Following the recent passage of the first-ever law safeguarding child influencers in Illinois, a wave of optimism has engulfed child exploitation activists like Sarah Adams. Despite not being based in the U.S., Adams and other advocates are buoyed by this development. They believe that Illinois’ pioneering legislation sets a precedent that could encourage other states to follow suit.
For years, concerns surrounding the ethical implications of “sharenting” have grown as family vloggers and parenting influencers amass substantial online followings. Critics have pointed out the potential harm caused by invading children’s privacy and compromising their online safety for fame or financial gain, often without informed consent.
Illinois’ newly enacted law, slated to take effect in the coming year, closely mirrors California’s Coogan Act of 1939, which aimed to safeguard the earnings of child performers and has inspired similar statutes in various states. However, none of these laws had previously addressed the income generated by children who perform on the internet, and the national Fair Labor Standards Act also lacks such provisions.
Under the Illinois law, content creators must allocate a portion of their earnings from videos featuring the “likeness, name, or photograph of the minor” into a trust accessible to the child upon reaching adulthood. The allocated percentage hinges on how prominently the minor is featured in the content, including instances where stories revolve around them without necessarily showing their image.
While creators failing to meet these criteria could be subject to legal action, the law does not establish a government enforcement mechanism. Consequently, compliance and litigation responsibilities are left to individual families.
Jess Maddox, an assistant professor specializing in digital media technology at the University of Alabama, underscores the importance of considering child influencers as child workers deserving of financial and legal protection. She believes that the Illinois law will likely spark broader national discussions about this issue, emphasizing that social media content creation and influencing are legitimate careers.
Maddox notes an organic surge in former child influencers voicing their experiences of having their lives shared online without consent. Their voices have resonated, prompting wider conversations and concerns about exploitative practices among child influencers.
The momentum for legislative action was further fueled by student involvement. High school student Shreya Nallamothu, credited with originating the legislation idea, expresses surprise at the swift progress of the bill through the Legislature since its introduction in February. Looking ahead, Nallamothu aspires to see more laws addressing the privacy and mental health aspects of child influencer work.
The Illinois law primarily focuses on granting child influencers a share of their earnings. It does not encompass provisions for their choice to remain offline or to erase past content. The original version of the bill included a provision granting former child influencers the right to request platforms to permanently delete monetized content featuring them as minors, also known as the “right to be forgotten.”
Nallamothu acknowledges that the law may not be perfect, but she’s eager to witness the legitimization of child influencing and its inclusion in legal frameworks. This development is deemed a significant initial step towards addressing the concerns of child influencers.