By: Riley Kramer
Volume X – Issue II – Spring 2025
I. INTRODUCTION
Imagine being a child whose entire life is broadcast to the world, from your first steps to your most private, vulnerable moments. Everything is captured and edited for the entertainment of millions of strangers. From the moment you are born, your milestones, struggles, and emotions are not yours alone but are shared, dissected, and monetized. Unfortunately, this is the reality for countless children whose lives are documented by their parents in family vlogging channels. These children, often called “Truman babies,” are raised under the harsh glare of the internet. Their every action is commodified for profit, and they have little to no control over how their stories are told. [1] They cannot consent to their portrayal, and yet, their very existence is sold as content to millions of their fans.
This new form of child labor, where children are exploited for the financial gain of their parents and the entertainment of the masses, presents a deeply troubling reality. Unlike traditional child labor, the youtube family vlogging industry lacks clear regulations to protect the well-being of the children involved from both financial exploitation as well as predatory behavior. While the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) sets international standards to safeguard children, including the rights to privacy and the protection from exploitation, this convention has yet to be ratified in the United States. Further, Illinois, Minnesota, and California have begun passing laws to regulate earnings and set aside trust funds for children in influencer content, but these laws fail to address the deeper ethical and legal issues inherent in family vlogging.
This paper examines how child labor laws, both international and domestic, intersect with the rapidly growing world of family vlogging. It argues for urgent, comprehensive legal protections. By examining current laws and proposing necessary reforms, this paper aims to ensure that children involved in family vlogs are not only financially protected but are also shielded from the exploitation, harm, and privacy violations they are too often exposed to; these children deserve a childhood that cannot be sold for profit and fame.
II. THE RISE AND PROLIFERATION OF FAMILY VLOGGING
Family vlogging can trace its origins to 2008, when Shay Butler, a father from Idaho, began uploading daily videos of his family to YouTube. His channel, Shaytards, is widely regarded as the first family YouTube channel, and it played a pivotal role in popularizing the concept of sharing daily family life with a global audience. [2] Shaytards offered an intimate window into the Butler children’s upbringing, allowing viewers from around the world to witness their milestones, celebrations, and struggles. This unprecedented level of access created a powerful sense of connection between the viewers and the Butler Family. Fans didn’t just merely watch these vlogs. Instead, many saw themselves as part of the family, forming deep parasocial relationships that fueled the channel’s popularity. As viewership continued to grow, so did advertising revenue and sponsorship deals, eventually enabling Shay Butler to turn family vlogging into his full-time job.
The success of Shaytards opened the floodgates for parents to build careers based on the lives of their children. [3] Unlike traditional reality television, where production companies maintain control over content, family vlogging allows parents to bypass the restrictions of the entertainment industry and create their own brand of entertainment. This direct connection to their audience grants vloggers unprecedented control over how their content is shaped and distributed, and most importantly, over the monetization of that content.
For many families, this new form of content creation became a lucrative business. Unlike actors in traditional media, who are often paid fixed salaries, family vloggers’ income is based on the number of clicks, shares, and likes their videos accumulate. As a channel’s popularity grows, creators begin to accrue more income through ads, sponsorships, and brand deals. [4] In addition, family vlogging channels are particularly attractive to companies because they offer direct access to a massive base of easily impressionable consumers: children.
While the success of Shaytards marked the beginning of the family vlogging era, it also set a precedent for the unregulated exposure of children in monetized content. The daily nature of these videos meant that every moment—no matter how private or intimate—became a commodity. What started as a personal family journey quickly evolved into a business model, one in which the children had little to no voice in the decisions that shaped their digital identities forever.
