, would argue that if you feel up for the conversation, if you feel like your kids are ready for it, like this might be the type of thing that your twins, your teen should watch. Because I remember being 13 or 14 years old and being so incredibly angry and confused at the way that my mom monitored my social media.

Like the way that I would get grounded when she would discover the secret Snapchat account that I would like so desperately try to create. Or when I would turn off my Life360 because I wanted to go hang out with my friends. And then she would lock me outside the house being like, "Now, I know that you turned off your location tracking. We need to have a conversation. You are grounded." Like I was so upset and so confused, obviously, because as a young person, you just want to be like everybody else.

You want to be mature. You want to be grown-up. And my frustration was not because I was doing anything that was intentionally, you know, dangerous or nefarious, but it was because, like I just said, I wanted to be like everybody else. I wanted to participate in what all the other cool young people were doing. And since then, I have just become so grateful for the fact that around that age, she sat me down and she made it so abundantly, uncomfortably, crystal clear as to why she was so strict.

She did not mince words about the horrors that were out there in the world and what she was doing in an effort to protect me. Like these are the same conversations that parents should be having today, but I would argue that the stakes are even higher, as evidenced by this app we need to talk about today that is currently making headlines. So, this app is called Whizz. And people are calling it the Tinder for kids because it has the same structure of swiping through profiles and finding somebody that you like and that you want to connect with, like Tinder or Bumble, Bumble BFF, whatever you want to call it.

However, this app is directly targeted at young people, at teens and tweens. And online, on their website and in their marketing materials, they tell people and parents specifically that they focus on age-appropriate engagement. But I'm sorry, how is it age-appropriate when there is seemingly, allegedly, no consistency or accuracy with their age verification software? How is it safe and appropriate when young teens are unknowingly meeting, connecting with adults who then sexually exploit them?

And that is exactly what has been happening with this app. In a recent op-ed for The Hill, writers Haley McNamara and Lily Moork wrote, "What is the result of this app design, this Tinder-type app? A 12-year-old girl meeting up with a supposed 14-year-old boy that Whizz connected her with, only to discover that the boy was an adult male who sexually assaulted her. An eighth-grader being sexually abused by a 27-year-old man, then finding out that she was only one of several underage girls that he had groomed through Whizz.

An 11-year-old girl being sexually assaulted by a US Marine that she met on Whizz." And these are just three stories from this year alone. Back in 2024, a 20-year-old man was arrested in Florida for pretending to be a 16-year-old boy and soliciting sexual images from a 14-year-old girl. In this article from November of 2024, they write, "According to the news release, Morgan began chatting with the victim through the messaging app Whizz.

They say that that the victim's profile noted that she was 14 years old, but Morgan's profile inaccurately Oh, no. What a unfortunate Oh, a blip in our security measures incorrectly showed that he was 16 years old. However, when he requested sexual pictures from the teenager, he confirmed that he was 19 years old at the time, agents stated." And it's not just us in America that is having this issue. In the UK, they are grappling with this app as well.

In one instance, a man spent years grooming a 12-year-old girl through the app. And in another, a Scottish dentist used the app to send a 13-year-old girl, quote, "disturbing and graphic sexual voice memos." Now, right now, thanks in large part to that op-ed from The Hill where they are arguing that Congress needs to step in and do something about this app, it is at the center of a large conversation about child exploitation.

But this is not the first time that this app has found itself in hot water. Yes, they still have millions and millions of users. I think at one point, they had 16 million users on the platform. But the app was largest back between the years of 2022, 2023. That is when young people were really excited about it. That's when it really took off. And around that time, a couple of years ago, Whizz was actually removed from all of the app stores due to these safety and security concerns, but they were later reinstated after they promised that they had implemented new safety protocols, which clearly hasn't been enough.

Now, a man named Stephen Balcom, who is the founder of the Family Online Safety Institute, tested these new safety protocols and the New York Post reported on what he found. They wrote that Balcom set up an account to test the app's age verification, purporting to be 15 years old. He claims that while the photo the app took of him was flagged for human review, his account was approved within 5 minutes, even though he is clearly much older.

