[shagie]

Apparently, this is known as Sharenting and has its own Wikipedia page... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharenting

> Sharenting is the practice of parents publicizing sensitive content about their children on internet platforms. While the term was coined as recently as 2010, sharenting has become an international phenomenon with widespread presence in the United States, Spain, France, and the United Kingdom. As such, sharenting has also ignited disagreement as a controversial application of social media. Detractors find that it violates child privacy and hurts a parent-child relationship. Proponents frame the practice as a natural expression of parental pride in their children and argue that critics take sharenting posts out of context.

There is a section "Applicable legislation":

> There appears to be little guiding legislation regarding parents' online control over their children's media. While different countries have their respective laws to protect children's privacy, most hand over the responsibility to the children's guardians, which sharenting may exploit as the parent is able to take advantage of their child's power to consent. This presumption in favor of the parent fails to protect the child's privacy from their parents.

> Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the United Nations broadly advocates for a child's individual identity. Article 14 outlines the applicable legal guardians' duty to represent the child's best interest.

Which then goes into the specifics for Europe and the United States.

[stametseater]

> Proponents frame the practice as a natural expression of parental pride in their children and argue that critics take sharenting posts out of context.

You know this framing is BS because they'd all scream bloody murder if monetizing that content were outlawed. It's not about pride in their children, it's about monetizing their children. Of course it's no surprise that somebody psychopathic enough to do this to their kids would also be comfortable lying about their motivation.

[corbulo]

I think you're underestimating how twisted these peoples pathologies can get. They don't see any of it logically. They're exploitative monsters because they have no emotional control or situational awareness. Words of strangers online are reality to them. Thats how they got on the path theyre on in the first place. In their brief moments of clarity where they encounter intense cognitive dissonance is where the suicide attempts enter (how the kid likely learned about such methods).

Usually these types of behaviors are accelerated with some kind of pharmaceuticals.

[smolder]

No, really. A lot of people just want to show off kids to family and friends, and don't think about the repercussions of making it public on Facebook. The bulk of kid pics post there are not exploitation by the poster, they just don't know better than to trust zuck with photos of children.

[stametseater]

> No, really. A lot of people just want to show off kids to family and friends, and don't think about the repercussions of making it public on Facebook

Those posts aren't monetized. To monetize social media posting requires intent, it doesn't happen by accident.

[smolder]

And we're talking about "sharenting" which does not imply monetization at all, hence why the post I replied to was off base.

[wutbrodo]

This definition easily encompasses the people who post their kids' lives for no monetary gain,which is the vast majority of social media users. A lot of the people in their 20s who share every detail of their life on social media continue to do so once they have kids.