Emily Gustafson

Professor ​​Boyle

ENG 170-34

March 19th 2022

Coogan for Kidfluencers

The world has completely evolved into a society that bases all of our successes on the quality of our digital footprint. Every second of every day, hundreds of thousands of photos and videos are shared online. With the rise of social media apps such as Instagram, TikTok, and Youtube, people have become comfortable with the aspect of showcasing their lives freely for the whole world to see. This change has also sparked the rise of “family vloggers”, Youtube channels filled with content featuring charming families and the happy memories they make with their kids. In the last ten years, these types of accounts have grown popular on the site because parents have realized that they can stay home and take care of their kids while still making a profit. 

However, under all the smiling trips to Disney is a whole dark underworld of exploitation. It only takes one video to grasp the attention of the world to make it big. These parents have taken it upon themselves to force their children to cry for thumbnails or evenfilm  intimate conversations involving sex and period talk. The dangers of these types of videos are that some of the young creators featured aren’t old enough to consent to these aspects of their lives being broadcasted for the whole world to see. These parents completely make a living out of overworking their children and posting private, intimate moments. We have seen Hollywood create child labor laws in order to protect its young stars. By enforcing and applying these same labor laws, Youtube can make sure that the young stars of the videos are making the profit they deserve. Youtube needs to take steps to protect its underage creators by enforcing Hollywood child labor laws such as the Coogan law on these channels and their AdSense so that the money belongs to the stars, not the parents.

One example of this exploitation that is common on the site is the use of clickbait thumbnails and titles in order to get views. Recently, mommy vlogger Jordan Cheyenne faced major backlash after leaving in a clip of her instructing her son to cry harder and pose for a thumbnail after explaining their dog was sick. According to an article published by Newsweek written by Danya Hajjaji, Hajjaji states “The camera kept rolling as the influencer instructed her son to look more upset for the video’s thumbnail. “Act like you’re crying,” she says, demonstrating an anguished expression. The boy replies: “But Mom, I’m actually crying””. Even though this clip was accidentally included in the vlog, it was enough to spark enough outrage and get people talking about exploitation on the site. Instead of comforting her child, she took it upon herself to use it as leverage for views on their channel. Like moths to a flame, people are drawn to drama. Youtube needs to ensure that content like this isn’t promoted because it promotes unhealthy parenting habits and encourages people to exploit private moments for a check. 

Another family channel that has recently received backlash for exploitative thumbnails and titles in order to get views goes by the name Yawi Vlogs. This channel has grown an audience by featuring puberty-related content. “In one video, the couple’s tween daughter could be seen fully dressed on the edge of a bathtub as her parents shaved her legs in an effort to teach her how to do it herself. For another vlog, the family took the same young girl shopping for her first bra. The video was titled “Becoming a Woman! I’m 11 and It FINALLY HAPPENED!” with a thumbnail featuring the child holding hangers with bras on them”(Hajjaji). Although these families post these as a way to savor memories and normalize this sort of talk between parents and children, they also do not realize the detrimental impacts of digital footprints. Not only that, but not everyone who is viewing this sort of content is viewing it for the right reasons. These children are way too young to consent to videos like these being uploaded and also do not understand that once something is uploaded, it is permanently online. 

There has also been an increase of blatant child abuse being shared to the video uploading site. One example of this is the Youtube channel DaddyOFive, who recently had two of their five children taken away from them after CPS was alerted over their numerous abusive “pranks” on their channel. The one that received the most from the media was a spilled ink prank done on their son Cody. In this video, according to an article published by The Washington Post by Abby Ohlheiser:

 Heather Martin, aka “MommyOFive”, is screaming. “Get your f–ing a – up here!” she yells at Cody, her young son. Mike Martin – “DaddyOFive”… follows along behind with the camera as Cody runs upstairs. Soon, he is yelling, too: “What the hell is that?”… Cody begins to cry. “I didn’t do that, he says, his face turning red. “I swear to God I didn’t do that. (Ohlheiser)

The parents continued to scream in their son’s face until they felt as though he had enough, switching to smiling happy faces and exclaiming it was a prank while their child was still shocked and in tears. Outraged bystanders who saw the video published online took their comments to twitter when their comment section was disabled. Even though the family claimed that these videos were nothing but light hearted pranks, it wasn’t enough to convince everyone who had seen the videos. The family eventually “lost custody of two of their five kids and ended up sentenced to probation for child neglect” (Hajjaji). This abuse case is one of the many featured on the site and it was thanks to the media that two kids were actually saved from an abusive home.

