5 ms·

good.

by reality_inspctr 3y ago

good.

donatj 3y ago
Why?
- smt88 3y ago
  Because children are under the control of their parents and can't consent to thousands/millions of adults watching them. This is no different than regulations around child actors, which are widely considered good and necessary protections of vulnerable children.
  - donatj 3y ago
    Yes, but their parents can consent for them. This argument is weirdly circular.
    - smt88 3y ago
      > Yes, but their parents can consent for them. The point is that there are some things so risky for kids that parents shouldn't be able to "consent for them". One of those things is child labor. > This argument is weirdly circular. Circular doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. Parents have control over their children, but society has put boundaries on what they can do to them because parents are capable of great harm. There's nothing circular about that.
- hello_computer 3y ago
  Because it is child labor.
  - donatj 3y ago
    How so? Someone recording you seemed utterly unlike being in a coal mine.
    - the_only_law 3y ago
      Ah yes, as well all know labor is exclusively equivalent to working in coal mines.
      - donatj 3y ago
        The entire point of child labor laws was to get kids out of dangerous situations like working in coal mines. Being recorded isn’t labor, isn’t dangerous. Isn’t negative at all.
        hello_computer 3y ago
        Until some 7-yr-old's munchausen-by-proxy mom puts him on puberty blockers for social media updoots.
        xboxnolifes 3y ago
        Seems like the other thing is the issue here.
        smt88 3y ago
        > Being recorded isn’t labor, isn’t dangerous. Isn’t negative at all. Tell that to Brooke Shields and many other children who were sexualized on camera with the consent of their parents and still have psychological damage. There have also been parents who literally tortured their children on YouTube for laughs[1]. 1. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/child-abuse-charges-against-youtube-channel-s-mom-underscore-lack-n985526 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/child-abuse-charges-aga...
    - t-writescode 3y ago
      In this comment, the goal post has been moved from "child labor" to "working in a coal mine as a child". Certainly working in a coal mine is worse, but they are both child labor.
    - hello_computer 3y ago
      The title was "Illinois set to define using your kids in social media videos as child labor", not "Illinois set to define using your kids in social media videos as coal mining."
- t-writescode 3y ago
  They're literally child actors. It is child labor. It's regularly exploitative and should be under at least the same laws as child actors are under, with all the protections in place that child actors have for the money they earn, etc. And while we're at it, we should probably re-evaluate child actor laws to make sure they're sufficiently protected from the bad actor and actor strategies that have evolved since the original child actor laws have gone through.
- garrettjoecox 3y ago
  “Mommy vlogging” as it’s been called, is disgusting but openly accepted child exploitation across YouTube and TikTok. Especially the cases where the children are obvious victims of abuse. Some people literally use (and treat) their children as props, for internet points.

good.

donatj 3y ago

Why?

smt88 3y ago
Because children are under the control of their parents and can't consent to thousands/millions of adults watching them. This is no different than regulations around child actors, which are widely considered good and necessary protections of vulnerable children.
- donatj 3y ago
  Yes, but their parents can consent for them. This argument is weirdly circular.
  - smt88 3y ago
    > Yes, but their parents can consent for them. The point is that there are some things so risky for kids that parents shouldn't be able to "consent for them". One of those things is child labor. > This argument is weirdly circular. Circular doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. Parents have control over their children, but society has put boundaries on what they can do to them because parents are capable of great harm. There's nothing circular about that.
hello_computer 3y ago
Because it is child labor.
- donatj 3y ago
  How so? Someone recording you seemed utterly unlike being in a coal mine.
  - the_only_law 3y ago
    Ah yes, as well all know labor is exclusively equivalent to working in coal mines.
    - donatj 3y ago
      The entire point of child labor laws was to get kids out of dangerous situations like working in coal mines. Being recorded isn’t labor, isn’t dangerous. Isn’t negative at all.
      - hello_computer 3y ago
        Until some 7-yr-old's munchausen-by-proxy mom puts him on puberty blockers for social media updoots.
        xboxnolifes 3y ago
        Seems like the other thing is the issue here.
      - smt88 3y ago
        > Being recorded isn’t labor, isn’t dangerous. Isn’t negative at all. Tell that to Brooke Shields and many other children who were sexualized on camera with the consent of their parents and still have psychological damage. There have also been parents who literally tortured their children on YouTube for laughs[1]. 1. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/child-abuse-charges-against-youtube-channel-s-mom-underscore-lack-n985526 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/child-abuse-charges-aga...
  - t-writescode 3y ago
    In this comment, the goal post has been moved from "child labor" to "working in a coal mine as a child". Certainly working in a coal mine is worse, but they are both child labor.
  - hello_computer 3y ago
    The title was "Illinois set to define using your kids in social media videos as child labor", not "Illinois set to define using your kids in social media videos as coal mining."
t-writescode 3y ago
They're literally child actors. It is child labor. It's regularly exploitative and should be under at least the same laws as child actors are under, with all the protections in place that child actors have for the money they earn, etc. And while we're at it, we should probably re-evaluate child actor laws to make sure they're sufficiently protected from the bad actor and actor strategies that have evolved since the original child actor laws have gone through.
garrettjoecox 3y ago
“Mommy vlogging” as it’s been called, is disgusting but openly accepted child exploitation across YouTube and TikTok. Especially the cases where the children are obvious victims of abuse. Some people literally use (and treat) their children as props, for internet points.