Quote, "As you can tell, I'm definitely not 15," said Balcom, who has salt and pepper hair and a mustache. We'll put a photo of him right here. Whizz approved this man to join their app as a {quote} 15-year-old. Now, the Whizz CEO pushed back on this and gave New York Post a statement and said, "We've looked into this thoroughly and here's what actually happened. The person mentioned in the article tried to sign up for Whizz by lying about their age."

That rubs me the wrong way, like saying he's lying, like pointing the finger at this man who was literally just trying to figure out if you were actually protecting children. Anyway, he goes on and he says, "Our age verification system, which runs on Yoti's technology, remember that name, caught the mismatch and shut down the accounts in 84 seconds flat. This is our safety tech doing exactly what it is supposed to do."

So, in that case, even though the photo was flagged and even though a real person allegedly approved it, the account did get shut down. But clearly, based on all of these stories, people are still slipping through the cracks. Just like they are at public universities, but not GCU. Because GCU actually cares about their students and making sure that they thrive. And Grand Canyon University is a private Christian university in the beautiful Phoenix, Arizona that offers over 360 academic programs that are all informed by industry and student learning outcomes.

Shocker, crazy idea. And it is actually affordable. to federal grants and aid, GCU's on-campus students received approximately $196 million in scholarships in 2024, and many have the opportunity to graduate in less than 4 years. They want to get you trained and educated and into the workforce so that you can start building your future now, which is what higher education should actually be about, of course. And so, if you want to learn more, just visit gcu.edu/myoffer to see what scholarships you may qualify for.

Admissible high school seniors and transfer students can schedule a complimentary visit from anywhere in the country. Find your purpose at GCU today. It is private, Christian, and it's affordable. Again, visit gcu.edu/myoffer. And when you finish your finals at Grand Canyon University this year and you're heading home for the holidays, you are going to want a Noble suitcase. Because picture this, you are at the airport, you set your suitcase down, and you turn your head to pick up the phone, and boom, any thief with a ballpoint pen can pop the zipper in 3 seconds, steal everything in your bag, and re-zip it.

And I am embarrassed to admit, but before I started working with Noble, I had no idea it's possible. Like that is common sense, but I guess I was just an idiot. And that is why travelers like me are now switching to the Noble all-in-one carry-on. It has zero zippers. It latches shut like a vault with one solid click that no one can breach. Plus, it has amazing features like a flip-out cup holder, a built-in charger when you chronically have no battery like me, a front laptop pocket, and buttery smooth 360° wheels.

Over 12,000 flight attendants and pilots use it daily. It is number one rated on Trustpilot, and it has a lifetime warranty. And right now, they have their biggest sale ever going on. It is up to 58% off. So, just head on over to nobletravel.com. That is n o b l travel.com. When they ask who sent you, make sure that you say Brett Cooper. Now, back to the story and a more sinister version of slipping through the cracks, my question is, what about the 20-year-olds, the 23-year-olds that could possibly pass as 15-year-olds?

Where it is less easy to figure out that this man, Stephen Balcom, >> If you said that you were a minor, you were within minutes served highly sexual content through an account that was supposed to protect you and shield you from that exact content. And that is not the only report that has come out about Meta. And I'm not trying to nitpick them, you know, specifically because obviously every social media app has these problems.

X with its weird porn on there, TikTok, everything. But Meta has very much been in the news. And you know, safety measure after safety measure has allegedly been implemented. And then year after year, month after month, it seems like new articles reports coming out showing that these measures haven't actually worked. In fact, just a few weeks ago Time magazine published this. Court filings alleged that Meta downplayed risks to children and misled the public.

This is like the culmination of years of these types of reports from parents, from these advocacy organizations, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, they've all published things on this. And in this Time magazine they wrote that the following allegations against Meta come from the brief filed in an unprecedented multi-district litigation. More than 1,800 plaintiffs, including children and parents and school districts and state attorney generals have joined together in a suit alleging that the parent companies behind Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube {quote} relentlessly pursued a strategy of growth at all costs, recklessly ignoring the impact of their products on children's mental health and physical health.

