Loading...
Title : "Right now, children online have zero protections in regard to their privacy, in regard to their labor, in regard to the income they’re generating for their family."
link : "Right now, children online have zero protections in regard to their privacy, in regard to their labor, in regard to the income they’re generating for their family."
"Right now, children online have zero protections in regard to their privacy, in regard to their labor, in regard to the income they’re generating for their family."
"If people are going to use children this way, these children deserve protections, just the way child stars have. Imagine being one of these kids and having every single day of your life exploited on a family vlog, and getting to be 18 and seeing nothing in your bank account. Or every moment of your life being monetized and commercialized, the invasion of privacy goes so deep."Said Sarah Adams, a "child-safety advocate," quoted in "There are almost no legal protections for the internet’s child stars/Illinois is considering a law, but a similar effort in Washington state failed, and Congress hasn’t tackled the issue" by Taylor Lorenz (WaPo).
There are so many issues mixed together here. The privacy question is very different from entitlement to the money if the material is successfully monetized. So many parents (and other relatives) put up photographs of children and would, I'm guessing, feel outraged to be told they are doing something wrong. Is government going to chill this free expression? Is it different if the parent's expression makes money? Does that turn the children into child laborers?
I'm not saying it is ethical to use children this way, just that it's invasive and repressive for government to try to do something about it.
The monetization only works because huge numbers of people watch videos that feature children. Would they watch if this material is in fact something that ought to be regarded as child abuse? The viewers are — to some extent — monitoring what is going on. Maybe we won't watch if we think the child isn't treated with great care and love (and at some point, we'll contact the authorities).
Loading...
"If people are going to use children this way, these children deserve protections, just the way child stars have. Imagine being one of these kids and having every single day of your life exploited on a family vlog, and getting to be 18 and seeing nothing in your bank account. Or every moment of your life being monetized and commercialized, the invasion of privacy goes so deep."
Said Sarah Adams, a "child-safety advocate," quoted in "There are almost no legal protections for the internet’s child stars/Illinois is considering a law, but a similar effort in Washington state failed, and Congress hasn’t tackled the issue" by Taylor Lorenz (WaPo).
There are so many issues mixed together here. The privacy question is very different from entitlement to the money if the material is successfully monetized. So many parents (and other relatives) put up photographs of children and would, I'm guessing, feel outraged to be told they are doing something wrong. Is government going to chill this free expression? Is it different if the parent's expression makes money? Does that turn the children into child laborers?
I'm not saying it is ethical to use children this way, just that it's invasive and repressive for government to try to do something about it.
The monetization only works because huge numbers of people watch videos that feature children. Would they watch if this material is in fact something that ought to be regarded as child abuse? The viewers are — to some extent — monitoring what is going on. Maybe we won't watch if we think the child isn't treated with great care and love (and at some point, we'll contact the authorities).
Thus articles "Right now, children online have zero protections in regard to their privacy, in regard to their labor, in regard to the income they’re generating for their family."
that is all articles "Right now, children online have zero protections in regard to their privacy, in regard to their labor, in regard to the income they’re generating for their family." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article "Right now, children online have zero protections in regard to their privacy, in regard to their labor, in regard to the income they’re generating for their family." with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2023/04/right-now-children-online-have-zero.html
0 Response to ""Right now, children online have zero protections in regard to their privacy, in regard to their labor, in regard to the income they’re generating for their family.""
Post a Comment