III. FINANCIAL EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN
At the heart of the family vlogging business is the notion that the family’s primary source of income comes from the children themselves; their milestones, struggles, and everyday moments become the sole commodity that fuels the channel’s success. The concept of family vlogging as the “ultimate family business” has radically reshaped the way these families live and work. For example, the child of a popular family vlogger, using the alias Claire to shield her identity, revealed that her parents quit their jobs after their YouTube revenue became sufficient to support the family. Claire’s father effectively transformed into her boss, blurring the lines between parental authority and business control, and further underscoring how her childhood became intertwined with the family's financial success. [5]
Even though the financial success of a channel may provide a family with luxuries like sponsored vacations or a larger home, they also carry darker consequences. [6] Foremost, children featured in family vlogs typically have little to no control over how their lives are portrayed and monetized, and they are often deprived of any compensation for their involvement in their family’s channel. The emotional toll on young child vloggers is immense, and in some tragic cases, it also extends to actual abuse for refusing to appear in content or not performing for the camera in ways that will garner the most viewers. This highlights yet another disturbing reality: while not every family vlogger engages in physical abuse or coerces their children into appearing on camera, the act of vlogging itself constitutes an inherent form of exploitation. Children are treated as commodities, with their lives packaged for profit, often without their consent or adequate safeguards in place. The industry's lack of regulation leaves children vulnerable, as they have no control over how their money is earned, spent, or even if they will ever see any of the profits.
These stories are not isolated. As family vlogging continues to grow, it is increasingly clear that children are being financially exploited in ways that are often not transparent or fair. Parents may argue that they are saving the income for their children’s future, but there are few guarantees or mechanisms in place to ensure that the children benefit from the wealth generated by their own image. The rapid growth of the family vlogging industry calls for stricter legal protections to ensure that children’s rights are upheld, that they have control over their own image, and that they receive a fair share of the earnings generated from their participation in the channels.
IV. EMOTIONAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL RISKS OF FAMILY VLOGGING
While social media’s effects on young users are well-documented, the effects of growing up as a child vlogger remain largely unexamined. The pressure to perform, the loss of personal privacy, and the relentless scrutiny of an online audience shape a child’s sense of self in ways that can be deeply damaging, but we have yet to truly understand the long-term consequences of Youtube vlogging.
Once again, what is shared, how it is shared, and how parents portray their children are choices made entirely beyond the children’s control. Children’s personal milestones, struggles, and even moments of embarrassment are broadcast for public consumption, often with parents prioritizing viewer enjoyment over emotional security. Viral videos of children being embarrassed, disciplined, or manipulated for reactions routinely garner millions of views, reinforcing a culture where children’s most intimate moments are exploited for profit. In many cases, these videos become fodder for snark pages on platforms like Reddit, where strangers dissect and mock these children’s lives, further amplifying their lack of agency and exposing them to ridicule on a massive scale. For example, a subreddit dedicated to the ultraChristian LaBrant influencer family has over 44,000 anonymous posters who scrutinize the family, including their children: twelve year-old Everleigh, six-year old Posie, four-year old Zealand, and twoyear old Sunday. While these communities claim to advocate for children’s privacy, they often fall into exploitative patterns, such as making snarky posts about the kids’ appearances and speech patterns. Even moderators of these forums acknowledge the ethical concerns of amplifying such discussions, with many pleading for members to stop these conversations to little avail, meaning the children remain at the focal point of these communities as well. [7]
Furthering the emotional toll, this constant exposure can distort normal childhood development. Kids raised in front of a camera may struggle to separate their true selves from the personas their parents have crafted for them. Instead of engaging in natural play, forming private memories, or making mistakes in a safe space, their actions are dictated by content creation. Family relationships shift as well—when parents become managers rather than caregivers, it creates a transactional dynamic that can lead to resentment, emotional detachment, and an erosion of trust. [8]
Parents frequently share private details, like where their children go to school, their medical conditions, and their fears, without considering the long-term consequences. Unlike corporate data collection, which faces regulatory scrutiny, there are no laws preventing parents from exposing their child’s most personal information. This lack of protection leaves children vulnerable to exploitation, cyberbullying, and the lasting burden of a digital footprint they had no control over creating. [9] The permanence of these vlogs means that even as these children grow up, they may never be able to escape the content that defined their childhood, leaving them susceptible to lasting public scrutiny.
While family vloggers argue that sharing their experiences fosters connection and entertainment, the cost to the child’s well-being is profound. Without legal safeguards, these children risk growing up without a sense of personal autonomy, burdened by the pressure to perform for an audience they never chose. As family vlogging continues to evolve, the ethical implications of exposing a child’s life for profit must be acknowledged. The urgent need for protections has never been clearer, as the normalization of turning a child’s life into content remains unchecked.
