Chinese paparazzi published what was deemed a major exposé on influencer Tu Xiaodi (also known as iamroosie). However, instead of sparking outrage, the revelations were largely met with ridicule and sarcasm from netizens.
According to paparazzi accounts, Tu Xiaodi survives by repeatedly borrowing money or asking men to pay on her behalf. The claims suggest that his daily life revolves around sending payment links and requests for financial help, ranging from food deliveries and grocery bills to medical bills and medications. The complaint also stated that when some men refused to pay, Tu Xiaodi threatened to expose the private chats.
Despite the sensational framing, public reaction quickly turned disdainful. Many netizens pointed out that evidence of so-called “gold digging” amounted to mundane expenses such as milk tea, takeaway meals and daily necessities rather than luxury cars, properties or expensive gifts typically associated with the label.
Online comments mocked both the complaint and the men involved, questioning why screenshots involving such small sums were leaked. Some users asked sarcastically whether a single cup of milk tea now qualifies as “mined for gold,” while others criticized the paparazzi for publicizing the story only to provide what they described as content “Not even enough to scratch the itch.”
Others aimed criticism at the anonymous men who allegedly leaked the chat logs, calling them stingy and suggesting that exposing someone for minor expenses reflected poorly on them rather than Tu Xiaodi. A number of netizens even joked that the paparazzi should do it instead reveal the identities of so-called “cheap male celebrities” involved.
The controversy comes amid increased attention on Tu Xiaodi following his previous livestream claims, which had previously brought Luhan under public scrutiny due to unverified allegations. As in that situation, reactions remain divided, but skepticism towards unverified reports seems to be growing.
Ultimately, while the paparazzi attempted to frame Tu Xiaodi as a calculating opportunist, online opinion suggests that the attempt failed. Rather than damage its image, the complaint instead reignited criticism of rumor-based reporting and raised doubts about the credibility and motivations behind such leaks.
Sources: Weibo
