Child labour laws must be urgently strengthened to stop young social media influencers from being exploited by their parents, MPs say

[LimeGoss]

• MPs are urging the government to regulate the growing online influencer market
• Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee called for tougher advertising rules
• Concerns that child influencers could be exploited by adults to maximise profits
• Last year, up to half of children said they watched vlogger or YouTube content

MPs have urged the government to regulate the influencer market amid concerns that child influencers could be overworked to maximise profits.


Ministers have also been told to boost advertising laws to force influencers to make it clear when advertising products - in order for children to develop 'media literacy' and prevent harmful ideas around body image from taking hold.

The report by the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) Committee says child labour regulations should be brought up to date to reflect the growth of child influencers.

'Child viewers, who are still developing digital literacy, are in particular danger in an environment where not everything is always as it seems,' said Tory MP Julian Knight, the chairman of the committee.

'There is a woeful lack of protection for young influencers who often spend long hours producing financially lucrative content at the direction of others.'

He added that 'inaction' had left regulations behind the times in a digital world, and that was particularly concerning when it came to the protection of children.

According to Ofcom, last year up to half of all children said they watched vlogger or YouTube influencer content and 'kidfluencers' can earn as much as £100,000 per month.

Successful child influencers in Britain include 14-year-old Tiana Wilson from Nottingham, who has 11.4million Youtube subscribers, and football expert Lorenzo Greer, 13, with 1.7million followers. There is nothing to suggest these children have been exploited, The Times reports.

In the US, 11-year-old toy tester Ryan Kaji has emerged as a phenomenally successful influencer, with 32 million subscribers and projected earnings of almost $30 million.

The committee urged the Government to conduct a study into the influencer industry so it can be properly regulated as it grows - as well as manage rules around pay standards and practice, and advertising regulators be given more power to close influencer loopholes.

They also called for an official code of conduct for influencer marketing to be commissioned.

Mr Knight said: 'The rise of influencer culture online has brought significant new opportunities for those working in the creative industries and a boost to the UK economy.

'However, as is so often the case where social media is involved, if you dig below the shiny surface of what you see on screen you will discover an altogether murkier world where both the influencers and their followers are at risk of exploitation and harm online.'

The committee's report said it had heard concerns during its inquiry that some children within the influencer economy were being used by parents and family members - who often manage their online accounts - who were seeking to capitalise on the lucrative online market.

'The explosion in influencer activity has left the authorities playing catch-up and exposed the impotence of advertising rules and employment protections designed for a time before social media was the all-encompassing behemoth it has become today,' Mr Knight said.

'This report has held a mirror up to the problems which beset the industry, where for too long it has been a case of lights, camera, inaction.


'It is now up to the Government to reshape the rules to keep pace with the changing digital landscape and ensure proper protections for all.'

---
The times

Plea for new child labour laws to protect young influencers | News | …

archived 9 May 2022 06:49:45 UTC

archive.ph

Influencers and followers need more protection, say MPs

MPs say the growth of online culture has outpaced employment and advertising regulations.

www.bbc.co.uk

----
Posting this in one thread so we can chat about it here together rather than in all the individual threads.

 

[sewcute]

The Saccone Jolys must be shitting themselves!
Let’s hope something gets done!

 

[sleepingsatellite]

The Saccone Jolys must be shitting themselves!
Let’s hope something gets done!

I think it’s not enough to look at children’s rights from a labour angle, what about the effects on their mental and physical health after living out their formative years so publicly?

 

[Axatogrind]

Took them long enough.

The articles appear to be centred around "child influencers" and "young social media stars". It needs to be clear that this extends to "children of parent influencers" who aren't marketed as stars in their own right per se, and ANY child being exploited online.

 

[DietGossip]

I'd be really interested to see some kind of ruling that the money earned by these children should go into accounts for them that their parents cannot touch. Might change a lot of parent's attitudes toward kidfluencers...

 

[Yel]

No shit , we've been saying this for years while the media and influencers have gone on about tattle being the worst site on the internet. I always said they should be the ones worried about regulators catching up with their murky ways. Although that'll probably still be a long way off.

DCMS Committee Chairman Julian Knight said: "If you dig below the shiny surface of what you see on screen you will discover an altogether murkier world, where both the influencers and their followers are at risk of exploitation and harm online."

Mr Knight continued: "The explosion in influencer activity has left the authorities playing catch-up, and exposed the impotence of advertising rules and employment protections designed for a time before social media was the all-encompassing behemoth it has become today.

"This report has held a mirror up to the problems which beset the industry, where for too long it has been a case of lights, camera, inaction.

"It is now up to the Government to reshape the rules to keep pace with the changing digital landscape and ensure proper protections for all."

The Competition and Markets Authority told the inquiry that influencer compliance rates with UK advertising regulations are still unacceptably low.
In 2020, a monitoring exercise by the ASA found that just 35% of 24,000 marketing posts on the Instagram accounts of 122 UK-based influencers were clearly labelled as adverts..

 

[WeepingCassandra]

I 100% believe that in 20 - 30 years time people will look back at this 'era' of internet use and wonder what the actual fuck was going on and how people couldn't see the blatant exploitation and damage being done to kids and teenagers on social media. This is a great step towards changing for the better when it comes to young people.

 

[BusyDoinNuffin]

Took them long enough.

The articles appear to be centred around "child influencers" and "young social media stars". It needs to be clear that this extends to "children of parent influencers" who aren't marketed as stars in their own right per se, any ANY child being exploited online.

