YouTube has established itself as an accessible platform, both for viewers and for those who wish to position themselves on the other side of the screen and use it as a voice. Its ease of use in both directions has enabled anyone to become a content creator, even the youngest. In fact, the sixth most followed YouTubers in Spain are only 13 and 12 years old.
The exposure of minors on social networks has always been a topic as delicate as it is scarcely regulated, raising a series of ethical dilemmas, as well as concerns about how it affects children in their present and future development. This is precisely what I wish to discuss today by analyzing the case of children who, coordinated by their parents, have managed to carve out a niche in the “YouTuber world.”
It is no surprise that, today, many young people dream of being YouTubers, TikTokers, or influencers, just like their online idols. Wanting to be like our role models or engage in professions related to what we perceive as successful is something that has always happened. Simply, we did not live in such a developed digital age before, and instead of wanting to be like Lola Lolita, we could dream of being Hannah Montana and filling stadiums rather than having a large online community.
Similarly, this desire does not necessarily have to come from the minors themselves. If we look at the most followed child YouTubers in Spain, we find a common denominator: all of them began their journey on the platform at a very young age.
Las Ratitas, two sisters from Spain, started appearing in YouTube videos at the ages of 3 and 4; MikelTube at 6; LeoTube had his own channel at the age of 5 but was appearing on his brother’s channel at just 2, and Arantxa Parreño at the age of 4. It seems improbable that becoming YouTubers was their desire; rather, it was a path paved by their parents.
We should then question what the real motivations are behind creating a YouTube channel featuring minors, which in many cases leads to economic benefits and collaborations with advertising brands. And it is that all members of this top started on YouTube with videos where they were seen playing with different toys in each episode, which is not the kind of content that came later on.
Therefore, we can understand that, in addition to seeking to create attractive content for children who could be entertained by watching these minors use toys, it was also an appeal to brands. A way to demonstrate that this format is a powerful display case that, moreover, is perceived much more amiably, less “advertising-like”.
European consumer protection regulations are clear; advertising content, sponsored content or paid collaborations must be duly identified, allowing the audience to recognize that it is commercial content.
But, what happens in the case of these children? Well, after analyzing their channel content, it is observed that most of them include the #Advertising tag in the video description or a phrase indicating it is a sponsored video.
Of course, some put more effort into indicating this fact. For example, both MikelTube and LeoTube, in addition to the hashtag, also include a narrated notice at the start of the video, and Las Ratitas use YouTube’s “promotional content” and “this channel has received money or gifts to create this video” checkboxes. These are some of the tools offered by the platform to inform users effectively.
On the other hand, in some of these channels, we also find content suspected of being ads that are not marked as such. From mentions like “this brand sent me this” to showing the product in such a way that the brand is fully visible on-screen or including the product name and the URL to their website in the description without indicating it is part of any promotional agreement.
The legions of followers that these YouTubers have amassed on their channels over time have not only brought them fame and brand collaborations but have also allowed them to build a persona, step into the public sphere such that they have moved towards the creation of their own brand, under which they launch books, toys, and all kinds of products that may be attractive to their audience.
This clearly shows that, around these minors, there exists an entire business that goes beyond the earnings they might generate from their activity on social networks. Therefore, we should accept that their role as YouTubers is not a game or pastime, but a job aimed at financial gain and at consolidating a strong image that appeals to both their audience and companies that wish to project their values through these children.
However, if we read their channel descriptions, websites, or interviews they give alongside their parents, we find that this activity is discussed in playful terms. It is about selling as clean an image as possible, where the enjoyment of these minors and how much they love to shine on camera is always at the center, with no focus on money. However, to what extent is that game free and fun?
After all, we are talking about content, videos that need to meet more or less professional or more or less strict characteristics, but they must meet them. Therefore, the minor will be directed and given instructions. From the seemingly simplest command, such as not leaving the camera frame, to stricter ones like being taught to clearly show the brand to the camera, they are all limiting frameworks.
The rate of publication on these channels is overwhelming in many cases, with the average frequency being one video per week. As for the average duration of these contents, it stands at about 14 minutes.
Nevertheless, we should be clear that a 14-minute video is not recorded in just 14 minutes, far from it. It requires deploying all the necessary means for recording, repeating takes, and covering parts that will later be cut from the final content but must be endured anyway (for example, when showing a video game match or doing crafts, steps are often summarized or omitted), etc.
In this regard, we encounter the issue of monitoring the time minors spend recording their videos. In the absence of regulations that establish norms and set some limits, everything remains at the discretion of the parents.
Even if these young YouTubers enjoy or have learned to enjoy their moments in front of the camera, we cannot consider these moments as leisure time.
Of course, the content created by these boys and girls aims to be pleasant and fun, with them always appearing energetic and ready to start a new adventure, game, video game, or experience. But, realistically, it is not hard to imagine that, just as adults sometimes do not feel happy, motivated, or want to do our jobs, these minors do not always have to want to play or do an unboxing in front of a camera.
We must also remember that all these boys and girls have grown up being YouTubers, so it is important to reflect on how not knowing another reality affects their desire not to want it.
Furthermore, we are talking about minors, who are more easily impressionable by the success and satisfaction that, in this case, social networks can provide. On the other hand, there would also be the issue of wanting to meet the expectations of the parents. This could push them to continue creating content and may also lead to internal conflicts.
Another worrying scenario is the possibility of them ending up suffering from the “broken toy syndrome”. This has affected singers, artists, athletes, and other people who began to be recognized figures at an early age. However, after this stage, either because they move away from the spotlight or because their fame fades over time, they are hit by a sense of emptiness and loss. This loss not only implies not having their fans but losing part of what they had built as their identity, which could lead to depression, disorders or addictions.
Legally speaking, the Labor Statute in its Article 6 prohibits under-16s from working. But there are certain exceptions to this rule, found in the artistic domain. Since under-16s can work in theater, cinema, and other audiovisual fields provided the specifications marked in Royal Decree 1435/1985 dated August 1 regulating the special employment relationship of artists in public performances are met.
However, as of now in Spain, there are no regulations that cover the work of minors on social networks. And yes, we will call it work. But this is about to change, as the Government of Spain is working on a draft law to amend Article 6 of the Labor Statute to extend the protection of minors in the digital realm, control their exposure, and ensure that the earnings generated by these minors belong to them.
As for how platforms approach this issue, in their policy regarding channels featuring minors, YouTube washes its hands of it and leaves the responsibility entirely to the parents to comply with the law, “It is your responsibility to comply with all laws, rules, and regulations related to minors appearing in the videos, such as obtaining mandatory permits, providing them with a salary or agreeing to share revenue, and adhering to stipulations on teaching and schooling, work environment, and working hours”.
But, who supervises whether the minors’ guardians comply with the law or act ethically? Apparently, the answer is simple: no one.
According to the study conducted in 2022 by the CashNetUSA portal after analyzing Socialblade data, Las Ratitas, the most followed children channel in Spain, would have generated on YouTube a total earnings of $21.395 million dollars over the entire history of their channel. This makes them the highest-earning children’s YouTubers in Spain. Another revealing data point of the report was that in five out of six continents, the highest-earning channel over its history was of children’s content.
Even though the aforementioned figures are just estimates and fluctuate in ranges with large variations, they help us outline an approximate picture of the economic benefits these channels reach. However, as mentioned previously, there are no guarantees that this money reaches the actual creators: the minors. Because there is no regulation defining the distribution of this income, it may eventually lead to cases like the one exposed by Cosmopolitan magazine in March 2024.
The report was conducted in the USA and featured “Vanessa” (a fictitious name the affected party decided to use to protect her privacy), a 20-year-old who shared her experience as a child influencer. She highlighted the pressure she was under and how her mother emotionally blackmailed her to create content and present herself perfectly on camera. She also spoke about the extensive recording times that sometimes interfered with her studies.
This youth became a recurring “character” in her influencer mother’s blog, gaining great fame and collaborating with big brands. But, the price to pay was overexposure that eventually affected her negatively, reaching a point where she did not know “where the line between reality and what was selected for social networks was.” Ultimately, when she turned 18, she discovered she had received none of the money she had generated.
Although this case might seem distant, having happened across the pond, the truth is that every aspect of this young woman’s story presents dangers that can occur in the reality of any child influencer. From the pressure to do a good job to the creation of an indelible digital footprint over which they have no real control, or the unfair (or nonexistent) distribution of the income generated.
It is clear, then, the need to protect childhood, for which it is imperative to have clear and firm regulations that consider the new scenarios and risks to which minors may be exposed in this digital era that I refuse to call new, as it has already run a long course and would only serve to justify the unjustifiable: that these issues have not yet been addressed.
Photo: generated through GPT4
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Δ