TikTok Finally Bans Rendy_Vlad But Why Did It Take So Long?

Two of the world’s biggest social media platforms have now banned Cork influencer Vladyslav Morhulets, known online as Rendy Vlad. Instagram removed his account on 27 October 2026, followed by TikTok just two days later. However, the bans came months after reports of unwanted filming, public humiliation and videos involving vulnerable members of the public.

According to the Echo’s report published on 29 October 2026, TikTok banned Morhulets following further investigation into violations of its community guidelines. His account previously attracted more than 1.1 million followers and 13.6 million likes. Although the decision is welcome, it raises an uncomfortable question about how long people must endure intrusive behaviour before platforms intervene.

Two Platforms Finally Take Action

Earlier this week, Meta confirmed to the Irish Examiner that it had removed Morhulets’ Instagram account for repeated violations of its bullying and harassment policies. TikTok subsequently confirmed that it had also permanently banned his account after reviewing further violations. The company explained that its rules prohibit harassment, bullying and certain activities involving regulated products and services, including gambling.

However, these decisions did not happen in isolation. In April, the Irish Examiner reported that TikTok removed footage of a young woman receiving emergency medical treatment in Cork. Further reports documented the secret filming of retail employees and videos involving vulnerable people. Nevertheless, Morhulets continued attracting substantial online attention until both platforms eventually removed his accounts.

The latest Irish Examiner investigation into TikTok’s decision also highlighted videos linked to the promotion of Rainbet, an unregulated cryptocurrency gambling platform. TikTok referred to its rules concerning regulated and high risk commercial activities when explaining its enforcement policies. However, the company did not publicly establish which individual violations ultimately triggered its account ban.

The Harm Does Not Disappear When an Account Is Removed

For the people featured in these videos, removing an account does not automatically undo the consequences of unwanted exposure. Someone filmed at work or during a vulnerable moment may continue worrying about where the footage has circulated. Furthermore, screenshots and copied videos can remain accessible long after the original material disappears.

From a cyberpsychological perspective, the problem extends beyond individual videos. When creators gain attention through provocative encounters, that popularity can encourage further content of a similar nature. Meanwhile, audiences may view uncomfortable interactions as entertainment without considering how the person being filmed experiences them.

This is particularly concerning for children and teenagers who follow influential online personalities. Young people observe which behaviours attract followers, reactions and apparent success. Consequently, repeated exposure to humiliating content may contribute to the belief that provoking strangers is an acceptable way to gain recognition.

Why Did Stronger Enforcement Take Months?

TikTok’s decision raises questions about how social media companies identify repeated harmful behaviour. The platform had already removed individual videos before taking action against the entire account. Therefore, we should ask whether its moderation systems recognised the wider pattern quickly enough.

The issue is not simply whether a particular video violates a platform’s rules. Companies must also consider whether repeated incidents demonstrate an ongoing disregard for the dignity and privacy of others. Furthermore, they should examine whether recommendation systems are amplifying content that depends on making unwilling participants uncomfortable.

I welcome both account bans. However, I believe meaningful enforcement should begin when platforms identify serious and repeated violations, rather than only after widespread media attention. Effective online safety requires prevention as well as punishment.

Smart Glasses Remain a Serious Privacy Concern

Both Instagram and TikTok may have removed Morhulets’ accounts, but the technology used to record these encounters remains widely available. Camera equipped smart glasses can capture interactions without the obvious visual warning associated with someone holding a phone. Consequently, people may not realise that a conversation or uncomfortable encounter could appear online.

Ireland’s Data Protection Commission raised concerns about smart glasses recording indicators in 2021. Although Meta maintains that its glasses include visible recording indicators and safeguards against tampering, questions remain about whether members of the public consistently recognise when recording occurs. Manufacturers must therefore consider the privacy of people surrounding the wearer, not only the interests of the purchaser.

These concerns have also inspired the Stop Smart Glasses campaign, created by Liz Hunter in collaboration with Guy Holder, who launched the associated UK parliamentary petition. The campaign operates across Ireland and the UK and seeks restrictions on the mass market sale and promotion of camera equipped smart glasses. Importantly, it recognises the legitimate accessibility benefits these devices can provide for people with disabilities.

What Needs to Change?

The bans demonstrate that social media companies can take decisive action when they determine that an account repeatedly violates their policies. However, the real challenge is making that intervention timely, consistent and proportionate. Platforms should recognise patterns of harassment, strengthen reporting procedures and introduce escalating restrictions for repeated violations.

