Expert-come-lately Plunkett, citing the memoir of child star from the Nineties, tells the Gazette,
Developmentally, a child or teen has real limits on understanding, let alone meaningfully consenting to, being put on a global stage in perpetuity in their own most intimate spaces — their home and daily life. That has a lot of harms and risks, including: an erosion of sense of self and autonomy and agency; real boundary violations from viewers who feel they know the child personally and will try to engage with them directly; and outright financial exploitation or abuse where a parent is making a lot of money off of them. They can come of age and realize they were put to work without their consent and perhaps even their knowledge, and have literally nothing to show for it, which then carries its own psychological, emotional, and relational harm. There are also practical limitations for kids who arrive at adulthood and realize they spent their childhood working online and now don’t have the peer networks, interests, or preparation for college or a first job that their peers have. That’s all to say nothing of the harms and risks they may experience while making the content.
Welcome to the party, pal! Petersen, as the creator of the non-profit “A Minor Consideration,” made all of that indisputable online, in TV appearances and in legal battles on behalf of such victims as Gary Coleman more than thirty years ago. I posted about former child actress Sarah Polley’s open letter to her former director in 2014. Polley, who evolved into a director and Canadian legislator as well as an excellent adult actress, made all of these same points.
Plunkett and Robinson, unlike Polley, unlike Petersen and unlike me, want the law to to take over. (Ethics Alarms motto #2: “When ethics fails, the law takes over and usually makes a mess.”) Of course they do: they are middle-aged female academics, and more reliable progressive peddlers of expansive government control one could not find with an ICE-sized posse.
In this post I argued that child stars should be banned, but I never once suggested that a legal ban was appropriate or reasonable. ethical industries and platforms should ban them. I argued for a social, cultural, societal and ethical consensus that parents exploiting their babies, toddlers and children before they could give meaningful consent is wrong, indeed child abuse, and those who engage in it will be shamed, shunned, denigrated. That applies neatly to social media “influencers” as well.
This is an ethical problem, and only ethics can solve it.
________________
*I included some links to the old Ethics Scoreboard inadvertently. My fault. You can find Ethics Alarms post on the topic here and here, among other places on EA.
I was just revisiting the Catholic church’s concept of “the age of reason,” which, when I was a kid, was age seven. It was the age at which a child would be old enough to sin. I wonder whether adults have long thought kids were morally competent as young as age seven.
Where did Shirley Temple stand on this issue?
Shirley was one of the proverbial exceptions that proved the rule. She was freakishly smart, and her parents were responsible and protective. They had a once-in-a millennium talent, she loved what she did, and it was the Depression, meaning that she could ensure a better childhood for herself and her family while so many were struggling. When she aged out of her moptop career and was trying to forge a new career as a teen, an MGM exec exposed his junk to her in an interview. Shirley’s mother blacklisted MGM from then on. Her autobiography is fascinating.
Unpaid child labor isn’t even the most unethical element. The invasion, the destruction of privacy has lifelong consequences. Digital culture is destroying the concept that there are moments and memories in your life that are precious or intimate that shouldn’t be shared with the world – only with those closest to you.
And there’s barely a mention by these so-called experts that criminals are using children’s images to target or to profit from them.
No study is needed – just common sense to tell you that putting your children’s lives online for all the world to see is risky business on multiple levels.
Question: you are a movie director, and want a movie that includes child characters. Examples: Home Alone, The Sixth Sense, Annie, and the type of movie that Shirley Temple played in. Is there an ethical way to do that, without AI and child characters played by actors over 18 years old?
No. (Paul disagrees. “Gotta have those kids, Jack.” was his answer when I proposed an industry ban.)
That is a very absolute statement, and has a consequence that certain types of films and TV programs cannot be made anymore. This includes many movies and TV programs (Walt Disney!!) that appeal to children, and require child characters to be believable. Little House on the Prairie, and other TV programs on which we all were raised.
Yes, because child labor is wrong, Kant’s rule that you don’t use a human being as a means to an end regardless of the end applies, and when a party can’t consent, it is unethical to put that party in a potentially harmful state. Unless you want to say that it’s worth ruining people’s lives when they are too young to underatnd what’s happening to them because enough people will be entertained and make money. Are you?
Because I know how to make that argument. But it’s also how one defends the NFL and abortion.
I was raised on a dairy farm, and as is the custom at farms since ancient times, was required to help my dad at the farm since the age of ten. The farm is part of the film reel of my early decades in life until my emigration to the USA. I am very thankful for my farm upbringing.
Based on my life experience I am not on principle against all forms of child labor. Before attending school until age 18 became mandatory farmers, artisans, and people in the trades educated their children themselves with the idea that the son would follow in his father’s footsteps, and the education included hands on physical labor such as milking cows.
The moral absolutes against all child labor are actually preferences that developed in the last two centuries, based on the industrialization of society, labor laws, public education, etc. Childhood and adolescence are also recent concepts; in the past a child was regarded as a little adult.
Based on my personal experience labor at a young age (teenagers) can be a healthy part of personal development. Sons learning farm work or a trade from their fathers has been essential for the preparation for adult life. In addition it creates bonding between father and son.
In the 1970s many teenagers delivered news papers, and did vacation work. This is also a good preparation for later life, important for the development of a work ethic, and becoming resourceful and taking initiative. Similar arguments can be made in favor of young girls running lemonade stands, or selling girl scout cookies. The demise of vacation work is one of the reasons why we have so many listless young adults who fail to launch, and live with their parents after age thirty.
That does not mean that all work done by children passes ethical muster. The example that jumps to my mind is Michael Jackson, who was monomaniacally focused on his music career from a very young age, did not have the formative experiences other children had, and as a result never grew into an adult. And please do not get me started on Jon Benet Ramsey, with a mother who forces her child to realize her own unfulfilled ambitions.
That means that some distinctions need to be made, as some forms of labor are good and formative in a child’s or teenager’s development, and other forms of labor are harmful and exploitative.
The example mentioned in the post (momfluencers) has another harm unrelated to the labor aspect, namely the privacy and safety of the children. There are too many creeps out there looking at on-line content for the wrong reasons, that any parent should even hesitate to publish vacation pictures including their children online.
“In the 1970s many teenagers delivered news papers, and did vacation work. This is also a good preparation for later life, important for the development of a work ethic, and becoming resourceful and taking initiative.”
Did all that and more. To me, Summer “Vacation” just meant no school.
PWS
I don’t consider family chores or early jobs for minors exploitation.They are doing things, not giving up their identity and privacy for the family’s profit.
I appreciate you adding nuance to your earlier position. It sounds like taking away a child’s identity and privacy is the main concern. Arguably manual labor is also for the family’s profit, but manual labor doesn’t scale exponentially like fame does (and for that reason also doesn’t have cutthroat competition), so there’s less of a temptation to overwork one’s children on a farm.
Are there forms of entertainment work that could be sufficiently separated from issues of privacy, identity, fame, and overwork that a child could safely engage in them? The first thing that comes to mind is something like a choir or orchestra, where an individual blends into a group.
It occurs to me that part of the issue is the toxic influences in the various entertainment fields. It’s not that adults are unaffected by these influences, but that they have the ability to consent to them, although they still may not know what they’re getting into.
Offhand, the only suggestion for improving the situation that comes to mind is that people in the entertainment field should avoid taking their careers too seriously and have some backup skills to fall back on. Of course, that advice applies to just about any field, but our culture, economy, and education system aren’t set up for that yet. Fixing the education aspect was the goal that started me on my journey of compiling the toolbox of foundational problem-solving concepts.
Show business is a toxic, immoral, corrupt cesspool. The children are put in danger with weird working schedules with neurotic, immature, often substance abusing and sex-obsessed adults. The profession causes adrenaline and adoration addiction. that leads to other addictions. I liken it to a child working in a coal mine.
Been waiting for a post in which to bring this up. Most of The Florida Project is children acting, and sometimes dealing with mature themes (nude sunbathing, etc.)
Anyone seen it, and if they have, their opinion?
PWS
I have not seen it, but the combination of children and nude sunbathing should raise many ethical concerns.
The “Paul Peterson” link connects “Crypto Baccarat Sites for Bitcoin Casino Gambling” at the Ethics Scoteboard address. Not sure what’s up with that.
Fixed.
The ethics scoreboard has apparently been hijacked. I suggest taking it offline.
It’s been offline for over a year now. It’s URL must have been grabbed by someone else: I have no control over it. I’ll take the link down as soon as I can figure out how.
Well, Michael Jackson was put out there performing music in person from an early age, and did it do him any harm? Oh, wait…