V. DISREGARD OF BOUNDARIES AND CONSENT
Even when parents ask for their children’s permission to appear in vlogs or other social media content, the reality is that children, especially those under the age of 12 or 13, are almost never in a position to give informed consent. At such a young age, children are still developing an understanding of privacy, personal boundaries, and the consequences of their actions online. They may not fully grasp the concept that once something is posted on the internet, it is nearly impossible to remove entirely; digital content can be copied, shared, and spread far beyond its original context, making it difficult for the child to regain control over their own image or likeness. [10]
Children, by their very nature, are still exploring and shaping their identities, and their understanding of what it means to give consent is far from fully developed. Even though they may be asked to "agree" to participate in videos or photos, they do so without any true comprehension of the repercussions, such as how their image may be used by strangers, how it might be monetized, or how it may ultimately expose them to exploitation. In fact, most children are offered very little say in the matter at all. [11] Parents may present it as a fun and harmless activity, yet the underlying pressure for the child to comply is overwhelming. They often face an unspoken demand to please their parents, to conform, and to participate, even if they are uncomfortable.
In this context, children are often unable to assert their boundaries. The economic incentives for parents, who may depend on their children’s social media presence to drive income through advertisements, sponsorships, and exclusive content, further entrench this exploitation; children may feel as though they have to continue generating content or their family will not longer be able to survive, that even children that do not want to appear on these vlogs may feel unable to escape them.
There is an inherent disconnect between a child’s ability to truly comprehend these digital consequences and the reality that parents are, often unknowingly, putting them at serious risk. This underscores a larger issue: even well-intentioned parents, who believe they are engaging in harmless fun, are potentially violating their children's right to privacy and autonomy. With no laws that properly address the complex landscape of children's rights on social media, there is a significant power imbalance between parents, platforms, and the children themselves. This highlights a critical need for clearer regulations that protect children’s rights in the digital space and a rethinking of how consent is approached within family vlogs and influencer culture.
VI. PREDATION OF MINORS
The sexualization and exploitation of minors on social media is a deeply disturbing issue that severely impacts children’s emotional well-being and privacy. In an increasingly digital world, many children are unknowingly thrust into the spotlight where their innocence is commodified and manipulated for adult gratification. These children’s images, moments of innocence, and activities are manipulated to satisfy adult desires and expose them to harmful cycles of objectification. This can have many longlasting effects, with many children developing a distorted sense of self-worth, as they start associating their value with online approval rather than their intrinsic qualities.
For example, Piper Rockelle became a social media sensation at just nine years old on platforms like YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok. Initially, her content appeared lighthearted and geared toward younger audiences, yet it also attracted a significant following among adults. By thirteen, she was posting videos like “FIRST KISS ON CAMERA” which racked up nearly 50 million views. [12] Similarly, other videos such as “I BECAME A BABY FOR THE DAY” and “LAST TO STOP KISSING BOYFRIEND WINS $10,000” have each accumulated over ten million views. On Instagram and TikTok, her posts often feature suggestive movements and clothing, blurring the lines between her young audience and an adult world. Recently, Piper Rockelle came under scrutiny for visiting the “Bop House”, a collective of popular OnlyFans creators. Although she only filmed TikToks with the members, the way these collaborations were framed with suggestive captions and dances make it seem like her content is meant to be targeted to the adult world. This incident underscores a broader pattern of exploitation, particularly through her paid fan club, Club Piper, where subscribers, many of whom are adult males, can pay for exclusive content featuring Piper in bikinis and directly chat with her on her Twitch streams. [13]
Moreover, allegations against Piper's mother, Tiffany Smith, have shed light on an even more troubling dynamic. Smith has been accused of creating an abusive environment for the young content creators who worked with Piper, known as the Squad. In a lawsuit settled for $1.85 million, these creators alleged emotional, verbal, and sometimes sexual abuse, including being subjected to highly inappropriate and sexually explicit comments and sexual assault by Smith [14] There have also been reports of videos showing Smith instructing Piper and other young Squad members to pose in suggestive ways at a very young age, emphasizing that such content would attract more views and revenue, [15] This horrific and unacceptable behavior highlights the exploitation of children for financial gain and underscores the urgent need for clearer industry regulations to protect children’s safety and well-being.
This type of sexual exploitation is not limited to high-profile influencers like Piper Rockelle; instead it extends to countless children, who find themselves unwittingly ensnared in this web of exploitation. For instance, parents may post vlogs of their children playing Twister, doing gymnastics, or swimming, which are followed by strangers sharing timestamps of “suggestive” moments. Innocent clips, like a child doing the splits, are thereby quietly co-opted into an ecosystem of predation. This again forces children into a world where their body is scrutinized by strangers, where they are viewed not for who they are, but for how they can be used for adult forms of pleasure. [16]
VII. THE ROLE OF MOMAGERS
This issue is even further complicated by the rise of family-managed Instagram accounts. Parents create and manage their children’s social media profiles to elicit additional income, brand deals, and sponsorships. Even if the accounts are promoted as family fun, every post invites the risk of a comment, a message, or an exchange that crosses the line. In the context of child influencers, a "momager" refers to a mother who acts as the business manager for her child, often managing their finances, publicity, and partnerships with brands and other child influencers. One momanger, Elissa, currently manages her eleven year old’s account of 100,000 followers. Her child’s profile features images of her modeling dresses, dancewear, and fitness apparel. Although the daughter’s popularity has led to many brand deals, her content also seems to appeal to thousands of pedophiles, many of whom leave comments on her posts, such as “Great Body” and “Mmmmmmmm take that bikini off.” [17] While many parents view social media as an opportunity for their child to gain exposure and career opportunities, comments like these further emphasize that there should be significant concerns about privacy and unintended exposure to inappropriate adult audiences.
An investigation by The New York Times revealed that among 5,000 accounts of child influencers, a staggering 32 million connections were found between these children and adult male followers. Many of the comments on posts by these accounts included grateful messages from followers thanking the momagers for allowing them to view suggestive content legally. In 2022, Instagram launched paid subscriptions, which allows followers to pay a monthly fee for exclusive content and access. While subscriptions are prohibited for users under 18, many mom-run accounts sidestep this restriction, since they are technically run by an adult. The Times uncovered dozens of accounts of young influencers charging upwards of $19.99 for “ask-me-anything” chat sessions and behind-the-scenes photos. Although men make up about 35 percent of instagram users, most of these child influencers have a male audience of over 75 percent, with many of these male followers and paid subscribers having been charged with and/or convicted of sex crimes against children. [18]
This is not just an issue of poor moderation or bad parenting. It is a systemic failure to protect the most vulnerable. Parents, whether willfully ignorant or knowingly profiting, sacrifice their children's privacy in pursuit of visibility and money. Social media platforms are complicit in the cycle, as their algorithms push child content into the hands of those who should not have access. In some cases, momagers who are trying to limit male followers have reported challenges in blocking unwanted interactions, as platforms limit the number of accounts that can be blocked within a given period, meaning that social media companies are also responsible for not only failing to implement retroactive measures to remove nefarious followers but also by not creating preventive measures to remedy the overarching crisis: banning child influencers from their platform. [19] Yet, it seems unlikely that these platforms will ever create preventative measures, as they are also profiting heavily off of young children, with an annual income of nearly 11 billion dollars off of ad revenue on child and/or family vlogger content across all platforms. [20]
The cost of this exposure is borne entirely by the children themselves. Former youtube family children, now adults, have spoken out about the lasting trauma of being raised for an audience. For many, their fame was not a gift, but a curse that they could not escape. In an ask-me-anything forum on Reddit, a former child vlogger showcased their perspective on their career, one they notably never asked for nor desired. Their family’s channel consisted of, again, seemingly harmless content like purchasing menstrual products or having their first kisses, yet it was a “massive hit with middle aged creepy men” that their content was catered to. After leaving home, this former vlogger has effectively disowned their family due to long lasting trauma. [21] Notably, their fame was not solely when they were a child. As every time this poster goes out in public, she is still recognized and hounded by former fans. Again, children do not and can not ask for stardom nor are they able to properly consent to a lifetime of its consequences.
VIII. REVIEW OF RELEVANT LAWS AND STATUTES
Although a legal framework exists to protect children's rights online, significant gaps remain, especially when it comes to the control parents have over their children’s digital presence. While some regulations, such as the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), provide broad protections, they fail to address the specific challenges of family vlogging.
Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA)
COPPA was enacted to protect children's online privacy by regulating the collection of personal data from children under the age of 13 from corporations. Key provisions entail:
Section 312.5: Websites and online services must obtain verifiable parental consent before collecting personal data from children under 13. However, this provision does not regulate parents' ability to share their young child's personal information online.
Section 312.10: COPPA mandates that online services delete a child’s personal data once it is no longer needed for its intended purpose. However, this provision does not apply to content that parents post about their children; as such, COPPA does not grant children the right to request content deletion. [22]
Convention on Rights of Child:
The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) is an international treaty that sets out the fundamental rights of children, including protections for their civil, political, economic, social, and cultural well-being. Signed in 1989, it has been ratified by every eligible country except the United States, meaning that this treaty has no legal standing in this nation.
Nevertheless, several articles within the CRC are particularly relevant to the issue of children’s participation in social media content, especially within the context of the influencer industry:
Article 3: This article emphasizes that decisions affecting children should prioritize their best interests. This principle supports stronger regulations to prevent exploitation, such as excessive work hours, coercion, or financial abuse. However, without clear legal enforcement, parents and social media platforms can easily bypass accountability and the lack of defined standards on what constitutes exploitation online further complicates efforts to protect children from overexposure.
Article 12: This provision recognizes that children who are capable of forming their own views should have the right to express them in matters that affect them. The CRC highlights the ethical importance of considering a child's perspective in terms of their digital presence, but without legal mechanisms to enforce these rights nor the ability of many young children to even be able to provide informed consent, children remain vulnerable to parental decisions that prioritize content creation over their well-being.
Article 16: This article protects children from unwarranted intrusions into their personal lives, including exposure that could harm their dignity or reputation. While this provision suggests that children should be shielded from overexposure, the lack of specific guidelines means that determining what constitutes a violation remains subjective. Parents may justify vlogging content as harmless or beneficial, and social media platforms have little incentive to intervene since viral content drives their own revenue. [23]
State Laws on Child Influencer Protections
Several states have enacted or proposed laws to safeguard child influencers’ earnings and privacy, reflecting growing concerns about financial exploitation and digital exposure. While these laws share common principles, they differ in scope, enforcement mechanisms, and additional protections:
Illinois: As the first state to pass a law protecting the earnings of Youtube vloggers under 16, this law requires parents to place a portion of children’s earnings into a trust if they appear in at least 30% of the family’s monetized videos. Additionally, content creators are required to maintain financial records detailing the child’s involvement in these videos and provide access to these records upon request. Notably, Illinois grants minors a private right of action, meaning they can sue if their earnings are withheld.
Minnesota: Effective July 1, 2025, Minnesota's law mirrors Illinois in protecting the earnings of minors featured in influencer content. However, it also introduces additional provisions, such as prohibiting minors under 14 from engaging in content creation and mandating that content creators delete content upon request from the child or an adult who was a child when the content was made. [24]
California: Like the other states, Senate Bill 764 requires content creators who feature minors in at least 30% of their content to set aside 65% of the child’s earnings in a trust account for the child until they turn 18. Unlike Illinois and Minnesota, California does not explicitly grant minors a private right of action [25]
Several other states have introduced similar bills aimed at protecting child influencers, signaling a trend towards more robust safeguards for minors working in the digital space.
IX. EFFECTIVENESS OF RELEVANT LAWS
Despite existing legal frameworks intended to safeguard children's rights online, these laws remain woefully inadequate in addressing the nuanced exploitation of minors in social media and influencer culture. The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), while designed to limit the collection of children’s personal data by corporations, does nothing to prevent parents from exposing their children’s private lives online for profit. In fact, COPPA’s requirement for parental consent paradoxically empowers those who may be complicit in their child’s exploitation, while its data deletion mandate fails to protect children from the permanence of online exposure. Once a child’s likeness is commodified, they have no legal recourse to erase their digital footprint, leaving them vulnerable to predation and lifelong repercussions. Similarly, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) articulates fundamental protections for minors, such as the right to privacy and participation in decisions affecting them, but without U.S. ratification, its principles hold no legal weight. Even if ratified, its broad language lacks enforceable measures to address the unique dangers of social media exploitation, leaving children at the mercy of parental discretion and platform indifference.