Furthermore, companies should review monetisation and recommendation systems that may reward humiliating content. Where individuals repeatedly target unwilling members of the public, platforms should examine the creator’s broader account history rather than treating each incident separately. Serious enforcement decisions must also remain evidence based and subject to appropriate appeal procedures.

Ireland’s Coimisiún na Meán provides guidance on reporting harmful and illegal online content. Nevertheless, the responsibility should not rest solely with victims who must repeatedly report footage after experiencing unwanted exposure. Prevention requires action from content creators, technology companies, regulators and the audiences that help such videos spread.

Two Accounts Banned. What Have We Learned?

In my previous CODA article on Rendy Vlad and online harassment, I questioned why someone whose conduct had attracted repeated complaints continued to command enormous online audiences. Two days after Instagram’s ban, TikTok finally took similar action. That development is significant, but it should also prompt scrutiny of the months that preceded it.

This case illustrates a wider failure to prioritise the rights of ordinary people in online entertainment. Social media companies have the technology to distribute content to millions within hours. Therefore, they must also develop effective systems to identify persistent harassment and intervene before additional people become targets.

The lessons extend far beyond this particular influencer. We need to teach children that popularity does not excuse cruelty and remind audiences that sharing humiliating content contributes to its reach. Above all, platforms must demonstrate that protecting people matters more than retaining the engagement generated by harmful behaviour.

Two platforms have finally acted. The real test is whether they have learned enough to prevent the next person from building an audience through someone else’s humiliation.

References

• Echo Live (29 October 2026). Cork-based Rendy Vlad banned from TikTok days after Instagram removes his account. Reports TikTok’s decision to ban the account following further investigation into community guideline violations.
• Irish Examiner (29 October 2026). TikTok removes account of Cork influencer after Instagram ban over harassment. Confirms the account removals and examines TikTok’s policies on harassment and regulated commercial activities.
• Irish Examiner (27 October 2026). Instagram removes account of Cork influencer Rendy Vlad. Details Meta’s decision following repeated violations of its bullying and harassment policies.
• Echo Live (3 April 2026). Cork prankster video violated TikTok rules. Reports the removal of footage involving a young woman receiving emergency medical treatment.
• Irish Examiner (12 May 2026). Who is TikToker Rendy Vlad and why is he covertly recording Cork shop workers?. Examines complaints from people filmed in their workplaces and the privacy concerns associated with smart glasses.
• Irish Examiner (25 July 2026). Cork influencer’s prank videos linked to promotion of unlicensed gambling operator. Investigates covert recording, commercial incentives and gambling promotion.
• Data Protection Commission (2021). Statement concerning Facebook View smart glasses. Explains the regulator’s concerns about recording indicators and public awareness.
• Government of Ireland. Digital Services Act. Outlines the European framework for online platform accountability.
• Coimisiún na Meán. What online content can I report?. Provides guidance on reporting potentially illegal content and concerns about online platforms.
• Stop Smart Glasses. Campaign website. Information about the campaign seeking restrictions on camera equipped smart glasses.

Further Reading

Explore these related CODA articles and safety guides for more information about online harassment, privacy, responsible digital behaviour and social media protection.

• Online Harassment: Why Are Platforms Still Giving It an Audience?Our original investigation examines Rendy Vlad’s reported activities, Instagram’s account removal, unwanted recording and why repeated harassment requires stronger platform accountability.
• Instagram Safety SettingsPractical guidance for managing privacy, followers, unwanted messages, abusive comments, account restrictions and reporting harassment on Instagram.
• Social Media Safety SettingsAccess CODA’s safety guides for TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat and other popular platforms. Learn how to strengthen account privacy, restrict unwanted interactions and report inappropriate content.
• X Safety SettingsDiscover how to manage account visibility, restrict replies, reduce unwanted interactions and report harassment on X.
• Resources for ParentsExplore CODA’s wider collection of guidance covering digital footprints, children’s privacy, social media, cyberbullying and safer online behaviour.

About Children of the Digital Age

Children of the Digital Age provides online safety education and training for schools, parents and organisations. Our guides support practical conversations about online behaviour and the choices people make. However, education and app settings do not replace safeguarding or professional support.

Send a message

Contact Children of the Digital Age to enquire about online safety education, parent sessions or training for your school or organisation.