Youtube Childstardom

As society continues to reckon with the long-term consequences faced by child actors, a new form of exploitation is emerging and it's unfolding on our screens every day. The lives of children are increasingly being exposed online by their own families, turning minors into monetized "kidfluencers" without adequate protections.

While a handful of states — including California, Illinois, Minnesota, Hawaii, Montana, and Utah — have started to introduce legislation, a concerning legal gap remains. These new protections include:

Financial Protections:

Similar to the Coogan Law for child actors, some states now require a portion of earnings from online content to be placed in trust accounts for children until they reach adulthood.

Privacy Protections:

Certain laws grant minors the right to request removal of their images and personal content from the internet upon reaching a certain age.

Age Restrictions:

Some legislation restricts children under a specific age from being used as content creators altogether.

Yet, in states where no such protections exist, children remain vulnerable. Their images, stories, and sometimes even traumas, shared for public consumption without informed consent. The consequences of this modern-day digital child labor are only beginning to surface, and we’re likely to hear more from this generation as they grow up and process the long-term effects of life lived online.

Take the case of Ruby Franke, whose family YouTube channel "8 Passengers" amassed over 2.6 million followers before it was shut down amid a devastating child abuse case. The smiling thumbnails masked a much darker reality. One where children suffered once the cameras stopped rolling.

Even in less extreme situations, the harm is real:

The loss of privacy

The constant pressure to perform

The emotional toll of online fame

The inability to develop a personal identity away from the screen

The burden of being tied to family income

Exposure to online bullying and predators

The irony is that parents running these channels often grew up in eras without smartphones, let alone monetized family content. They enjoyed the freedom of unrecorded childhoods, something their children may never experience.

Psychologists are starting to raise alarms. As noted in Psychology Today and the Netflix documentary Bad Influence, the psychological strain placed on children raised in front of the camera is real and often overlooked.

"Psychologists recognize the harm of parentification, a dynamic in which children take on adult responsibilities to meet a caregiver’s emotional or practical needs. In kidfluencing households, this often manifests as performance pressure, public exposure, and the internalization of adult expectations — without the maturity to cope." (Hooper, 2007)

"According to Erikson’s theory of psychosocial development, adolescence is a critical stage for identity exploration. For children raised online, this process is stifled. When they are finally given the space to make mistakes or exist offline, they may realize they no longer know who they are — only who the algorithm wanted them to be: cute, funny, and obedient." (Erikson, 1968)

A Call to Consciousness

I urge everyone to think critically about the content they consume. Supporting "family vloggers" may seem harmless, but every view is a vote. One that is often contributing to a child’s lack of privacy, autonomy, and emotional safety.

While not every vlogging parent is abusive, even the most well-meaning ones can unknowingly inflict harm by turning everyday moments into content. We don’t yet fully understand the psychological cost of this phenomenon, but we will. As these children grow up, they will speak out.

The legal system must catch up. More protections must be put in place. And those who use their children for fame and profit, especially in cases of abuse, must be held accountable.

Let the message ring out clearly:

We will no longer tolerate the exploitation of children for content without protection or consequence.