This is a printer-friendly version of an article from Zip06.com.

Visits by YouTube ‘Auditors’ Creating Confusion

In a somewhat confusing trend, so-called “YouTube auditors” are visiting Connecticut government buildings and demanding that employees interact and answer what purport to be legal inquiries. However, the visits and the nature of the interactions are also causing confusion and anxiety among some public employees. In early December, an individual entered Guilford Town Hall and began demanding employees answer questions in what many officials described as an attempt to provoke confrontations to be later posted on social media.

A video later posted to YouTube by the “auditor” shows several town employees interacting with the “auditor.” Reportedly, the incident disturbed several town employees due to the “aggressive” nature of the individual and his attempts at sparking some sort of confrontation.

The “auditors” describe themselves as defenders of the First Amendment and citizen journalists, and they have reportedly visited various town government offices in groups of up to 10 people. They are often reticent to answer questions regarding their motives, and as seen in some videos, their inquiries range from polite questioning to name-calling and, occasionally, hostility. According to several witnesses of the incident at Guilford’s Town Hall, the “auditor” departed in a vehicle with out-of-state license plates.

Police Chief Butch Hyatt said officers responded to the December incident after receiving a phone call from Town Hall employees. Hyatt said that because government buildings are open to the public, there is little police can do to thwart potentially disruptive gatherings as long as they conform to basic standards and don’t interfere with employees’ duties.

However, video of the Guilford incident clearly shows the “auditor” entering the Tax Collector’s office where potentially private information can be stored.

Hyatt said his department is acquainted with this particular individual, interacting with him previously at the Guilford Police Department. Hyatt described that encounter as positive and mutually respectful.

“We’ve had interactions with those guys in the past, and they are certainly welcome in any public building, as they well know. They can come in and talk to employees and film as long as they are not in areas that are confidential,” Hyatt said. “I believe this same gentleman had stopped into our police department several years earlier, and we had interacted with him here very positively and answered his questions and directed him to where he wanted to go. We actually had a pretty positive interaction with him.”

Hyatt stressed that as long as a person is not interfering with official duties or attempting to enter restricted areas, the public is welcome in all public buildings.

“(T)he public is allowed into any area of a public building, and they are allowed to film as well,” said Hyatt. “They absolutely have every right to do that. If someone gets to the point where they are threatening or trying to get into a restricted area, that would obviously be a different situation. But most of these guys and gals who are doing this don’t go to that length, and if they’re asked to leave, they generally do so.”

Hyatt said educating public employees about what is and isn’t permissible in their workplace is also vital in keeping these incidents positive.

While Hyatt said he could not speculate about the motive or end goal of these “auditors,” many posted videos include a donation or payment link. YouTube creators also earn money from advertising revenue generated by simply having their videos watched and increasing YouTube channel subscriptions. One content creator with a video of the Guilford incident boasted more than 113,000 subscribers and 37,000 views. According to a YouTube revenue calculator, the value of the views and subscriptions could generate more than $12,000. The Guilford video had only been online for a little more than one month.

First Selectman Matt Hoey ventured that one of the motivations for the visits and the videos is financial.

“One of the things that is pretty clear to anyone who witnesses what they [the “auditors”] post is that they are attempting to catch people and to embarrass them,” said Hoey. “But the nature of the questions and the nature of their responses suggest that they are trying to get a reaction and a reaction that will help sell ad space on YouTube or wherever they are posting.”

Guilford is not the only town that has received visits from the self-proclaimed “auditors.” Incidents in North Branford, Ridgefield, Sherman, and Danbury have all been posted to YouTube. In response, some municipalities have invoked an “official business” limitation on visitors to public buildings. Those limitations require anyone in a government building to be on “official business,” or they will be asked to leave.

According to published reports, two “auditors” visited public buildings in Ridgefield on several occasions in early December. During one of the visits, they provoked a town employee who, in frustration, threw a sheaf or file at the “auditors.” That employee was placed on administrative leave and charged with disorderly conduct. Those charges were eventually dropped. Video from that incident received more than 174,000 views in 60 days.

“A lot of it simply boils down to the fact that people [and] employees are just not used to this, and they may become a little bit nervous as a result of that,” Hyatt said. “Part of our job is educating public employees that these auditors are out there, and the best thing to do is simply be cordial and treat them no differently than any other person who comes through the door.”

Hoey was not at Town Hall on the day of the incident but said he and his staff had been aware of the potential for these “audits” and that staff had been alerted and provided information on how to react.

“We had become aware about some of this type of activity about a year and a half ago, and our HR director had sent out a memo on how employees should react to them,” said Hoey.

Hoey said that some Town Hall employees were anxious about being filmed, wondering whether it was allowed.

“I think there was a bit of anxiety with at least one employee when they were confronted by these people, specifically about whether they can be filmed,” Hoey said. “We subsequently followed up and urged employees to kill them with kindness and treat them the same way we treat any other member of the public.”

Hoey said that Town Hall was not considering limiting access to the building or restrictive measures to thwart the activity. He noted that remaining professional and ensuring safety is the best plan to deal with future incidents.

“I think that, ultimately, that is a bit of an overreach,” Hoey said. “We have areas where the public is allowed to go into and areas where they are not allowed. For instance, our finance office or the seating area of the Town Clerk’s office are off limits. And those restrictions are for privacy matters, and that holds for the general public as well as these folks. So, we are not intending to expand those areas of non-access, but we will make sure that those areas that are off limits to the public are clearly marked as such. These guys poke their heads up every couple of years and do so in multiple states. I anticipate that we’ll see these guys again at some point.”