Society

Family vlogging and “kidfluencers” are big business. Can these new laws protect children from exploitation?

In California and Illinois, parents who profit from social content featuring their kids will have to set aside some earnings. Advocates hope it’s just the beginning.
Cover Image for Family vlogging and “kidfluencers” are big business. Can these new laws protect children from exploitation?

Vitolda Klein

Vitolda Klein

In 2017, 6-year-old Ryan Kaji raked in $11 million through his YouTube channel, where his parents filmed him reviewing toys. Last year, he earned $30 million, illustrating the stunning explosion of the child influencer and family vlogging industry.

More than 80% of children under 11 regularly watch YouTube — and many become stars themselves, drawing in sponsorships, endorsements and substantial income for their families. But the industry’s lucrative potential has also raised ethical concerns over parental exploitation, labor, consent and children’s rights.

As the stakes grow, so does the need for legal protections and regulatory oversight for these young digital stars. In September, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law two groundbreaking new measures aimed at protecting minors who generate income through online content creation. 

These bills, Assembly Bill 1880 and Senate Bill 764, expand the state’s pioneering Coogan Law — originally enacted in 1939 to protect child actors’ earnings  — to include child influencers and content creators.

With more and more family vlogging scandals emerging — including two “momfluencers” whose videos racked up millions of views before they were arrested for shocking child abuse — these measures are among the first designed to safeguard underaged influencers’ their financial earnings and, to a lesser extent, their privacy. 

“In old Hollywood, child actors were exploited. In 2024, it’s now child influencers,” Newson said. “Today, that modern exploitation ends through two new laws to protect young influencers on TikTok, Instagram, YouTube and other social media platforms.”

The state’s original Coogan Law ensured that 15% of child actors’ earnings were safeguarded. The new laws extend this protection to children who appear in at least 30% of a social media channel’s content, acknowledging that the digital world has blurred the lines between traditional performance and online entertainment. 

“There’s been this glaring gap,” Newsom remarked at the signing, referencing the rapid growth of social media and the need for legal protections in the space. “This legislation closes that loophole.”

Under the new laws, a percentage of earnings from content featuring minors will be placed in a protected trust that is accessible only when the child reaches adulthood. The legislation also mandates that records of income and the amount of time children appear in online content must be maintained.

Former Disney star Demi Lovato, who joined Newsom at the signing event, hailed the legislation as a “Coogan Law for the digital age.” While the international pop star’s involvement helped spotlight the issue, much of the groundwork for these protections was laid by grassroots activists.

Fighting for kidfluencers’ rights

University of Washington student Chris McCarty first became interested in child influencer legislation after reading about the Stauffers, a popular influencer family that controversially relinquished custody of their adopted son after extensively featuring him in monetized content. 

“It didn’t sit right with me,” says McCarty, who in 2021 founded the advocacy group Quit Clicking Kids as a senior in high school and has since become a key figure in pushing for child protection laws. “I began to research what it means to work in this new industry as an influencer, with a majority of your content focused on minors.”

Child influencers face several unique dangers as compared to traditional child actors, McCarty explains. “Child stars of a vlog are portraying their own life, so it’s a lot more intimate details, and a lot of things that could impact them potentially later in life,” they say.

“Child stars of a vlog are portraying their own life, so it’s a lot more intimate details, and a lot of things that could impact them potentially later in life.”

Children starring in family vlogs have no home to return to at the end of the work day, nor any clear boundaries around when they can stop performing, McCarty adds. Social media platforms also advance parasocial relationships that can leave youth vulnerable to obsessive fans.

“When children are featured prominently online, they can develop a sense of familiarity with their audience, which can blur the lines of consent and privacy,” McCarty argues. This dynamic complicates how children are perceived and treated by the public, highlighting the urgent need for more robust protections.

These concerns drove McCarty to begin calling on legislators in Washington state to enact new laws to protect minors. Although initial attempts failed to gain traction, their persistence led to the passage of legislation in Illinois, which served as a model for the new California laws.

“I had this idea for a policy concept that would offer both privacy protections and financial compensation,” McCarty says. “I compiled everything into an email and just started cold emailing Washington state legislators.”

Though the Washington bills were unsuccessful, McCarty’s advocacy laid the foundation for Illinois’ Senate Bill 1782, which passed in 2023 and required influencers to save a portion of earnings in a trust for minors. Following Illinois, lawmakers in a handful of other U.S. states including California also began considering similar measures; McCarty was involved in bringing Washington State’s template legislation into California.

“It’s disingenuous for companies to claim they can’t ensure a child’s safety when we hear about advances in AI every day.”

While Illinois’ and California’s legislation both passed without explicit privacy protections, McCarty is committed to pushing for stronger measures in the future, especially at the federal level.

“It was a setback that the Illinois bill passed without privacy protections,” McCarty says, arguing that tech companies are choosing not to focus on protecting child users. “The tech lobby was strong, but I think it’s disingenuous for companies to claim they can’t ensure a child’s safety when we hear about advances in AI every day.”

Despite the limitations, advocates agree the new laws mark a critical moment in the evolving landscape of child labor protections in a world where the line between entertainment and reality is increasingly blurred.

McCarty’s end goal is federal legislation that ensures uniform protections for all children across America, noting that many family-run social media accounts cross state lines. “State-based legislation presents challenges,” says McCarty. “Federal laws are essential to provide equal protections.”

Kanita Tariq is a staff writer at Analyst News.

Share