Absolutely! The suggestion here is that children who CHOSE to become influencers are being worked too hard. The biggest problem we are seeing are parents who CHOSE to become influencers or have a presence which invariably makes them one, using their children for content, engagement and ultimately cash cows.

 

[Yel]

Took them long enough.

The articles appear to be centred around "child influencers" and "young social media stars". It needs to be clear that this extends to "children of parent influencers" who aren't marketed as stars in their own right per se, and ANY child being exploited online.

Agreed, the ryan's toy reviews types are the thin end of the wedge.

All of the children that have been turned into content in order to generate money for the parents need to be protected. From mrs hinch using her children to sell child products and the inghams home schooling their kids in order to generate daily vlogs. For many of these people the children is the content.

 

[SilentCW]

I honestly don't think any Child can fully comprehend what this all means and cannot give proper consent to be an "INFLUENCER".

A child needs to have a childhood for as long as possible, they do not need to be on the Internet through some of their most awkward times of life.

I challenge anyone to say they don't have things they are embarrassed about from their childhoods that haunts them till this day and then to compound that with it being on the Internet for the whole world to see.

Nope... kids must be kids. Discover themselves and mostly have fun.

 

[StatusWoe]

I think this could be a really important and significant step (that's assuming it leads to changes in the law). It's easy to see how exploitative some social media/influencer channels can be, and it's a market that's developed so rapidly that legislation just hasn't caught up yet.

 

[Axatogrind]

Let's also see some rigour around things like broadcasting children's medical conditions & details, personal information (home address, school - or enough clues to easily work them out) etc.

 

[PartTimeNoseyWitch]

Along with the obvious wrong of parents gaining money from posting their children they also put them at risk of ending up on the dark web and viewed by pae**philes. I saw a mini documentary on TikTok a few days ago where they showed some of the images which end up on there and they were fully clothed, normal photos and these sickos rate them on stomach churning things like ****ability - apologies it’s awful to think about but it made me decide to never post a single photo of my kids online ever. And some of these people are literally posting knowing the risks but see the pound signs and don’t care!

 

[Somersetvibes]

A child (especially a baby or a toddler) or someone who is unable to understand/verbalise their thoughts/feelings, should absolutely NOT be plastered all over the Internet, in books etc (and let's be honest, used for content) by their parents or guardian.

About time!

 

[Whatevesmate]

The Saccone Jolys must be shitting themselves!
Let’s hope something gets done!

Was talking to my (adult) daughter about them just this morning and she was horrified! This legislation is long overdue to protect vulnerable kids from being exploited by foul, influencer poncing-parent types

 

[GingerWhinger]

About time something was done, it’s a start.

 

[thetis]

All the odious 'family vloggers' need to be slapped in the face with this. I can't even watch their videos because I feel weird watching some stranger's children go about their day, but Saccone Jolys took it to the next level. I feel terrible for all the innocent, unaware kids who are being used as their parents' cash cow. I don't care what the general opinion is, I think it's a form of abuse. Even if the children say they want to be on camera, they don't understand and won't understand the long term effects until years later. I wouldn't feel a crumble of sympathy for the parents for what they could face but the kids deserve better.

 

[Niamh77*]

Would this apply to children used in videos without their consent ? so many influencers use their kids for content ,views ie their income . I think it is dreadful personally

 

[Lalla]

A child (especially a baby or a toddler) or someone who is unable to understand/verbalise their thoughts/feelings, should absolutely NOT be plastered all over the Internet, in books etc (and let's be honest, used for content) by their parents or guardian.

About time!

I agree with this entirely!

I had a friend who was a child catalogue model from the age of 8 or so. From what I remember it was her wanting to do it rather than her parents making her do it. The family were well off so didn't need the money (not that she was paid much as this was in the 80s!). Although she got some kudos from it at first, the older we got other kids made comments that would take the piss out of what she was wearing in the photos, especially if it was swimwear or underwear etc. Back then most families had at least one of those catalogues at home so we'd all see her. She gave it up at about 12/13 mainly out of embarrassment/ awkwardness, but even then, those old catalogues were still knocking around for a few years and still being mentioned at school.

That was uncomfortable enough (and I'm sure is the reason why none of her own children have done any modelling themselves) but she was older, she wanted to do it, stopped when she didn't want to any more, and the extent of it was her posing awkwardly in shit clothes in about 20 different pictures. No one other than locally knew her, or her family, where she lived or what her bedroom looked like, or what she had for lunch (stuff we now see with instafamilies every day)

But compare it to now - the instakids of today whose every move is plastered all over the gram from when they're babies, not only do they have no say in it, no chance to consider if it's what they want or not, this stuff is online forever potentially. It's not a catalogue which will get chucked away in 6 months.

I can't imagine how the kids of some of these instabeggars will fare at school given they've been living in the Truman show since birth.

 

[Whatevesmate]

I was approached in Covent Garden once by a model scout who was interested in representing my daughter, who was an extraordinarily beautiful child. She was about 8 months old at the time.

Obviously I'm hugely biased but this confirmed that she is objectively, extremely pretty. The agent was telling me that I could make lots of money and be her manager, etc. Erm, no ta

My eldest told my youngest this when she was about 8 and she was OUTRAGED that I'd "denied her this opportunity". Years later she has said unequivocally, thank fuck you said no, mum!! Confirmation that children cannot give consent despite what they might say at the time. Not that ever I doubted this anyway.