But possibly the craziest thing that has been revealed about Meta specifically, which was revealed at the top of this Time magazine article, was this. Instagram's former head of safety and well-being testified that when she joined Meta in 2020, she was shocked to learn that the company had a 17-time strike policy for accounts reportedly engaged in the {quote} "trafficking of human beings for sex." {quote} "You could incur 16 violations for prostitution and sexual solicitation, and upon the 17th violation, finally at 17, your account would be suspended."

This former employee testified that by any measure across the industry, it was a very, very high strike threshold. The plaintiffs claim that this testimony is corroborated by internal company documentation. 16 circumstances of human trafficking, oh, that's totally fine. But 17, we got you there. That that that that is insane. That it is so incredibly disgusting. Like that's not something that just slipped through the cracks.

That was an intentional policy, allegedly, that they had in place. And you would think that protecting users, especially children, would be the top priority. So why is it that after years of this kind of publicity, these reports, these damning reports coming out, why is it that these companies continuously fall short? One guy on X who was posting about Whizz said, "Big tech talks about safety, but rarely follows through on its promises.

Kids deserve genuine protection, not PR claims." And the fact that people are now betting on whether this app will be removed again it just shows how far the problem has progressed. I think it should be removed from all application stores. And what he is referring to there is that there are literal bets on apps like Call She, and I think that's how you pronounce it, and Polymarket betting on whether Congress will actually do something on whether this app Whizz, that is riddled, allegedly, with exploitation will be removed from the app store once again.

Back to Whizz, I want you to see how their website describes the app. Now that you know everything you know, now that you've heard these stories, this is how they describe themselves. "Make new friends. Connect with people your age from around the world and build real friendships in a safe space. It's age-appropriate engagement. On Whizz, safety and reliability are key. The Whizz app's age-match chatting feature ensures that you are only connecting with friends in your age group, maintaining a secure and age-appropriate environment."

Like are there legal ramifications to this of using words like "ensure"? Like I'm "ensuring" that you are only speaking to people your own age when we in fact have literal arrests involving children that have been sexually assaulted due to the faults of your age verification platform? Like I just I would like to know. But now what's interesting, you just saw how they described themselves, this is how kids and users describe the app.

This girl, 16-year-old, said it is like Tinder for kids. Like literally, when you think of Tinder, that is what it is, trying to hook up or like date. People are literally meeting up with strangers, like kids their age, it is really weird. And they are not wrong. And for people on TikTok, as I was trying to research and scrolling through videos, especially young women, the common sentiment is that they use this app as a {quote} "ego boost" because they know that immediately upon creating their account, on logging on, on redownloading the app, whatever it is, that they will have tens, if not hundreds, of men in their DMs.

Take a look at this video. I'm going to be honest, um, I've been using this app called Whizz. Um, I don't know if this is going to reach anybody. I'm using this app called, um, Whizz. And look at this one guy who's been texting so much. Like you find the weirdest people on there. And look here, I only use it for like an ego boost. I'm going to be so serious. Um, like I don't really want a relationship, but you know I'm on there.

Do you guys you know, maybe, but this guy that keeps text texting, he's like, "Why aren't you texting? Are you mad at me?" Where he's like, oh, I posted like a photo on my story, he's like, "So, so pretty." >> [snorts] >> Then I love Whizz. I just paid two bucks to see who was my secret admirer, like someone apparently viewed me 55 times, so there was that. >> literally is just another version of Tinder that kids can join.

Like that is not a recipe for disaster at all. And this is not just one single video. This was just the most concise one that I could play for you guys, but I saw 25 videos of young women between the ages of probably 16 and 22 showing their DMs, showing how many hundreds of guys they have sliding up on their Whizz stories, reaching out to them, sexting them, whatever you can imagine is happening and they are posting about it.

And the rationale for being on there, even though the guys are {quote} "weird" and it's a little bit odd, is because it is an ego boost. They are seeking that validation, they are seeking those types of connections out. So imagine the recipe for disaster where you have an app that has safety protocols, but allegedly people are slipping through the cracks, their ages are not being verified, and you have thousands, millions, of users that are insecure and that are on there for validation and attention.

And when parents have no idea what is going on. But again, this is not just a Whizz problem. The whole thing is creepy, it's a risk for kids, but again, it's not just this app, which is why one country is taking more drastic measures. And Australia, as of this month, has started enforcing their new social media law that keeps children off of certain platforms. And according to Fox, the platforms that will be banned for youth in Australia are Facebook, Instagram, Kick, Reddit, Snapchat, Threads, TikTok, Twitch, X formerly Twitter, and YouTube.

And apps that are not banned, and you might have like a jaw-dropping response to this, the apps that are not banned, Discord, Google Classroom, that makes sense, Lego Play, Messenger, Pinterest, Roblox, WhatsApp, YouTube Kids, and LinkedIn. Now I get most of those, like Google Classroom, whatever, but not banning Discord and Roblox of all the apps out there, of everything that we have learned about what happens on Discord, the breeding ground of radicalization, that is just simply insane to me.

Now obviously there is this whole debate on whether this move from Australia is an infringement on Australians' rights and the precedent that this could set for Australia to control access to other platforms across the board, even for adults. And I understand the slippery slope, obviously, and that does concern me. But the argument for doing this and keeping young people under the age of 16 off of these platforms is that there are plenty of other things around the world in all different kinds of countries that are restricted for minors.

So why not this? Why not social media platforms? That that's my argument even though I understand the concerns. That would be my argument for it. Like we're restricting access to the thing that objectively, in 2025 in the modern age, is doing them the most harm, that poses the most significant risk. Anyway, people are already pushing back against this, specifically Reddit, who just sued the country of Australia as of yesterday morning.

This article reads that Reddit is calling it an intrusion on free political discourse and setting the stage for a protracted legal battle. And then they argue that even if the court does uphold the ban, Reddit should be exempt because it did not meet the definition of social media, which is what they added in the filing. And listen, I understand why Reddit is doing this. I understand that you are a business. You do not want to lose money.

You do not want to lose users. But is this really the hill that you want to die on? Is the under-16-year-old market in Australia that significant for your business? Like rather than suing an entire government trying to protect children, why don't you step in and try to make your platform better and figure out how to make it safer? Because let's not forget about the jailbait subreddit and the ones just like it that are predatory and inappropriate that span all across the platform.

Now in Reddit's defense, they did remove that specific subreddit and they have promised that they have, you know, per usual, they have bettered their safety protocols, but still, like everyone else, like all of these other platforms, they have struggled to keep things clean. And allegedly, allegedly, the app is still riddled with what they are calling sexploitation. And so if you cannot prove or show us with 100% certainty that your app is operating with the best intentions for your young users, zip it.

I don't want to see you suing Australia. Go back to the desk, get back to coding, and figure out how to make it better. And in my opinion, I don't even know if I should say my opinion, this just seems like an objective fact, but all of this is going to get harder and more complicated with the increase of AI. Now an interesting thing that I learned about with Whizz is that they use an age verification and digital system called Yoti, which has been backed by the World Economic Forum, as you can see here in this article.

And in 2023, Yoti, this digital ID platform, went to the FTC with a proposal for a more universal image-based age verification system that would allow both companies and parents to consent to minors being on certain social media platforms. They wanted this to be the universal platform the companies were using. But in April of 2024, that proposal was rejected. And why, you might ask? Well, because of serious privacy concerns, and concerns over what Yoti would be doing with the data they collected, the images they collected of those children.

And obviously that is a bit of an aside in this story, but I did think that it was relevant in the age of AI. And in the age of {quote} "sextortion" where predators are often using AI to threaten and blackmail and extort young people, which is already happening across the internet and across our country. Where young people, children as young as 11 years old, have been driven to suicide over the fear and the horror that incriminating photos, sometimes edited with AI, will be released.

