The Ethical Crisis in Family Vlogging
The Ethical Crisis in Family Vlogging
By: Meg North
Picture being followed by a camera and having your life documented, the good and the bad, for millions to see. Now imagine being a child under such a microscope. The ethics of family vlogging are widely talked about, and in recent years, its sinister undertones have been impossible to ignore. There has been a slow rise in family channels since 2008, with the account ‘The Shaytards’ being one of the first to post videos of their family online. They grew quickly in popularity, reaching over 4.9 million subscribers. The Ace family, Sacconejolys, Family Fizz, to name just a few, all followed in their footsteps, sharing their everyday lives on the internet, from simple shopping challenges to birth vlogs. Home-style video uploads have evolved into a billion-dollar industry, where children are the stars but many are demanding laws to protect the faces on camera behind the scenes.
A 2019 Pew Research Centre study found that videos featuring children under 13 garnered three times as many views as other videos, regardless of whether the content is aimed at children. It is a genre of content which clearly attracts the masses, and with a following comes brand deals, AdSense, and merchandise, with the family being the brand.
The ACE family has over 18.3 million subscribers and their top partnership with Best Fields have racked up 18 million views. Using a YouTube sponsorship calculator, it is estimated that their channels ad revenue is $1.4 million dollars a year. An even more extreme example would be ‘Kids Diana Show’, whose channel has over 100 million subscribers- their Google AdSense is estimated to total $112 million a year. Another example would be ‘Ryans World’, a powerhouse in children’s content, in 2021, merchandise sales alone brought in over $250 million, with the family earning at least $25 million from these sales. You can see the attraction of this type of content for parents, but at what cost?
The 8 Passengers
A harrowing example would be the case of the once popular ‘8 Passengers’, led by mother Ruby Franke. They built a mass following sharing their life as a devout Mormon household, raising six children. The channel had more than 2.6 million subscribers before being taken down, with Franke posting five days a week. She told local news at the time of her channel’s success that filming her family helped her “live in the present and just enjoy the kids” but some moments began a concerned discourse online. Her parenting techniques began to be questioned when her children’s dinners were withheld as a disciplinary measure, and her oldest son revealed that he had been sleeping on a bean bag for seven months after playing pranks on his siblings.
Concern turned to outrage in 2023 when Franke was arrested and later pleaded guilty to child abuse, receiving a maximum sentence of up to 60 years. Away from the camera, the kids were subjected to beatings, starvation, described as “horrific and inhumane”. The shocking case has sparked increased debates surrounding children’s safety behind the camera. In a recent podcast, ‘The Squeeze’, the eldest son, Chad Franke recounts his experience, describing the constant nature of the camera. He states, “If someone fell, hit their head or if I had a bad day at school.. that’s drama, that’s pain, that’s content and she really knew that and fed off of it”. He goes on to describe how his mother treated their home like a set, and the invasive camera and unhappiness only started happening once the paychecks grew.
Are any laws in place?
There has been a call for regulation and legal protection of children who appear on family channels in the wake of instances like the 8 Passengers. Family vlogging currently exists in a grey area, unlike child actors who work under contracts and legal protections, they are filmed at home, often every day, without clear boundaries or a say in what gets posted. Tantrums, hospital visits and awkward teen phases become monetizable moments.
The UK has explicitly said that its licensing laws for child performers do not apply to user-generated content; therefore, there are no limits on filming hours or the nature of footage. In Washington state, a law is being designed which hopes to protect child social media stars. In February, Cam Barrett, a TikTok influencer who regularly appeared in her mother’s Facebook as a child testified in support of the bill. She stated, “I’m terrified to share my name because a digital footprint I had no control over exists”. She discussed how her mother shared details of her first period, a car accident and a serious illness she had. Once again, we are seeing the lack of control, absence of consent and the dangers of the ‘grey area’ family vlogging is described to be in. Illinois has recently amended its Child Labor Law, parents are now required to deposit a portion of their earnings from vlogging into a trust fund for the child and keep records of their contributions.
This is a step in the right direction to decrease the exploitation of children for content, but many argue that the rest of the world needs to follow. As child vlogging and influencing become growing fields of work, a question remains: are they being celebrated or exploited?
All photos provided via Adobe stock images.