MOD & FOD #14 Who cares that my wife is going through hell; when there’s hair bands to lose and children to sell

Status
Not open for further replies.

JessicaFletcher

VIP Member
How does that work though? If a channel features a toddler say and the content is about meals toddlers eat, potty training etc. Then that content isn't for children its for adults or parents anyway it just features a child. What category does it fall into ?
I didn't get that either, I took it to mean you just had to declare if it was for children, so they can vet it as suitable for children?
 

bear_mum

Member
I’ve just spent far too long watching UGGs highlights (after someone showed her quote on the previous thread) and I LOVE her, she’s very funny. Please tell me she’s not like all the others?! (Hi by the way 👋🏼 Serial lurker, only followed the ODs out of morbid curiosity and had no clue who all these other instahuns were until following all this drama!)
 

Kingfisher

Member
I don't think that YouTube rule applies to the issue of using your children in videos, rather who your audience is. There definitely needs to be a distinction, and guidelines for influenzas who exploit their children incessantly for content. Though as others have pointed out before, it should really be covered by children's work laws??? If your child is making you money, surely they should be protected by those laws AND remunerated. Aside from the freebies and sponny holidays how much do you think is left Iver for the kids....?
 

Suzesnooze

VIP Member
How does that work though? If a channel features a toddler say and the content is about meals toddlers eat, potty training etc. Then that content isn't for children its for adults or parents anyway it just features a child. What category does it fall into ?
I think what the vlogger is saying is that if this is one change aimed at protecting children online then the next change she hopes to happen is that these mummy vloggers can’t use their children in their vlogs until the children are old enough to consent to it?
How does that work though? If a channel features a toddler say and the content is about meals toddlers eat, potty training etc. Then that content isn't for children its for adults or parents anyway it just features a child. What category does it fall into ?
I think the point the vlogger is making is that this is one step in protecting children and hopefully the next one will be to stop vloggers using their children online without their consent and that the law will change to protect them from this over exposure when they are too young to consent to it?
 

Wetmyplants

VIP Member
I’ve just spent far too long watching UGGs highlights (after someone showed her quote on the previous thread) and I LOVE her, she’s very funny. Please tell me she’s not like all the others?! (Hi by the way 👋🏼 Serial lurker, only followed the ODs out of morbid curiosity and had no clue who all these other instahuns were until following all this drama!)
UGG is one of the good ones 👍🏼
 

Fluffs

Active member
Oh I was too late for my thread submission!

‘Who cares that my wife is going through hell; when there’s hair bands to lose and children to sell’
That’s a good one too!
Just seen Clemmie T’s stories, going on about purpose and why she started her ‘lists’ on Instagram- anything for engagement eh!
I’ve also realised all the instamums have a sort of cover for their blagging, with CT it’s the lists, MOD was gasandair, all the mamas who sell over priced merch... but really, if they were only on Instagram to showcase these things they wouldn’t need to be selling pics of their kids online too would they?
But they all know that’s what’s needed for engagement - cute kids = ads.
Hope this makes sense, I’ve typed as I’ve thought so probably a bit incoherent! I’m also annoyed as it’s reminded me of all the bullshit “I’m doing these ads for you (the followers)” type posts 🙄
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
AdBlock Detected

Please disable your adblocker to use tattle

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks