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

91–100 of 243 posts

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

#91

Post by golergka »

stametseater wrote: post #80
golergka wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no "pressing need" for any art at all, or many other wonderful things that make our lives better. It's a very shitty criteria to determine whether something should be banned or not.

I find it hard to believe anybody could describe that cover as a "wonderful thing" that "made their life better." If it's really art for the sake of art, art justifying itself, then let it be done for free. I want the monetization of such things banned, because I don't think this is art for the sake of art. I think child modelling is done for the sake of commercial exploitation.

> I find it hard to believe anybody could describe that cover as a "wonderful thing" that "made their life better."

I didn't say that this art cover is such a thing. I attacked your criteria of a "pressing need" with this description, this argument is independent of discussion about this particular cover.

> I want the monetization of such things banned, because I don't think this is art for the sake of art.

I don't think anyone should be able to ban other people from committing voluntary transactions. The band wants to sell the album. I want to buy it. Somebody else's opinions on what is and what isn't art are not relevant to either of us.

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

#92

Post by mablopoule »

stametseater wrote: post #75
golergka wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should we make Nirvana's Nevermind cover illegal?

Was there ever a pressing need for that cover to exist in the first place? I don't think our society would be culturally impoverished if they had simply taken a picture of something else.

Yeah, society would absolutely be culturally impoverished if this would be considered off-limit.

Limiting the space of 'allowed' expression and saying it's okay because culture is not essential isn't really the best path to take as a society.

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

#93

Post by Eisenstein »

bnralt wrote: post #62
PeterisP wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You are making a moral judgement and applying it to everyone -- but I think you are in the minority in thinking that. Most people don't see children actors and think of them as being harmed and the production immoral.

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

#94

Post by nradov »

golergka wrote: post #70
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 make Nirvana's Nevermind cover illegal?

The subject of the Nevermind album cover actually filed a civil suit over child sexual exploitation. His case was dismissed because he had waited too long to file it, so the core legal issue hasn't really been adjudicated.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/05/entertainment/spencer-elden-n...

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

#95

Post by PuppyTailWags »

BurningFrog wrote: post #72
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…

AFAIK, it's empirically established that access to pornography lowers rape rates. So maybe access to videos of lightly dressed children, icky as it may feel, lowers the rate of pedophile rape.

The concern isn't that these children will be raped or that pedophiles will rape them. It's much more subtle: these are children who are taught from a young age to be exploited. They are taught not to have boundaries with strangers, to tie self-worth and sense of self to external validation, and to squash down their own feelings of discomfort or even danger in order to placate authority figures around them. These are all things that they will have to spend a lot of resources and time unlearning to grow into healthy adulthood, hampered by the fact that videos of their exploitation will be continually on the internet for everyone to see for the rest of their lives.

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

#96

Post by zomgwat »

ivraatiems wrote: post #78

I have some good friends who've gone the other way: they've asked that there be as close to no photos or videos of their child on any social media as possible. They don't post about him online, and they keep pictures of him in photo albums. When he was born, they asked all of us to please refrain from taking photos of him without their permission. I completely support this and I intend to do something similar for my…

My wife and I have done similar. We privately share photos. It took a bit for my mom to get over the fact that she can’t post pictures of her grandkids on Facebook but I was eventually able to explain why in terms she understood.

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

#97

Post by [deleted] »

stametseater wrote: post #75
golergka wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should we make Nirvana's Nevermind cover illegal?

Was there ever a pressing need for that cover to exist in the first place? I don't think our society would be culturally impoverished if they had simply taken a picture of something else.

[deleted]

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

#98

Post by [deleted] »

ivraatiems wrote: post #78

I have some good friends who've gone the other way: they've asked that there be as close to no photos or videos of their child on any social media as possible. They don't post about him online, and they keep pictures of him in photo albums. When he was born, they asked all of us to please refrain from taking photos of him without their permission. I completely support this and I intend to do something similar for my…

[deleted]

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

#99

Post by lotsofpulp »

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.

This reminds me of

https://arresteddevelopment.fandom.com/wiki/Milford_School

> Children should be neither seen nor heard.

Surely, kids can be seen in movies, tv shows, news articles about kids competitions or events, etc?

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

#100

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

Once again money is the root of all evil. What would be the downside if all videos that had any children in them were demonetized? In addition, buttons for sharing such videos would be automatically disabled. That means a parent could post the video and send links to family, but it would make it less likely for the video to go viral.

Looking at the example of culture even before the internet, kids who participate in entertainment from a young age end up often messed up. For example see the Jacksons (Michael being only the most prominent example in his family) as well as a multitude of child stars (Shirley Temple being the exception that proves the rule).

I bet once you removed the financial incentive a lot of this over sharing of kids’ lives would mostly stop.

Post reply on HN