Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

teenvogue.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 243 posts

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#61

Post by watwut »

PurpleRamen wrote: post #59
davidguetta wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have weirdly mixed feelings on your comment. - I agree that parents who publicize their children on social media are massive creep in my opinion, who do a massive invasion of the child privacy. That should almost be illegal in my opinion since the child can't consent. - At the same time saying that no skin should ever be shown ever because "it titills sexual creeps" is a dark road that points in a direction which i…

> Should we forbid children to go to the pool because sexual creeps might go there ? It's significant easier to hone your creepiness when you have an endless supply of training-material. It might even help you to discover this side of you in the first place. > On the other hand in many places of Northern europe nudity is more common even in public. Not with children. Even in Europe parents are generally quite protect…

I have seen naked toddlers in European swimming pools/lakes.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#62

Post by bnralt »

PeterisP wrote: post #39
bnralt wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always found it strange that child labor laws have an exception for acting. From what I've seen, acting is probably a worse job for kids than many of the jobs that are outlawed.

It's because an adult can do almost all jobs where child labor would be used, usually it's just that adults are more expensive; but in acting we don't really want to say that movies are prohibited to show kids or that all kid roles must be played by adult actors. Like, do we want to make a rule that a family drama must be filmed without showing that family's kids? If not, then we have to permit child acting at least…

You might well be right, but it's odd when you really think about it. We're allowing behavior we deem immoral or harmful to happen in cases where we think it makes our entertainment a bit better.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#63

Post by mlhpdx »

Why aren’t all the participants (influencers) in a performance (channel) automatically actors already? That seems obvious. We acknowledge people with blogs as writers and authors. Is the weird, made-up language around streaming an intentional obfuscation of the precedent in behavior and law?

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#64

Post by bnralt »

Eisenstein wrote: post #23
bnralt wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always found it strange that child labor laws have an exception for acting. From what I've seen, acting is probably a worse job for kids than many of the jobs that are outlawed.

You could argue that acting is a child doing something they want to do as artistic expression. Like, could you ban a kid from playing a concert if they are good at violin or piano; or could you ban them from selling their artwork or their singing?

People are fine with kids selling someone some arts and crafts they made, but most people don’t think children should be making things in factories. Likewise, a school play is completely different from the life that most children actors live.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#65

Post by sramam »

eloisant wrote: post #55
davidguetta wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have weirdly mixed feelings on your comment. - I agree that parents who publicize their children on social media are massive creep in my opinion, who do a massive invasion of the child privacy. That should almost be illegal in my opinion since the child can't consent. - At the same time saying that no skin should ever be shown ever because "it titills sexual creeps" is a dark road that points in a direction which i…

Going to the pool and posting online are 2 different things. I would be happy with a law forbidding to post public pictures of your underage kids, regardless of skin exposure.

Personally, I agree with your view-point.

However, the law you are proposing would prohibit a parent from posting an image of their child winning the spelling bee, in a full suit.

I have no idea how to thread this needle, outside making my personal choices.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#66

Post by watwut »

eloisant wrote: post #57
watwut wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would made half summer family albums on Facebook illegal. People share fotos of swimming kids on public spaces all the time. And no, those fotos are not sexy nor meant to be.

Do people really post their family albums publicly? Posting privately for your extended family yes, but that should never be posted publicly.

Yes they do. Internet if full of it. Usual intention is to show it to friends and family. In 99.99% of case, no one outside of family cares at all. The photos of kids posted on public albums nobody cares about are massively outnumbering youtube starts earning money on making their kids into internet stars.

The issue is trying to ban an innocent thing - photo of a kid in state normally seen in public vs "making kids perform for camera, encourage them children to form participate in parasocial relationships with the audience".

No kid ever build parasocial relationship by having photo in family album, even if public. And photos of kids are as old as photography.

One could make regulations about monetization of such things I guess. Monetization does not just happens randomly. You have to enter into contract with social network to send you money, you fill taxes. That could be workable, theoretically.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#67

Post by bcrosby95 »

NotACop182 wrote: post #10
PuppyTailWags wrote: post #7

This article unfortunately doesn't cover a much darker part of the TikTok children: exploitation of the children for the titillation of online creepers. The Some Place Under Neith podcast goes into this extensively [their "Parasocial Pits Of Hell" series]. It's completely legal to vlog your children in swimming outfits or a similar level of skin exposure, have the children sing or perform for their "fans", and encour…

Same can be said about child beauty contest.

My wife and I watched a season of this stuff just to gawk at how terrible/creepy it was. Then we felt bad about contributing towards its popularity and stopped.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#68

Post by watwut »

_fat_santa wrote: post #19
bhouston wrote: post #5

I guess the solution is to try to take some of the law's protecting child actors and apply them to influencers? https://www.wrapbook.com/blog/child-actor-labor-laws I think it is hard, because influences are in random jurisdictions and just arise without much structure. Maybe it can be controlled at the platform level, like YouTube and TikTok as they are the ones funnel money to these influencers? It would require so…

The problem I see here is where would the "line" be? That is, when does that video you post on Instagram of your family at Disney or someone blowing out candles at a birthday stop being just a family video and starts being content? I guess the easy way to make that distinction would be if your content is "monetized" but even then it seems like there are many loopholes and gotchas.

When it earns money? When you just post video on Instagram, there is no way you will get money magically. You need to enter into contract somehow. That goes for any social network. Literally none of them will send you money unless you actively initiates it.

Re: Influencer parents and the kids who had their childhood made into content

#70

Post by golergka »

davidguetta wrote: post #25
PuppyTailWags wrote: post #7

This article unfortunately doesn't cover a much darker part of the TikTok children: exploitation of the children for the titillation of online creepers. The Some Place Under Neith podcast goes into this extensively [their "Parasocial Pits Of Hell" series]. It's completely legal to vlog your children in swimming outfits or a similar level of skin exposure, have the children sing or perform for their "fans", and encour…

I have weirdly mixed feelings on your comment. - I agree that parents who publicize their children on social media are massive creep in my opinion, who do a massive invasion of the child privacy. That should almost be illegal in my opinion since the child can't consent. - At the same time saying that no skin should ever be shown ever because "it titills sexual creeps" is a dark road that points in a direction which i…

Should we make Nirvana's Nevermind cover illegal?
Post reply on HN