NASA GLITTER BOMB PRANK FAKE FREE

No after-math scenes or commentary were included for the remaining clips in his video. Lastly, it's a sponsored video - it needed to be safe and can't have any legal repercussions from bad PR to being held liable if they knew in advance the content they are sponsoring. Whether the person has bad intentions or not, there's still laws against booby-trapping properties / devices. Someone could've been allergic to the fart spray or the glitter could've injured their eyes. But most importantly it's a huge risk if a person gets injured from it, thief or not. There are multiple reasons why it's convenient to have it staged, from a successful deployment of the device and for youtube views (his content is sponsored after all and he gets a cut from sponsored links). Not everyone censors faces especially if they want to catch thieves. Even if he was able to retrieve the package, wouldn't curiosity set-in to look into where the thief lives? Also even if the police wouldn't do anything about it, being caught on camera stealing packages with the chance of it being posted online is still a risky thing to do. Specifically, the lady thief's GPS location being right next to Cici's house. He also has time stamps of the surveillance camera when it was taken from the porch. If the video he received was from the cloud, it makes sense it would also send its GPS location and where it was a certain times. > We always know the package location at all times due to the GPS of all phones. He also claims he didn't notice it was Cici's neighbor or car from the video footage which is understandable. Note how he describes Cici as his friend in the video, but now demotes her as being a friend of a friend and just a volunteer.

NASA GLITTER BOMB PRANK FAKE FREE

Why let thieves get away with it, when his volunteers can just fake it and get free money. So basically right from the get go, his prank / experiment is biased because of a financial motivation.

The gist was he offered 'financial compensation for any successful recoveries of the packages' and that he was unaware that Cici & her friends arranged a fake thievery. Then he posts an explanation on twitter (first as a reply, then its own tweet) and edits his original pinned comment (that has already amassed 65,000 likes). Buzzfeed notes that they directly asked Mark Rober about it, and noticed he deleted the scenes right after. The second one with the lady who opened it inside her house, apparently is Cici's next-door neighbor.Īfter it was posted on reddit, these two clips were deleted. The black car was seen parked in a 2017 google street image in front of Cici's house.

First was the thief who opened it in his car. However internet sleuths were able to figure out the location of the 'thieves' and found that two of them lived in the same location. While I'm not familiar with the guy, his channel produces high quality (sponsored) content - but essentially stays out of the youtube drama sphere. Surprisingly there was little little to no trace of upvoted skepticism towards the video on reddit, with people defending it being real because it's Mark Rober. The Package Thief vs Glitter Bomb video went viral (40M views), with multiple publications citing a very wholesome justice porn material from a former NASA engineer. I'm not a bad guy with something to hide. Here's the edited 9 minute one in Mark Rober's channel. Here's a mirror of the original 11 minute video. Proven by a variety of images matching the friend and thieves' houses & cars.

TL DR: Second and third thief are associated to Mark's 'friend' who volunteered for the prank in exchange of financial compensation.

Nasa glitter bomb prank fake