And one of these stories recently took place in Virginia with a 15-year-old boy named Bryce Tate. Now the New York Post, as you saw, covered the story, and they talked to this boy's father. And the father said, "They acted like a local 17-year-old girl. They knew which gym he worked out at. They knew a couple of his best friends and name dropped them. They knew he played basketball for Nitro High School. They built his trust to where he believed that this was truly somebody in his area."

The post is told that the photos Bryce received were not AI generated, but most likely of a real girl who was another victim. So, they were posing as a flirty girl sending him photos. Scammers then ask and asked for illicit photos in return, and once they have them, extort the victim for money by threatening to show the pictures to family and friends. For Bryce, that sum was $500. They asked for $500 to not blast these photos on the internet.

The dad writes, "My son had freaking $30." And he's like, "Sir, I will give you my last $30." And these cowards wouldn't take it. A tearful Adam told the post recounting his son's final exchange. If the target, like Bryce, doesn't have the money to send via untraceable methods like gift cards, cryptocurrency, or apps like Cash App or Venmo, extortionist then threaten violence. In Bryce's alleged case, outright encouraged the victim to kill himself because, quote, "Your life is already over."

In the last 20 minutes of Bryce's life, he was messaged 120 times. A tactic to keep teens feverishly engaged, creating a, quote, "tunnel vision" to where you can't set your phone down. Now, 3 hours after that first text from a local flirty 17-year-old girl in his area, Bryce took his own life. And he is not the only one. A representative for the National Center of Missing and Exploited Children said that in 2024, there have been 33,000 cases of sextortion.

On X, Heidi Briones wrote, "I am begging parents to teach their kids about sextortion. Be clear and direct. Don't just say don't talk to strangers online. That is too vague. You have to explain exactly how these scams work. Even if your kids cringe or act embarrassed, it is your job." And that is the point that I was trying to make at the top of this episode. And obviously, as a parent, it is, you know, your discretion to decide when you want to talk to your kids about this, how you want to do it.

But if you watched this episode with your child, hi kids, if you are, you know, thinking about showing them, or maybe you are a teenager, because I know I do have teens that watch me, this should all be uncomfortable. This should be heartbreaking, but it also should be food for thought. Because some things simply are not worth the risk. Doesn't matter how many of your friends are doing it, how cool it is, no matter what other parents are okay with.

If you're in the parent seat, some things are not worth it. One mom said, "My son keeps asking to connect with other people on games like Minecraft, and he's mad that I won't let him, but the risks are too high." And Heidi responded and said, "Let him be mad." Now, all of this does tie into the episode that I actually did on Thursday about that guy, Clavicular. You know, a seemingly harmless self-improvement influencer, a meme to a lot of people.

And yes, the videos are funny, and I can mock them for kind of being gay and all those things. But what happens, and this is a real risk, what happens when an insecure, impressionable young person actually follows some of that insane advice? Doing meth, doing coke, taking a hammer to your jaw. What happens when it goes too far? I'm sorry, but we cannot just sit around twiddling our fingers hoping that somebody's going to be deplatformed, that somebody else will talk to our kids about it, that, you know, an app will be taken off the App Store.

That's not how it works. Especially not in 2025, when the risks are so high, when there is so much nastiness and disgust and filth going on in the world. You, all of us, I need to talk to myself about this, too, we have a responsibility. You have to know what your kids are watching or the impacts of what you are consuming yourself. Doesn't matter if you are 10, 13, 25, 60, you have to know the subliminal messages of what you are consuming.

And I think that a lot of people assume that young people are not mature enough to understand this, that they are helpless, that we should helicopter parent them to shield them from these hard conversations and these difficult situations, not make them think about the dangers that are out in the world, you know, protect their innocence. And I understand that. And there is a time and a place to protect that innocence, but I also think by having these hard conversations, you are also protecting their innocence.

And what if instead we chose to empower and arm young people? Not send them out into the world of social media completely oblivious to the horrors, the objective horrors that exist out there. So, if the social media apps aren't going to do anything, if their new safety protocols are not actually going to work, if time and time again, month after month, we're hearing about new reports of how horrible things are, maybe we talk to the kids.

Maybe again, we arm and empower. Maybe we try that on for size.