Stop Posting Kids On the Internet

Family channels are one of the most marketable niches on social media. The content is advertiser-friendly and gains the attention of a plethora of sponsors. If you don't know what family channels are, I envy you.

In all seriousness, family content is a corner of the internet where people share their experiences as caregivers for the world to see. The inspiration behind this post is the Youtuber, Smokey Glow. She has made plenty of content centered around the immorality of family channels, propelling me to do the same.

(Smokey Glow has a degree in social work and her videos below share great educated opinions. I can't recommend them enough.)

• (https://youtu.be/RMJGN_RNG78) (An overview on family channels as a whole.)

• (https://youtu.be/hym3hdoiVHo) (The Stauffer family situation explained.)

It goes without saying that there are exceptions to this genre of content. Having parenting resources is priceless, and the occasional baby photo isn't inherently exploitive. The problem grows knarled, calcified roots when money is brought into the equation.

Monetized channels that center around families, especially young children, will often use relatability to generate income. By the time a toddler can walk, they've already become employed for their parents' brand. These children are expected to participate in content to contribute to the family's income.

It is an incredible breach of privacy to habitually post children for commercial gain. Smokey Glow, also known as Hannah, put it best when she mentioned consent. These children rely on their parents to make decisions in their favor. They can't consent to their childhood being content for millions of consumers.

Deeply personal details about a child's life can be available for criticism and scrutiny from onlookers. Medical information, milestones, and emotions are all recorded, posted, and monetized. A lot of the time, I'll see this content shielded under the guise of openness. These parents are being vulnerable and "real" about having a family.

Recently, Youtuber Jordan Cheyenne got caught forcing her kid to pose for a thumbnail. Her video describes the family's puppy being diagnosed with parvo and the effect it had on everyone. Cheyenne accidentally left footage of her scrutinizing her young child for not crying correctly and ignoring their emotions in favor of creating content. Once again proving how far family channels are willing to go to look relatable.

Neurodivergent children often fall victim to this sage-like mentality as well. Videos detailing "the reality of raising a child with XYZ" are purposely created for profit. Meaning that these parents can capitalize off their children's medical background without their child's consent.

Myka and James Stauffer are infamous examples of this. For those unaware, the Stauffers adopted a child from China who happened to have several medical conditions. For years, the Stauffers informed their subscribers about the state of their child's development, health, and transition into the family. Eventually, having this child was "too much" for them, and the Stauffers got rid of them.

In my opinion, this is what happens when you merge family and finances. They constantly exploited their infant's trauma and mental health until it didn't benefit them. The child was a branch of content for the Stauffers, and they had no issue using them for monetary gain. The backlash from this got so intense that Myka deleted her channel altogether.

Influencers can use their children as props in photos and as talent in videos, both without consent and compensation. There are no guarantees that the foundation of these channels, the children, will receive any money or protection while "working."

Individuals may have their lives from infancy to young adulthood on display without any safety net. Content creators are within their right to share unfiltered details about their kids, unfortunately.

Not to mention, being posted by your parents can be humiliating. Very rarely do I see a child online acting like a child without being villainized. Babies cry relentlessly through the night. Toddlers throw tantrums. Teenagers have fragile moments while navigating intense emotions for the first time. At no point in life are they safe from the camera.

Even if these people can get these posts down by age eighteen, countless viewers have already seen these videos. Even if their faces are never shown on camera, stigmatizing details can't be unshared.

One point that I see brought up is that the caregivers are "sharing their own journey." Personally, that doesn't bother me too much when done in good taste.

It's often cathartic for people to explain unreasonable parenting expectations and how it affects their mental health. Parenting forums provide a place for caregivers to trade tips help provide insight. This can fall through when details related to the child are overshared and when uneducated caregivers spread misinformation.

There are several solutions to these problems that ensure the protection of children in internet content. Hannah provides several attainable policies, and I want to share my favorites.

She proposes a union for these kids, an idea I love since it can provide clear-cut standards for content. A second point she made details the number of hours children can work for their influencer parents. Hannah makes a very real (and frankly scary) point that these kids have no way of clocking in and out of work, so to say. The solution she gives is to have a limited amount of minutes in one video. Basically, kids could only appear in a percentage of a video.

I think it's crucial to hold these influencers and their sponsors accountable. Clear boundaries need to be set when promoting a product. Going back to Myka, there was once a time where she used her baby to sell laundry detergent and attributed that to their bond.

YIKES.

I'd like to think that a boycott against companies that let their influencers exploit children is an effective solution as well. It's tricky due to the millions of dollars this industry can make, but it's a start. If you want solid parenting advice, there are several professional routes you can go. Deplatforming an influencer is controversial but in the end, holding these people accountable is too important.

Be sure to understand the people you support. Children, especially young children, are individuals and cannot consent to endorsing sponsors, being online, or being filmed.

Frankly, I find it morally irresponsible to take the choice of internet presence away from someone. We all remember being embarrassed over our baby photos, so why would we make them accessible and profitable to millions of people? Respect children as individual people and don't view them as extensions of their caregivers.