I didn't notice this until one day when Sarah Michelle Gellar (playing Buffy Summer, of course) said, very slowly and clearly "There's" with some plural predicate I can't remember. At the time, I thought it was some affectation of the 'Buffyverse,' but once my ears were opened, as it were, I realized that was, and had been used all the time, I just hadn't noticed. And I don't approve.
Already, although more rarely, it's turned into "There is several things...", negating the notion, which I've heard put forward, that this is a case of verb-object agreement following 'different rules for contractions. And the contagion creeps: I've heard "Here's" and "Where's," and their uncontracted equivalents used with plural predicates, not only on American television but on the BBC as well. And when you hear some Oxford professor on the History Channel, holding forth on matters of culture, say, in his plummiest accent, "There's several examples in Shakespeare of....", it's time to cry "Hold!"
The idea that is a 'new rule' that everybody must follow in order to be speaking correct English is, so to speak, crap. The fact that some grammarians accept it in informal speech doesn't make "there are" or "there're" (which I pronounce as "therror") incorrect. And 'Es gibt' is an idiom, and uses a transitive verb with a singular subject: 'es'. Do we not say 'The situation provides several benefits'? Would anyone say that's incorrect because the subject and the object don't agree in number? That rule doesn't even exist!
Let the people who smugly insist that 'between you and I' and 'I feel badly about that' are correct because they've become fashionable among the middle-class types go on saying 'there's several things'. I'm going to keep on screaming 'There are, you idiot!' at my TV set whenever I hear it, and correcting myself every time I catch myself using it.
I do, however, reserve the right to say "It don't make me no nevermind." I'm a Southerner.