The news: MrBeast, YouTube’s largest creator with over 400 million subscribers, is facing scrutiny over how his Feastables chocolate brand has been marketed to children. The Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU), an industry watchdog, said several practices risked misleading kids and may have violated child privacy law.

• A “blind taste test” video showing Feastables outperforming European chocolates was deemed likely to mislead children into believing the results were genuine.
• Sweepstakes tied to the brand incentivized bulk purchases by encouraging multiple receipt uploads and failed to properly block entrants under 13.
• Feastables’ website also collected emails and phone numbers through pop-ups, with data shared to third parties—raising concerns under the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA).

MrBeast’s team said many flagged practices had already ended and promised to consider CARU’s recommendations, though they did not agree with every finding.

Why it matters: This case is more than a one-off for MrBeast, who’s come under fire on other fronts. It shows how influencer-driven brands are being held to the same standards as traditional advertisers:

• Disclosure expectations are universal. The FTC requires that any financial relationship—whether direct pay, free product, or sweepstakes entry—must be clearly disclosed to audiences. Nearly two-thirds of US social users have seen hashtags like #sponsored or #ad used as disclosure, making them the most common way creators signal paid partnerships.
• Kids remain a regulatory flashpoint. Marketing that appears to pressure bulk purchases or mishandles children’s data is highly scrutinized, especially when influencers with massive, under-18 audiences are involved.
• Reputation risk rises with reach. MrBeast’s following makes him a high-profile target, but the same rules apply to smaller creators whose content reaches children.

Our take: For advertisers, the MrBeast case is a wake-up call. Partnering with creators brings unmatched reach, but sloppy disclosures or manipulative sweepstakes can create both regulatory and reputational headaches.