What is ‘LOLCow’? TikTok’s guilty pleasure flirts with bullying.

If Google is curious about “LOLCow,” a phrase circulating throughout TikTok, the first link found on the outdated blog server, its mission is preserved only in the description of the page archived by Google: “Share anonymously sweet gossip and open ideas about the stupid and weird. people. , also known as lolcows.

Urban Dictionary suggests several similar, but different, definitions of LOLCow. Someone who is “easy/safe for most people to make fun of. He’s a cash cow but you milk ‘lols’ from him,” explained one. Another: “A cow is a person who is laughed at a lot, who does not know that she is being laughed at. They may think that they are praised for what they do, but secretly they are always laughed at.” And, more slowly, “Someone who makes a fool of themselves on the Internet over and over again. It’s usually drug-induced.” The ultimate for sports fans: “A word that can be used to describe the endless industry of sadness in sports…”

The concept, while new in TikTok’s vernacular, is not particularly new, a holdover from the early days of the internet when anonymous accounts gave users the gall to openly abuse each other as part of a digital festival. It’s a key term in the 4Chan lexicon, and many point to Christine Chandler, who is now a blogger. it’s covered in trolls and online crimes of both illegal and inappropriate behavior, such as one of the internet’s most prominent LOLCows.

What you have evolved from the days of internet trolling acceptable to the general public access to LOLCow. New one-stop shopping platforms like TikTok give creators massive viralities (and money) almost overnight, often stemming from the crowning of a new app’s algorithm.

No longer just passing meme fodder or a busy community, these people became everyone’s FYP star. They’re flown in to work with great creators, honored for product deals, and given the tools to turn their online persona — which, in many cases, goes from the ability to be mocked — into a source of income. A place full of deception, TikTok hides the modern LOLCow under the guise of love and fandom. Conscious posters don’t always follow just to be mean, some believe that, at least in their comments, they are building a community of people on the internet.

‘Milking’ LOLCCows: modern bullying or harmless fun?

In a 7 minute long video posted by a user @PinkBinz on Aug. 31, TikTok’s version of “LOLCow” is described as the target of “middle school bullying” behavior, where the user is raised by inappropriate audience interaction. To be more precise, according to the creator, LOLCow is thinly veiled cruelty, if not outright malice. “LOLCows are always picked on by the internet because they’re actually disabled,” he says, pointing to the creator’s rise. Shawty Baewho have not yet identified as a person with a disability. “Ninety-nine percent, if these people had not gone online, their lives would have been completely different. Most of the things that happened to them in their real life happened because of the influence of people on the internet. Harassing them.”

In a comment that has been liked more than 13,000 times, one viewer added, “lolcows are right wing pipers to try to make it look like disabled people are a danger to society. Food dieugenics.”

Another video, posted in 2023 by @GamerMageeHe says that more attention should be paid to people who are creative and attractive. “The level of dishonesty of the people they play with is strange,” he said. Commentators have compared the rise of LOLCows to the popularity of TV shows on channels such as TLC, showing “abnormal” behavior, appearances, or ratings trauma.

Not all viewers feel that way, however, arguing that they find these creators relatable or only want to “get into” them out of sympathy. “If you ever wonder why you’re attracted to shawtybae, it’s because he doesn’t try to be anyone but himself. In a world that wants to be perfect he doesn’t take himself too seriously and is incredibly humble even though he’s famous,” one user wrote on a YouTube video featuring Shawty Bae.

“Authentic” is joined by other unkind phrases used to describe TikTok creators identified as new-age LOLCows: “easy targets,” “manipulation,” “vulnerable,” “memorable.” Viewers of @PinkBinz’ video chimed in with dozens of examples that fall under these categories, each with dedicated “fanbases”, including viral pages of their own. Tophia Chucreator of trans Elphaba Orion Doherty, Daniel Larsonand – one of the most controversial – @WorldOfTshirts. Joshua Block, the face of the World of Tshirts, shot to fame in the TikTok boom that started the pandemic, known for his daily vlogs around New York City showing spontaneous play, profanity, and destructive drinking. His account, followed by 3.6 million people, boasts millions more views from viewers who say they binge watch his videos out of curiosity.

Block and Chandler are examples of the murky way “LOL farming” can go, where constant gossip leads creators to more dangerous paths and abusive behavior, directed at themselves or others. In some examples, LOLCows are clearly doxxed or victims of swiping. In others, they became the marriage finders of other creators, such as the relationship between Block and the creator Mr. Based in NYC, they use them to grow their channels.

LOLing without TikTok

There are other regular occurrences, too: YouTube star Gabbie Hanna’s overindulgence negative behavior and subsequent mental disorderswritten in its entirety on his TikTok page. Even the mass use and recall of Britney Spears’ social media videos, especially those recorded during her struggle for independence under her leadership, that it’s still going on today.

Even more complicated: Some of the most popular LOLCows are, in the eyes of the Internet (and often the law), “bad” people, perpetrators of legitimate crimes, threats, or problematic behavior. Others marked by the title are right-wing, or even white supremacist, figureheads. So cancel culture collides with LOLCows in a variety of vindictive online behavior.

Besides TikTok, there are dedicated subreddits and Discord servers tasked with following the spirits of these creators, including Blockwith posts torn between concern and sarcasm. This online voyeurism also includes a A 15 year old Wiki page are dedicated to Chandler’s movement and a host of “snark” pages provide forums for widespread LOLCow discussion.

TikTok & LOLCows: Made for each other

For many, TikTok is more than just a site for jokes and viral recommendations, it’s a LOLCow factory farm.

And where the blogs of yore were at the forefront of their brutality, the modern vision of LOLCow is down on the nose in its distaste for difference. Instead, people say they get involved out of a desire to give advice or, more often, to check things out — take the endless ideas from the lifestyle creator’s dating blog. Molly Rutter as an example. Some, for all intents and purposes, claim to be true followers of the creator. Comments like “you know what, yeah” or “I can’t talk about being obsessed with this” convey the idea that these people are a shameful guilty pleasure. But what is more worrying is how the modern social media environment is fueling these desires. Platforms that use endless scrolling, push commerce opportunities, and add all-encompassing search integration, keep people locked to their devices, a feedback loop between creator and user that encourages more obsession.

Will internet culture grow out of LOLing people?

In the age of the Internet – opportunities for the creative economy that were not yet available in the early 2000s – these parasocial relationships can lead in unexpected ways. Some of the people mentioned above and other mocked creators have turned to adult content, linking to Fan Only pages in their bios to capitalize on their identities. In ShawtyBae’s case, graphic photos taken from his Fans Only account were leaked online without permission, adding fuel to the fire. Others rely on businesses to make money through product deals, celebrity appearances, or product endorsements. Social ridicule is inextricably linked to their lives.

All in all, more and more people are facing the ethical consequences of posting on social media, from the trauma created by family blogging, to the inclusion of disabled people on the platform by creators, with or without their consent. The resurgence of the name LOLCow in the public consciousness, while it is about continuity, suggests that more people are aware of the dark side of social media.

Along with growing self-awareness, and a renewed love of criticism, among users, some are re-wording the moral check of their online peers: Are you really engaging with the creator out of compassion, joy, or concern… or are you milking their “LOLs”?