Instamums 4

[mammyoftwo]

Following on from Instamums 3.2

Mumofkids who do you followon insta? The celeb mums I've mentioned (other than Katie Price, who is vile) post very similar content to the likes of MOD, CLTS, Amothersedit etc.m

They feature their kids, promote various brands, go on holiday a lot (no idea if freebies or not) and post fashion affiliate links.

@farfallarocks people now quoting reality celebs I think this thread is derailed.

How is it derailed? You seem to be wilfully missing the point that if you're as concerned about child protection as you say you are (general you) then it is exactly the same whether it's people on instagram or on the telly.
You're all in the public eye regardless of your platform.
It's not being derailed pointing that out.

My point is there are many other children in the public eye, whether that is promoted by their parents or not. They are then supposedly in just as much danger as, for example, MOD's children.

I was just pointing this out as some posters on here are making such a fuss about the exploitation and safeguarding issues of some instamums kids.

What's katie price done to make her 'vile'?

I was just pointing this out as some posters on here are making such a fuss about the exploitation and safeguarding issues of some instamums kids.

Exactly, I see where you're coming from. When people stick to the topic that it is supposed to be about, you get accused of derailing.
Go figure

Thanks Cady, I feel other posters on here are actually purposely missing the point to gloss over it. I don't feel there needs to be any further discussion on child exploitation or safety. If posters are really that concerned surely they should be contacting the instagrammers whose children they feel are in danger.

It just comes across as people wanting to bitch and being put out that they can't as it's staying "on topic" doesn't it?

A lot of the traditional celebrity children are captured by paparazzi and staged shoots with hello, so there isn't as much information out there. The press are also bound by laws to protect and not give information to risk a child. Instagram users (and not just instamums) are offering this information themselves. Its not difficult for instance to Google planning permissions and names for addresses when building work is shown. BUT some of the TV/music made celebrities live on gated communities etc to give some protection against this exposure. There isn't a concrete answer to any of it, but I wonder if Joe blogs with a suddenly exploded Instagram and no PR/agent help, realises what all those pictures could lead to.

How do we know what a thread similar my title 'instamums' is 'supposed to be about' though?

It's thread 4..... what was thread 1 opening post discussing?

I’ve just looked at the Insta of Binky and Sam and their content is very dissimilar to the bloggers featured often on this thread. The whole MO of MIC was as I believe it, an insight into a privileged world for us plebs. TOWIE is all bling and nightclubs and a million miles away from the down to earth relatable Mum schtick of MOD. Both of them look like they have shockingly bad disclosure though, that I agree with. Have none of their followers ever raised it? The contributors to this thread isn’t the market for them I don’t think, in general.

@Sofialemon I’m sure we covered that earlier. Parental choice, nothing we as individuals can do about it, etc. The only people that need to contact them are the ones who can do something about it. It’s one of the most important areas of debate on this thread though, so why not discuss if further and continue raising awareness?

🤣🤣 @cadyheron @sofialemon I totally agree that these peoples children are at risk if they are behaving in a similar fashion to some instaparents and of course they should be protected and their parents should not monetise them. This thread is called instamums and so I've taken the valid point and yes I agree (although in Sofias case am confused as she's consistently laughed off any need for child concerns) however I do wonder if they are different risks, perhaps this Binky's child might be more at risk of kidnap than an instamums child a local weirdo stalker? And of course any ads should be open, same as any other instagrammer. Who knows, I'm no crime profiler, but as you watch hours of these people you would be clearer on what they expose and share, I can't really comment on something I've never seen and don't even know the names of. You come across as very young Sofia.

Sophie and Cady have been trying to steer this thread right from the beginning

The rise of reality TV and 'celebrities" has been such a shift, I'm not sure anyone knows the full answer

I agree though that it's not just instamums doing this with their children. It was just a point being highlighted that it IS a risk. Anyone working in child protection would say it is a heightened risk. Its just whether they are receiving advice to help them with that, like traditional celebrities would be

Or actually seeing as apparently it is SOOOO easy to find out their addresses you can go on their LA's website and put a safeguarding referral in.

It would obviously be completely ridiculous to do that, however no more ridiculous than you sound on here.

At work I deal with parents who have neglected, abused or injured their children. Yet if you look on their Facebook (and yes I do that) you'd think they adored their kids. Those children don't feature in beautiful pics on insta or receive lovely expensive #gifts. They're lucky to be fed, not get a clip or have toys. Seriously, some of you need to get a grip.

My point was that it’s a choice that the instamums or celebs have. It doesn’t naturally follow that you put yourself into the public eye and your children have to be part of that. Plenty of instamums and celebs are able to keep their children out of it. But Sophia and cady seemed to think that was a stupid suggestion for some reason 🤷🏼‍♀️

Hang on Sofie are you saying the just because children 'feature in beautiful pics' on Insta or go on expensive holidays, they are exempt from eg 'getting a clip' around the ear?

Very naive statement. Particularly given what you say you do for a living.

I wonder why you and Cody are so invested in defending these instamums.

I'm sure Rhonda is here?

And Sofia, I've known teenage girls be exposed to social media, and actually need intervention.

Can you really not see that there IS a risk? You may argue how much of a risk it is, but surely you cannot argue that putting information out there regularly which gives away your own, or family's, places of work, education, regular route of travel, is exposing them to a higher risk? There is a reason the poilce and SS advise against it after all.

Sophie and Cady have been trying to steer this thread right from the beginning

steer the thread to what? I've been responding to posts made.
What should we all be talking about?Have I got it all wrong? Is it not about child safety and protection issues at all then?As that's what the posts were concerning.
What is the post about in the first place then? You tell me what it is if it's not being concerned about the children in the public eye as that's how it comes across to me.

I'm sure Rhonda is here?

Who's Rhonda?

That’s very sad but abuse happens in all parts of society, even among those who go on nice holidays.

Well as the saying goes, they fuck you up, your mum and Dad. It doesn’t mean the damage is immediate. None of us know the real answer of whether social media exposure is going to be damaging to children. I guess we’ll find out in a few years who is right.

Seriously guys this now sounds like a daily mail comments section. Kidnapping kids. It's bloody nonsense.

Why have we veered onto child abuse? That's a serious issue.