This blog post is offered by Regent Law 2L and recent Family Law student, Chandler Jones:
Whether we like it or not, social media has permeated American culture. Popular services like Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter allow people to connect and communicate with one another like never before. Businesses and organizations utilize these platforms to engage with prospective clients. "Influencers" are individuals hired to endorse various brands by posting, tweeting, and blogging on their own personal social media channels. Some influencers use photos and videos of their children for advertising purposes—hence the term "kidfluencers." For example, "The Bucket List Family" is a well-known family adored by Instagram users for their world travels, adorable children, and inspiring videos. Their account has almost two million followers, and they make money by posting advertisements along with their own original content. With that idyllic family image in mind, other parents are now attempting to navigate this new age of technology. As a result, legal issues regarding platform regulation must be addressed, because unfortunately not all parents act in their children's best interests. The reality is that when children are the sole content producers for their parents' social media channels, they are not legally contracted because they are legally incapacitated to do so, which leaves them more vulnerable to exploitation.
The heart-breaking story of YouTube Mom Machelle Hackney exemplifies the dangers of unrestricted media. Once Hackney's children became famous for their Fantastic Adventures on YouTube, they were taken out of school and subsequently abused for years. Subscribers could not see that behind the scenes the children were subjected to physical abuse when they failed to perform perfectly for their mother's videos. Although children generally receive formidable legal protection, the law has yet to adapt to the developing digital age, leaving children defenseless to scenarios like the Hackneys'. Some states have adopted The Coogan Law, which establishes labor conditions and fair compensation guidelines for child actors. Congress has even implemented the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act that requires online operators to have parental consent when collecting content from children under the age of thirteen years old. These specific laws are inapplicable to parents' specific use of children on social media platforms.
Two sides of the debate extend further within the family law context set as rivals parents and children. Some argue that when parents post without their children's consent, they violate their children's reasonable expectation of privacy. Because children do not typically have the means and power to file claims in the court of law against their parents, regulations are needed to protect them. Others argue that the ramifications of social media are so complicated because the parent's right to control the upbringing of their children can overpower their children's individual interests. From an ethical standpoint, damage to the familial system is exacerbated by social media because some parents choose money and fame over what is genuinely best for their children.
A family restoration perspective focuses on bringing parents' and children's concerns into perspective together, coinciding and working simultaneously to restore and strengthen the family unit. New policies to take on the kidfluencer concern may be just what is needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment