0:00

podcast is brought to you by Progressive

0:02

Insurance. You chose to hit

0:04

play on this podcast today. Smart

0:06

choice. Make another smart choice with AutoQuote

0:08

Explorer to compare rates from multiple

0:10

car insurance companies all at once. Try

0:13

it at Progressive.com, Progressive Casualty Insurance

0:15

Company and Affiliates, not available in all

0:17

states or situations. Prices vary based

0:19

on how you buy. Spring

0:23

Spring Savings are in the air and

0:25

at Ross, where they have savings on

0:27

all the brands you love. From the

0:29

latest fashion to outdoor decor and even

0:31

pet supplies, savings are in every aisle. Go

0:33

to Ross and save 20 to 60% off

0:35

other retailers' prices on your favorite spring fines.

0:36

Hey

0:50

I'm Candice Lim. And I'm

0:52

Kate Lindsay. And you're listening to

0:54

IcyYMI. In case you missed

0:56

it. Slate's podcast about internet

0:59

culture. And Kate, I

1:01

want to talk about Big

1:03

Brother. Are you watching? I'm

1:05

not watching. I know that Big

1:07

Brother is always watching, but my

1:09

interests in terms of reality shows

1:11

are pretty much limited to Love Island.

1:13

But, funnily enough, that is the

1:15

reason that despite not watching, I do know a

1:17

little bit about what's going on on this

1:20

season of Celebrity Big Brother UK

1:22

because former Love Island UK contestant

1:24

Chris Hughes is on this

1:26

season. This also

1:28

is the first time I'm realizing that

1:30

Big Brother is essentially Love Island without

1:32

falling in love with each other, like

1:34

purposefully. But I was not familiar with

1:36

this Chris Hughes and his game until

1:38

now. Can you say more? Who is

1:40

he? Yes, so I joined Love

1:42

Island and the fandom in season four.

1:44

So he's slightly before my time, but

1:46

I'm aware he was on the third

1:48

season of Love Island UK. He

1:50

came third place alongside Olivia Atwood,

1:53

who is also like shot to new

1:55

heights following the show. He

1:57

was perhaps best remembered, though,

1:59

for his bromance -turned -musical duo with

2:01

a fellow contestant named Kem

2:03

Ketene. I don't think people feel

2:05

particularly one way or another

2:07

about him, but what I can

2:09

tell you is that no

2:11

one expected his next friendship duo

2:13

to be with Jojo Siwa.

2:15

Oh, yeah, because JoJo Siwa is

2:17

also on the season of

2:19

Celebrity Big Brother UK. This

2:21

is how I found out

2:23

that Celebrity Big Brother UK has

2:25

non -UK contestants on it. Anyway,

2:27

they started making headlines right

2:29

away because producers put JoJo in

2:32

a house with Mickey Rourke.

2:34

Yeah, who looks like a

2:36

human sandbag. Yeah, and hey. I

2:38

think we're allowed to say

2:40

that because he got kicked off

2:42

Big Brother for some truly

2:44

heinous behavior, the first instance of

2:47

which involved him asking JoJo

2:49

about her sexuality. She told

2:51

him she was gay and in a relationship with

2:53

her partner, Kath Ebs, who is non -binary, to

2:55

which he replied, quote, if I

2:57

stay longer than four days, you won't

2:59

be gay anymore. And he said

3:01

that he'd tie her up. Yeah, it's

3:03

horrible. I watched the clip and

3:05

there's really no other way to interpret

3:08

that other than even a jokey

3:10

rape thread. It's a rape thread. Yeah,

3:12

like don't even get like the

3:14

ages involved either. It's just really gross.

3:16

And then he went on to

3:18

use the F slur saying he was

3:20

just talking about wanting a cigarette,

3:22

but he was clearly saying it to

3:24

get a rise out of Jojo.

3:26

He also said, I'm going to vote

3:29

the lesbian out real quick. Yeah.

3:31

And Jojo handles this. Like

3:34

a champ like she tries to be playful

3:36

but understandably by the end of this

3:38

interaction because he just won't stop She's upset,

3:40

but it's Chris of Love Island who

3:42

ends up having her back in this He

3:44

repeatedly tells Mickey not to say that

3:46

and then he comes over and comforts JoJo

3:48

when she's sort of having this quiet

3:50

moment after Mickey's walked away And they just

3:52

have like a really sweet interaction where

3:54

he emphasizes it wasn't right what he said

3:56

and it's like wait This is like

3:58

the duo. I never knew I

4:00

needed It's crazy to

4:02

me That still

4:04

exists. Even when

4:07

you can't justify it, you

4:09

can't justify things which aren't

4:11

right. There's no point of

4:13

sitting there and going, it's

4:15

like someone's age. There's

4:17

not a thing anymore. But what I

4:20

felt when you were over there was like

4:22

you had an eye back. to

4:24

be honest, we've known each other less than 24 hours. You

4:26

have no reason to have my back. Because it's

4:28

right and wrong, though, it? But it's between right and

4:30

wrong, and that's that mental loss, so... Yeah, it's not

4:32

about having your back. It's like... Yeah. There's

4:34

right and then there's wrong. All

4:37

right, though. That's not too

4:39

bad, but... Come on. Wait.

4:42

Have a little cry. No crying is

4:45

my favorite therapy. Well,

4:47

welcome in. And

4:51

it took a few more instances

4:53

of inappropriate comments for Mickey

4:56

to finally get kicked out, but

4:58

people are understandably frustrated that

5:00

he wasn't immediately eliminated after his

5:02

initial comments to JoJo. Yeah,

5:04

like I would not feel safe in that

5:06

house with that man after that happened,

5:08

but he stays and he just keeps on

5:10

exhibiting the same behavior. Notably, it's not

5:12

until he starts sort of bigging up and

5:14

seeming to threaten violence to another man,

5:17

Chris, in this instance, that they finally remove

5:19

him. But now at least JoJo and

5:21

Chris can sort of further bond over both

5:23

being on the receiving end of this

5:25

bizarre shitty behavior from, again, a human sandbag.

5:27

Yeah, it's truly the most unexpected

5:29

duo. People are seeing a different

5:31

side to JoJo and probably Chris

5:33

on the show. I mean,

5:35

before this, thanks to her role at our

5:37

new adult era, her singing career, people thought

5:39

she was a little ridiculous. I know,

5:42

and sometimes I forget that JoJo is someone

5:44

who has been in the public eye for

5:46

a long time and she was kind of

5:48

frozen as this child entertainer thanks to dance

5:50

moms, which is how she got started. But

5:52

now she's an adult and having a bit

5:54

of a difficult time growing out of it.

5:56

And that's not unrelated

5:58

to what we're talking about

6:01

today, which is the child

6:03

influencing law that was just passed

6:05

in Utah. Right. As

6:07

more and more children are growing

6:09

up in this digital spotlight, that

6:11

industry is starting to get regulated.

6:14

We'll take a look at exactly what this law

6:16

is about, but first, let's take a break. When

6:19

we come back, we'll chat about how

6:21

these laws are cropping up in response to

6:23

controversies like Ruby Frankie, but also how,

6:26

despite this, the government just can't seem to

6:28

get it right. This

7:05

episode is brought to you by Saks

7:07

Fifth Avenue. Shopping at Saks is the

7:09

perfect way to discover the latest styles,

7:11

elevate your everyday look, and refresh your

7:13

wardrobe just in time for spring. At

7:16

Saks, you'll find inspiration for every

7:18

occasion from casual outfits to special

7:20

events. My favorite thing to do in

7:22

my off time is to go online shopping. And

7:24

I cannot recommend the sacks.com experience

7:26

enough. They have so many of

7:28

my wishlist brands on the website,

7:30

from Amina Mwadi's shoes to Alice

7:32

in Olivia dresses. And

7:35

it's spring, which means wedding season is

7:37

starting up. Sacks inspires me

7:39

to discover looks for anything

7:41

and everything on my agenda, from

7:43

destination wedding dresses to shoes

7:45

that can last the whole weekend.

7:48

Whether you're refreshing your entire wardrobe

7:50

or shopping for a vacation, Saks

7:52

makes it fun and easy. So

7:54

if you're looking for a fun,

7:56

effortless shopping experience and want to

7:59

elevate your personal style, head

8:01

to Saks. That's

8:03

saks.com for everyday inspiration.

8:05

Oh, I see why my listeners do I have

8:07

a scoop for you. So what is

8:10

it you ask? is that Discover is

8:12

accepted at 99 % of places that

8:14

take credit cards nationwide. Now, before

8:16

anyone goes suggesting that this is just

8:18

a rumor, know that there's actual proof

8:20

that this kettle of tea is not

8:22

only piping hot, but 100 % true. So,

8:25

yeah, sometimes it pays to be a

8:27

little nosy, but it always pays to

8:29

Discover. Based on the February

8:31

2024 Nielsen Report, learn more at

8:34

discover.com slash credit card. And

8:43

we're back to Candice. Let me tell

8:45

you about this law that just

8:47

passed. It's called HB322 and it was

8:49

signed into law by Utah Governor

8:51

Spencer Cox on March 25th. Weirdly though,

8:53

it actually isn't positioned as a

8:55

family vlogger law at all, even though

8:57

that's how it's being reported by

8:59

a lot of outlets. It's more

9:02

so this series of regulations for

9:04

children involved in entertainment, similar to the

9:06

Kugan law that exists for child

9:08

actors. But this language in Utah is

9:10

now inclusive of content creators. Which,

9:12

if you've been a listener

9:14

of the show, you know we cover

9:16

child influencer legislation and specifically the

9:18

lack of it. So at face value,

9:20

this is long overdue because Look,

9:23

they've been unprotected for a very long

9:25

time, so tell me more about this

9:27

law. Yeah, so to put it

9:29

simply, the law mandates that parents who

9:31

make more than 150k a year by

9:33

producing content that features their children will

9:35

be forced to set aside 15 %

9:37

of those earnings into a trust that

9:39

then that child can access when they

9:41

turn 18. Specifically, if a minor

9:43

is in 30 % or more of their

9:45

parents' content, they're entitled to the money that's

9:47

set aside. Also, they can request the

9:49

removal of any of that content once they

9:51

turn 18. Yeah. And

9:54

maybe we should pause here, do a

9:56

bit of a refresh about why this law

9:58

has come about. Over the past

10:00

few years, children of family vloggers

10:02

and parents who overshared on social

10:04

media have come forward to talk about

10:06

how it impacted them negatively. For

10:08

example, UK wrote a piece for

10:10

The Atlantic where you interviewed Cam

10:12

Barrett, whose mom posted a lot of

10:14

moments from her childhood online. Some

10:16

of these moments are really personal,

10:19

like her taking a bath, medical diagnoses,

10:21

the fact that she was adopted,

10:23

the time, driver hit the car

10:25

she was riding in. And this

10:27

overexposure of Cam's life without her consent

10:29

led her to become an advocate

10:31

for children's internet privacy, leading her

10:33

to testify in front of

10:35

the Washington State House in 2023.

10:38

First, I just want to thank you, Mr. Chairman

10:40

and ranking members of the committee for your time.

10:42

My name is Cam Barrett, and I'm an international

10:44

advocate who fights the exploitation of children on social

10:46

media. As a former content kid

10:48

myself, I know what it's like to grow up with

10:51

the digital footprint I never asked for. As

10:53

my mom posted to the world my first

10:55

ever menstrual cycle, as she posted to the

10:57

world the intimate details about me being adopted, her

11:00

platform grew and I had no say in what

11:02

was posted. I do think we

11:04

are being more careful about posting children

11:06

online, but then you have moments like

11:08

Ruby Frankie who was a family blogger

11:10

in Utah who was sentenced to prison

11:12

on child abuse charges. And Ruby's

11:14

been back in the news again because

11:16

her daughter Sherry Frankie came out with a

11:19

memoir this year that kind of details

11:21

from her perspective what it was like to

11:23

live in that house. Yeah, and there's

11:25

a parallel there between how far we've come

11:27

and how far we have left to

11:29

go because every time you think you've heard

11:31

how awful some child influencers had it, it

11:33

gets worse and you're like, okay, like what

11:35

will it take for someone to step in?

11:38

Yeah. And to the credit of

11:40

certain parenting creators, a number of them,

11:42

as this discussion started happening, independently

11:44

made the decision to stop showing their children.

11:46

I would say Bobby Altoff, who now does

11:48

a podcast, she's like totally moved away from

11:50

parenting content. But initially, a lot of her

11:52

content was about being a mom and she

11:54

would have her children in it. Maya

11:56

Knight's another one. She kind of made the decision to

11:58

step back a bit from showing her children. And

12:01

I actually interviewed another former family creator

12:03

for Bustle in 2023. His name is

12:05

Grant Ken Balanoff. and he said he

12:07

removed all pictures and videos of his

12:09

children and kind of one fell swoop

12:11

when they really hit him the impact

12:13

that maybe this content was having after

12:15

witnessing these conversations. But when he

12:18

reached out to the brands that he had had

12:20

deals with to let them know that his

12:22

children would no longer be in videos, he says

12:24

that 99 % of the brands dropped those deals.

12:26

He lost hundreds of thousands of followers from

12:28

it too because people were following for his family.

12:30

But it sounds like those who are

12:32

still going in Utah at least might

12:35

have to change how they do business

12:37

to comply with this law. Yeah,

12:39

and other states have been working on laws

12:41

like this for years. So recently, you

12:43

might have seen Demi Lovato sign something in

12:45

with Gavin Newsom. This was an expansion

12:47

of the Kugan law, essentially, to include child

12:50

influencers. Minnesota signed a similar

12:52

one last year. Illinois passed a

12:54

child influencer law. We mentioned Cam, who

12:56

testified in Washington State. That is

12:58

called House Bill 1627. It similarly calls

13:00

for money to be set aside.

13:02

It also allows them to request a

13:05

deletion of content when they turn

13:07

18. action was

13:09

ultimately taken, but you can sort of

13:11

look on the website, any movement that's

13:13

been happening with it. It was

13:15

reintroduced in January 2024, nothing since,

13:17

but you know, it's not gone, it's still out

13:19

there. Yeah, so there's been

13:21

a lot of progress in this area,

13:23

but Kate, since there's a whole other

13:25

segment still ahead, I'm sensing a big

13:27

butt. Oh yeah, you've sensed

13:29

a big butt correctly. Unfortunately,

13:33

this latest Utah law in particular has

13:35

a lot of issues and it suggests

13:37

that a lot of these laws are

13:39

maybe being written and pushed by people

13:41

who don't actually understand how the creator

13:43

industry works. We're going to take a closer

13:45

look at all that, but first, let's take a break. When

13:48

we come back, we'll break down some of the

13:50

key issues this latest law overlooks and how

13:52

we might be going about the child influencer debate

13:55

all wrong. Hey

14:32

there! If you love our podcast,

14:34

then maybe you should consider subscribing

14:36

to Slate Plus to immediately unlock

14:38

bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad -free

14:40

listening across all your favorite Slate

14:42

podcasts, including bi -weekly bonus episodes

14:44

of this show. Subscribe now on

14:46

Apple Podcast by clicking Try Free

14:48

at the top of our show

14:50

page, or visit slate.com slash icmyplus

14:52

to get access wherever you listen. Maybe

14:58

you like keeping your money where you

15:00

can see it. Unfortunately, big wireless

15:02

carriers like keeping your money, too. If

15:04

you're fed up with crazy high bills,

15:06

bogus fees and quote -unquote free perks that

15:08

cost more in the long run, switch to

15:11

Mint Mobile. I have been

15:13

on Mint Mobile's unlimited plan and I

15:15

really, really like it as a

15:17

product and service. Mint Mobile

15:19

is here to rescue you with premium

15:21

wireless plans starting at 15 bucks a

15:23

month. All plans come with high -speed data

15:25

and unlimited talk and text delivered on

15:28

the nation's largest 5G network. You

15:30

can use your own phone and bring your number along

15:32

with your contacts. Ditch overpriced wireless

15:34

and get three months of premium wireless

15:36

service from Mint Mobile for 15

15:38

bucks a month. If you like

15:40

your money, Mint Mobile is for

15:43

you. Shop plans at mintmobile.com

15:45

slash I -C -Y -M -I. That's mintmobile.com

15:47

slash I -C -Y -M -I. Upfront

15:49

payment of $45 for three month,

15:51

five gigabyte plan required, equivalent

15:53

to $15 per month. New customer

15:55

offer for first three months

15:58

only, then full price plan options

16:00

available. Taxes and fees extra, see

16:02

Mint Mobile for details. Don't

16:06

miss your chance to spring into

16:08

deals at Lowe's. Right now, get

16:10

a free 60 volt Toro battery

16:12

when you purchase a select 60

16:14

volt Toro electric mower. Plus, buy

16:16

3 19 .3 ounce vegetable and herb

16:18

body plants for just $10. It's

16:21

time to give your yard a grow

16:23

up. Lowe's, we help, you save. Valid

16:25

to 423, selection varies by location. While

16:27

supplies last, discount taken at time of

16:29

purchase. Actual plant size and selection varies

16:31

by location. Excludes Alaska and Hawaii. Oh,

16:34

I see why my listeners do I have a scoop for

16:36

you. So what is it you

16:39

ask? It's that Discover is accepted at

16:41

99 % of places that take credit

16:43

cards nationwide. Now, before anyone

16:45

goes suggesting that this is just a rumor, know

16:47

that there's actual proof that this kettle

16:49

of tea is not only piping hot,

16:52

but 100 % true. So,

16:54

yeah, sometimes it pays to be a

16:56

little nosy, but it always pays to

16:58

Discover. Based on the February

17:00

2024 Nielsen Report, learn more

17:02

at discover.com slash credit card. And

17:10

we're back. And before we dive in, I

17:12

want to give a shout out to Taylor

17:14

Lorenz, whose newsletter, UserMac, is the source for

17:16

a lot of this reporting that we're about

17:18

to talk through on this Utah law. She

17:20

essentially presented this law to a bunch

17:23

of legal experts who revealed how

17:25

shoddy and ultimately dangerous it is if

17:27

it gets exploited by bad actors. And

17:30

it's wild, but not surprising to

17:32

me how hard it is for anyone

17:34

to get a good solid child

17:36

influencer law pass because it shouldn't be

17:38

this hard. But that is on

17:40

me for trusting the government. So like

17:43

what is going on here? So

17:45

the first problem with the Utah bill

17:47

is it is way, way too

17:49

broad. So unlike past bills, which cite

17:51

family vloggers specifically, nowhere does

17:54

this law specify that these regulations

17:56

apply to just parents. Like I mentioned

17:58

earlier, it's not actually positioned as

18:00

just a family vlogger sort of

18:02

law. It defines creators as, quote,

18:04

an individual who produces social

18:06

media content. So you or I,

18:08

Candice, if we're making videos in Utah and

18:10

earning over $150K, and if anyone under the

18:12

age of 18 ended up in more than %

18:14

of our video, they could

18:16

rightfully demand that we give them 15 %

18:18

of our earnings. Yeah, and

18:20

I need that money for important things,

18:22

like I don't know, buying a

18:25

flight out of Utah, but what about

18:27

if the person making the content

18:29

is a minor? So that's another

18:31

thing. I mean, one, teenagers are huge

18:33

users of social media. We see content from

18:35

them all the time. under this

18:37

law something like I'm thinking like the

18:39

hype house would be a nightmare because not

18:41

only would they all be minors but

18:43

by appearing in each other's content they would

18:45

trigger this law and so they would

18:47

have to set up a trust for this

18:49

person and that person would have to

18:51

set up a trust for the other person

18:53

and it would be really convoluted and

18:55

even though they themselves are minors that doesn't

18:57

make them exempt from this law. According

18:59

to Jess Myers, who is this visiting assistant professor

19:02

of law at University of Akron, that was another

19:04

person that Taylor unspoked to, and this is

19:06

what she pointed out. So minors could

19:08

be in charge of putting away income

19:10

for other minors. Yeah, yeah, it's like,

19:12

there's a John Mulaney quote, it's like

19:14

a horse baby sitting a dog or

19:16

something. Like it's just like, it's not

19:18

gonna work. And everything is just so

19:21

poorly defined. Even their

19:23

definition of a quote -unquote performer is

19:25

not limited to minors. So this is

19:27

a quote from Tyler T. Ochoa.

19:29

He's a professor at Santa Clara University

19:31

School of Law's High Tech Law

19:33

Institute. He says, if you

19:35

read this law literally, any performer

19:37

who makes more than $20 ,000 needs to

19:39

have their parent notified. So Candace, can you

19:41

imagine if Slate came to you when

19:43

you get your next paycheck and was like,

19:45

by the way, you need to speak

19:47

to your parents about this? I mean,

19:50

I had to get my parents permission to come on

19:52

this podcast today. I need to see that permission

19:54

slip. I need to see it. Yeah. I

19:57

really recommend reading Taylor's whole piece because

19:59

there's a lot more. But the last

20:01

thing I want to highlight is what I

20:03

think is the underlying issue here, which is

20:05

that when it comes to the internet, politicians

20:07

and legislators keep trying to regulate something they

20:09

just don't understand. Yeah. I

20:11

mean, it's Senator Richard

20:13

Blumenthal asking this crazy

20:15

question at a Facebook

20:17

hearing. Will you

20:20

commit to ending Finsta? Senator

20:23

again, let me think we

20:25

don't actually we don't

20:28

actually do do Finsta Finsta

20:30

is slang for a type

20:32

of account. Okay. It's

20:34

not that type

20:36

of account We I'm

20:38

not sure I

20:40

understand exactly what you're

20:42

asking Well, I

20:45

don't think that's an answer to my question It's

20:49

been four years since that hearing

20:51

and you would think they have a

20:53

responsibility to know these things because

20:55

watching them flop is just like meme

20:57

fodder now. Here's the thing, I

20:59

would actually love if they committed to ending

21:01

Finsta because I forgot my Finsta login and

21:04

I would like it erased. Who

21:06

will commit to ending Finstern? We

21:08

need it. But when it comes

21:10

to sort of these laws, they're

21:12

kind of making grand gestures that

21:14

don't actually accomplish anything. Case in

21:16

point, this Utah law only regulates

21:18

income directly made from social media.

21:21

But when you sort of think about that literally, the

21:24

money people make directly from these

21:26

platforms is extremely limited. There's the Creator

21:28

Fund on TikTok, and then there's

21:30

AdSense on YouTube, and I think that's

21:32

about it. Yeah, because the

21:34

big way influencers make their money is usually

21:36

through brand deals. So how is it

21:38

regulating those? These

21:41

other much more significant forms of income are

21:43

not mentioned in this bill. So you could

21:45

say, oh, if it's so bad, you know,

21:47

if the bill is really that bad, if

21:49

it's not really touching on actually anything that

21:51

matters, how is it really going to change

21:53

anything? But I think the issue is what

21:55

Taylor points out. It is more so that

21:57

by not having anyone in power who understands

21:59

and takes this industry seriously, we

22:02

get these half -hearted attempts that then

22:04

leave doors open for bad actors. Like

22:06

one example is this gives those turning

22:09

18 more power to request the deletion

22:11

of any footage they appear in more

22:13

than 30 % of posted by any

22:15

creator. Again, it could be you, me,

22:17

their parent, a stranger. So

22:19

this is an extrapolation, but let's

22:21

say a teenager who was 17 went

22:23

to a far right white supremacist

22:25

rally and an independent journalist has footage

22:27

of that rally that shows that

22:29

they were there. If they're in

22:31

more than 30 % of that, they

22:33

could get that taken down and

22:35

like erase that crucial document evidence and

22:37

kind of get off scot -free. And

22:39

the other thing that's confusing to

22:42

me is how Ruby Frankie fits into

22:44

all of this because that's one

22:46

of those big stories people cite as

22:48

to why these laws are so

22:50

important. Yet, I don't really hear anything

22:52

in what we've spoken about that

22:54

would apply to that situation. Yeah,

22:57

it's interesting to use Ruby Frankie as a

22:59

reason these laws need to exist because

23:01

she was caught, arrested, all that. Like, she

23:03

got her comeuppance all thanks to laws

23:05

that we actually already have. This

23:07

law wouldn't have changed anything about what went

23:10

down, really, other than her children being

23:12

entitled to money. And they should be. But

23:14

sort of the case of Ruby Frankie

23:16

was primarily a child abuse issue that happened

23:18

to involve social media, kind of less

23:20

so than the other way around. And it

23:22

doesn't really have anything to do with

23:24

what this law addresses. which is essentially business

23:27

disputes. It's

23:29

not that we don't like this

23:31

law because we don't think child influencer

23:33

laws should exist, but because children

23:35

on social media, family vlogging, all

23:38

those issues are so important to address

23:40

and we keep not getting it

23:42

right. And that's the thing.

23:44

I think more and more states will probably

23:46

try to pass laws like this. They'll probably

23:48

not really address the dire state of child

23:50

influencing, because legislation just never keeps

23:52

up with the times. I mean, at

23:54

this point, what's kind of your fear, Candace,

23:56

or take about the next chapter of

23:58

child influencing legislation? It's

24:00

tough because sometimes I feel like I'm

24:02

putting on a tin hat, but sometimes these

24:05

tin hat theories come true I mean

24:07

my first one is the fact that like

24:09

whenever Children are involved in a legislation

24:11

in an issue it becomes a moral panic

24:13

thing But the thing is like as

24:15

you're reading out what exactly is being lined

24:17

out in these laws It actually sounds

24:19

more like a business issue, and it's not

24:21

even a business issue about now. It's

24:23

a business issue about like down

24:25

the line when they turn 18 what are they

24:27

entitled to and the thing is when we talk

24:29

about like the future of these accounts my mind

24:31

then also goes to like hold on

24:33

a second are we about to have

24:35

like questions of what if a parent

24:37

who's influencing passes away who does their

24:39

IG go to inheriting IG's like that

24:41

is a whole whole can of worms

24:43

that I don't think the government is

24:45

prepared to deal with no yeah I

24:47

feel like the thing that we're kind

24:49

of seeing as like the through line

24:51

is that there is because of a

24:53

lack of understanding there's like this overcorrection

24:55

that happens. This Utah

24:57

law, what it is, is an

24:59

overcorrection because it is so broad, like that

25:01

is the overcorrecting part. And then I think about, you

25:04

know, the issue of children and social

25:06

media in general, Australia, just introduced

25:08

Will Allegedly going to a fact

25:10

at the end of this year

25:12

in December, this ban on social

25:15

media for under 16s, which is,

25:17

a huge overcorrection. They want to address the

25:19

mental health issues, but it just means that

25:21

once they actually do it on social media,

25:23

they won't have grown up with any of

25:25

the digital literacy that is necessary. They're going

25:27

to immediately click on a spam email and

25:30

send money to a prince in a different

25:32

country. We do need this stuff, and so

25:34

it's not one or the other. And

25:36

then, like you said, we don't even know

25:38

what to make the laws for until the

25:40

issues present themselves. So there's children on social media.

25:42

There's what happens if someone passes away, who

25:44

gets the followers. What happens

25:46

to the pets on these social

25:49

media accounts is my question because

25:51

we have animal handlers and lots

25:53

of rules about that when it

25:55

comes to Hollywood. Some

25:57

of these Chihuahuas, some of these cats

25:59

I'm seeing, they don't look like they

26:01

want to be on camera. They do not

26:03

look like they're having a good time. Oh, I

26:05

know. I mean, I really think within five

26:07

years, that's what we're going to be talking about.

26:09

Like the first pet Instagram law where like

26:11

all of a sudden pets are like having rights.

26:14

And hey, PETA, if you're listening, they should,

26:16

they totally should. It's just that like we're setting

26:18

up trust funds for pets. Got it. Got

26:20

it, got it, got it, got it. I know

26:22

what to say. Are you about to tell

26:24

me that the Central Park squirrel in the background

26:26

of my vlog, I'm going to need to

26:28

set up a trust fund for? Or

26:30

all the bears. I watch a lot

26:33

of bear content when they're like running in

26:35

people's backyards. And now I'm like, damn,

26:37

she's entitled to 15 % now. Put the

26:39

cameras down. And don't even get me started

26:41

on ring camera stuff. Imagine if now

26:43

we're getting entitled to 15 % of ring

26:45

camera footage, because that I actually would have

26:47

a discussion on, especially considering how many.

26:49

door -dash people get caught on ring camera

26:51

doing something really cute and then it gets

26:53

posted in viral it's like whoa whoa

26:55

whoa is this door -dash or getting tipped

26:57

are they even getting tipped this is like

27:00

capitalism final boss I think a simpler

27:02

rule and it applies to many things

27:04

might just be don't be an asshole

27:06

we need like a don't be an

27:08

asshole law be thoughtful about what you

27:10

post of your children or your pets

27:12

and if you're making money off of

27:14

them give your child or your parakeet

27:17

some of that money I

27:20

mean, if we had a don't be an

27:22

asshole law, I think like half of

27:24

America would be in jail. Yeah, I mean,

27:26

I'd be in jail for sure. I've

27:28

been on asshole many times on this podcast

27:30

alone. And you know what,

27:32

Kate? I'd visit you. I'd visit

27:34

you. god. OK, would you vlog it? 100%.

27:37

Great. I want 50 % of

27:39

those earnings. All right, let's talk

27:41

about this offline. OK, OK. OK,

27:45

that's the show. We'll be back

27:47

in your feed on Wednesday, so definitely

27:49

subscribe. That way, you never miss an

27:51

episode. Leave us a rating and

27:53

a review in Apple or Spotify, and tell

27:56

your friends about us. You can follow

27:58

us on Twitter at icymi underscore pod, and

28:00

you can always drop us a note

28:02

at icymi at slate.com. ICYMI

28:04

is produced by Olivia Briley,

28:06

Candace Lim, and me, Kate Lindsay.

28:09

Daisy Rosario is our senior supervising producer,

28:11

and Hilary Fry is Slate's editor -in

28:13

-chief. See you online

28:15

or visiting Kate. Fresh out

28:17

the slammer. That

28:43

patio you've been dreaming of is more

28:45

affordable than you think. When you do

28:47

it yourself, you save. Get

28:49

free estimates using our landscaping

28:51

design program in store or

28:53

on minards.com. Save big on

28:55

the largest selection of concrete

28:57

landscaping blocks at Minards. Plus,

28:59

check out our weekly flyer

29:01

on minards.com for all the

29:04

great deals happening now.