State-level legislation, though a step in the right direction, remains limited in scope and enforcement. Although Illinois, Minnesota, and California have introduced laws requiring that a portion of child influencers' earnings be set aside, financial compensation alone does not address the deeper issue: the unchecked exposure of children’s private lives. While Minnesota’s law takes a more aggressive stance by prohibiting content creation for children under 14, enforcement challenges remain, as vloggers must still wait until adulthood to reclaim control over their digital presence, and by then, irreversible harm may have already been done. Moreover, the lack of universal federal protections leaves a patchwork of laws that fail to comprehensively address the systemic exploitation of children in digital spaces, as the lack of federal regulations has enabled influencers to relocate to states with minimal regulations to avoid compliance with their state’s new laws. This trend is already observed with many California-based creators, such as the Labrant Family, moving to Nashville, where labor protections for child influencers remain minimal. [26]
X. PROPOSED SOLUTIONS
To genuinely protect minors from digital exploitation, stricter legal interventions must be enacted. First, a federal-level law should establish clear digital labor rights for children, mirroring existing child labor laws in traditional media. This law should include mandatory trust funds for earnings, strict regulations on work hours, and explicit content guidelines that prevent the sexualization of minors. Second, there must be a right to digital erasure, allowing individuals at any time and age to request the removal of content posted about them during their childhood, ensuring they are not permanently shackled to an online identity they never consented to. Additionally, social media platforms must be held accountable for their role in algorithmically promoting exploitative content. Stricter moderation policies, content audits, and harsher penalties for platforms profiting from inappropriate engagement with child content must be implemented and enforced. [27]
Furthermore, parental control over a child’s digital presence must be reexamined. While parents play a crucial role in their child’s upbringing and have the right to raise kids in a manner they deem appropriate, the monetization of a child’s image should be subject to external oversight. Independent child advocacy boards should be established to review cases where minors are heavily featured in online content, ensuring their best interests are prioritized over financial gain. Lastly, public awareness campaigns must educate both parents and young influencers about the dangers of digital exploitation. As such, a multi-pronged cultural shift is necessary to dismantle the systemic mechanisms that allow child exploitation to flourish under the guise of entertainment. [28] While a ban on child vlogging might seem like an ideal solution, it is an unrealistic expectation in the current climate. Instead, the focus must be on implementing regulations that minimize the adverse consequences as much as possible, ensuring that children are not sacrificed under the guise of online fame and profit.
Endnotes
[1] Tait, Amelia, and Amelia Tait. 2022. “Their Lives Were Documented Online from Birth. Now, They’re Coming of Age - Rolling Stone UK.” Rolling Stone UK. June 28, 2022. https://www.rollingstone.co.uk/culture/truman-babiesyoutube-family-vlogging-generation-18995/.
[2] 2025. Youtube. 2025. https://youtu.be/QJNA-8VXWkU?si=sFody6Eknc_tSg0B.
[3] Hallie Q. 2024. “Shaytards: How Youtube’s First Family Vloggers Were Destroyed.” YouTube. February 18, 2024. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_2W8qkW5RU.
[4] Bousquet, Kristen. 2024. “How to Make Money on Youtube – 5 Methods.” Forbes, August 27, 2024. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kristenbousquet/article/how-to-make-money-on-youtube/.
[5] Latifi, Fortesa. 2023. “Influencer Parents and the Kids Who Had Their Childhood Made into Content.” Teen Vogue. Teen Vogue. March 10, 2023. https://www.teenvogue.com/story/influencer-parents-childrensocial-media-impact.
[6] 2025. Youtube. 2025. https://youtu.be/WUmCahC6V40?si=gZh7BsBvd3fQMUlB.
[7] Latifi, Fortesa. 2024. “Family Vlogging ‘Anti-Fans’ Lead Reddit Snark Communities.” Rolling Stone. December 21, 2024. https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/family-vlog-reddit-snark-1235212202/.
[8] Laude, Camille. 2024. “Family Vlogging and Child Harm: A Need for Nationwide Protection.” https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/Jurimetrics/spring-2024/family-vlogging-and-childharm-a-need-for-nationwide-protection.pdf.
[9] Stauff, Sarah. 2020. “Parenting in the Public Eye Parenting in the Public Eye.” https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=senior_comm.