In Hollywood, there are certain laws and regulations put in place in order to ensure that sets are a safe working environment for children. One of these laws enacted is “The Coogan Law”. According to an article by Harper Lambert it states:The Coogan Law, which requires 15 percent of a child’s earnings to be deposited in a blocked trust account, is one of Hollywood’s key mechanisms for protecting minors from such exploitation. Enacted in 1939 after Jackie Coogan sued his parents for burning through the money he made as a child actor….(Lambert) With the creation of a Coogan account, the young stars are the only ones who are able to access any profits they have made. Youtube is a big time corporation that racks in millions of dollars from the views content creators like these receive. By ensuring they actually get the money they make, it would protect them from the dangers of exploitation done by their parents. 

However, some social media management companies have taken steps to protect the children they work with by only agreeing to sign kids to their company if they are protected by a Coogan account. For example, “Manager Byron Austen Ashley of Settebello Entertainment requires parents he works with to save their kids’ earnings” and his company only works with children “if they’re entirely protected by Coogan accounts” (Lambert). This is because usually the Coogan Law is only applied to children who are working for a third party. According to an article by Katherine Rosman published by The New York Times, she makes a point stating “the law is written about children being employed or placed under contract with third parties. When parents are paid by brands to post images and videos of their children on social media, or they make money from YouTube ads, are children owed anything?”.  It is hard to get bills and regulations passed because these mommy vloggers are run by stay at home parents, not big corporate companies. These families are the loophole in a big money management issue. However even though it isn’t Youtube itself protecting the kids, this is still a big step in the right direction because it shows that the problem is being noted. 

Another step that Youtube can take in order to ensure that its young creators are protected is by creating a way for them to private the videos they are featured in once they decide they do not want to be featured anymore. France is already one step ahead of us, already making “the right to privatization” play a big role in what is shared online. This means that once the child doesn’t consent to being featured online, the videos must be taken down regardless of what the parents say or think. According to an article by Marie-Andrée Weiss, it states:

…article 6 of the French law provides that parental authorization is not necessary for the child to exercise this right to be forgotten, even if the child is not yet fifteen years old. As such, a child influencer has been given the power to decide that videos featuring him or her must no longer remain online, even if the parents or guardians do not agree. (Weiss)

This is a major step in the representation of online child stars because it allows the child to be in control of what is being shared about them. Consent is a basic human right, and with the way that these mommy vloggers post anything and everything about them, it blurs the lines between what can and cannot be said on the platform. Youtube in the U.S should begin to apply the same laws that France has begun to enforce because it would ensure the stars are protected.

Youtube is single handedly raising a whole new generation of kids with a camera in their face. The problem with this exploitation isn’t jus the blatant abuse, but the fact that these same kids who are shown online throwing temper tantrums and bra shopping are our future doctors and educators. Your digital footprint is real, and anything that is posted online stays online. By taking the proper steps and ensuring that they have control over what parts of their lives are being broadcasted, it would make for a very easy future for them.

I was really excited when I first was given this topic because this has been something that I have been interested in for a while now. This topic is something that I am very passionate about because it is frustrating how abuse like this happens right under our noses. The ones that are covered in the headlines are just the surface level of this problem online. The one issue I ran into writing this paper was having to trim down the amount of information I wanted to include. While researching I ran into many examples of this abuse. As disheartening as it is to say, it was difficult to choose which cases to include in this paper. I feel like I did well with stating my case and using enough evidence to back up my points. However, my weakest point has to be my time management skills and me somehow making myself write this paper two days in advance. I feel as though I let the fear of self plagiarism get the best of me and that my paper is just a bunch of wasted potential. 

Works Cited

Hajjaji, Danya. “YouTube Lets Parents Exploit Their Kids For Clicks; From Puberty-Themed Videos to Divulging Intimate Private Details of Their Lives, YouTube’s Parent Vloggers Are Leaving Their Children Exposed.” Newsweek (Vol. 177, Issue 13), Newsweek LLC, 15 Oct. 2021, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A678991225/ITOF?u=newpaltz&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=aa044b44. 

Lambert, Harper. “WHY KIDFLUENCERS NEED A COOGAN LAW.” Hollywood Reporter (Vol. 425, Issue 27), Prometheus Global Media LLC, 14 Aug. 2019, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A597715892/ITOF?u=newpaltz&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=987e0cb2. 

Ohlheiser, Abby. “The Saga of a YouTube Family Who Pulled Disturbing Pranks on Their Own Kids.” The Washington Post, The Washington Post, 25 Apr. 2017, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A490565426/AONE?u=newpaltz&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=7dd80090. 

Rosman, Katherine. “They Make the Gerber Baby Look Like a Slacker.” The New York Times, The New York Times , 28 Sept. 2017, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A506907877/AONE?u=newpaltz&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=6bf2d56e. 

Weiss, Marie-Andrée. “Kid Influencers Are Indeed Working under New French Law.” The Licensing Journal, Sept. 2021, pp. 19–26. ABI/INFORM Collection, https://libdatabase.newpaltz.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/magazines/kid-influencers-are-indeed-working-under-new/docview/2629100495/se-2?accountid=12761. Accessed 21 Mar. 2022.