The Mail doesn't have sources for something like this. The "source" was a random thought in the author or editor's head and inserted into the piece because it would get a lot of clicks.
Seriously, the Mail is half a step above American supermarket tabloids. Have you ever read a news article in a reasonably respected publication about a subject you know a lot about and notice that they got a few basic facts wrong? The Mail is that times 1000. I've read stuff in the Mail about subjects I only know a little bit about, and they still manage to get numerous things wrong all the time. They don't even make it a practice to try to get basic facts right. They're all about driving clicks at the expense of respectability. No one should trust anything they write on any subject.
And I'm sure a lot of people are thinking that the media always gets stuff wrong and just wants clicks and eyeballs. And that's true! But the Mail is among the absolute worst - they don't even try to get things correct.
The Post is similar to the Mail. There are already mistakes before you even get to the fourth word of the article - in no reality would anyone consider Chris to be known primarily as vlogger. There is no original reporting in the entire piece - they just repeat stuff that other people have written. It's about what you would expect from an outlet who published a front page article about a Twitter troll who
joked that he mortgaged his parent's house to buy Gamestop stock.