[10] Livingstone, Sonia, and Amanda Third. 2017. “Children and Young People’s Rights in the Digital Age: An Emerging Agenda.” New Media & Society 19 (5): 657–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816686318.
[11] “APA PsycNet.” n.d. Psycnet.apa.org. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-19481-000.
[12] Piper Rockelle. 2020. “Piper Rockelle - Bby I... (Official Music Video) **FIRST KISS on CAMERA** .” YouTube. October 17, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJFxx9M5Cww.
[13] Chulde. 2025. “The Dark Truth of the Bop House….” YouTube. March 7, 2025. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53-W0rqiENY.
[14] Gelt, Jessica, and Amy Kaufman. 2024. “YouTube Star Piper Rockelle’s Mom Settles Influencers’ Lawsuit.” Los Angeles Times. October 10, 2024. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2024-10-10/youtubeinfluencer-piper-rockelle-mother-lawsuit-settlement.
[15] https://www.facebook.com/peoplemag. 2025. “Netflix’s Bad Influence Docuseries Exposes the Dark Side of YouTuber Piper Rockelle’s Infamous Squad in First Trailer (Exclusive).” People.com. 2025. https://people.com/netflix-docuseries-bad-influence-trailer-exclusive-11694701.
[16] Orphanides, K. G. n.d. “On YouTube, a Network of Paedophiles Is Hiding in Plain Sight.” Wired. https://www.wired.com/story/youtube-pedophile-videos-advertising/.
[17] Valentino-DeVries, Jennifer, and Michael Keller. 2024. “A Marketplace of Girl Influencers Managed by Moms and Stalked by Men.” The New York Times, February 23, 2024. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/us/instagramchild-influencers.html.
[18] 2025. Brandarmy.com. 2025. https://brandarmy.com/u/Piperrockelle.
[19] Vinter, Robyn. 2025. “UK Watchdog to Investigate TikTok and Reddit over Use of Children’s Data.” The Guardian. The Guardian. March 3, 2025. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/mar/03/uk-informationcommissioner-to-investigate-tiktok-reddit-children-data?
[20] Vlamis, Associated Press, Kelsey. n.d. “YouTube Made $959 Million in Ad Revenue off Children Last Year, Followed Closely by Instagram: Harvard Study.” Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/youtubeinstagram-made-most-money-off-children-last-year-study-2023-12.
[21] “Reddit - Dive into Anything.” 2024. Reddit.com. 2024. https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueOffMyChest/ comments/1fdmyqa/my_parents_were_family_vloggers_it_ruined_my_life/.
[22] Federal Trade Commission. 2013. “Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule (‘COPPA’).” Federal Trade Commission. Federal Trade Commission. July 25, 2013. https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/rules/childrensonline-privacy-protection-rule-coppa.
[23] Abrams, Rachel. 2023. “Family Influencing in the Best Interests of the Child | Chicago Journal of International Law.” Cjil.uchicago.edu. The University Of Chicago. 2023. https://cjil.uchicago.edu/online-archive/familyinfluencing-best-interests-child.
[24] Nagle, Catherine. 2024. “New Laws Protecting Child Influencers: What Marketers and Influencers Need to Know.” Davis+Gilbert LLP. September 6, 2024. https://www.dglaw.com/new-laws-protecting-child-influencerswhat-marketers-and-influencers-need-to-know/.
[25] Latifi, Fortesa. 2023. “California Passes Legal and Financial Protections for Child Influencers.” Teen Vogue. December 21, 2023. https://www.teenvogue.com/story/california-legislation-for-kid-influencers.
[26] Jennings, Rebecca. 2025. “Family Vloggers Accused of Fleeing New Child-Labor Laws.” Vulture. March 5, 2025. https://www.vulture.com/article/family-vloggers-california-child-labor-laws.html.
[27] “FTC Finalizes Long-Awaited Child Online Privacy Rule Amendments.” 2025. Skadden.com. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. January 30, 2025. https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2025/01/ftcfinalizes-long-awaited-child-online-privacy.
[28] Lee, Michelle. 2025. “New Law Aims to Protect Child Influencers Featured on Parents’ Social Media.” KSL NewsRadio. March 13, 2025. https://kslnewsradio.com/utah/utah-protecting-child-influencers/2192286/.