Does the title Wren Eleanor imply something to you?
If it doesn’t, effectively, it’s price a Google (or, in my case, depend on the ever informative and proficient Instagrammer @fieldnotes__ to deliver it to your consideration).
Wren Eleanor is an American toddler, who’s amassed a TikTok following of greater than 17 million customers, however, after all, she hasn’t had a lot say in that.
Her profession as an influencer – or, extra precisely, an infant-luencer, which is completely a factor – started when she was a child, so the choice to share her life with an unlimited on-line viewers was made by her mum, a proudly single younger mom named Jacquelyn.
However the case of Wren Eleanor took a really darkish flip in latest days, when TikTok customers started to note the form of content material that was hottest on the kid’s account.
Most posts had been getting over one million views, which is unimaginable in itself, however the variety of saves – when a person saves a selected TikTok video to their very own gadget – was usually round a number of thousand per publish.
However folks seen that some posts had been significantly extra widespread than that.
As an alternative of 5000 saves, a video of the toddler within the tub had 59,000 saves.
One other of her in a swimsuit had 56,000.
A TikTok of Wren’s mum dancing by herself, in the meantime, acquired simply 2200 saves.
Jacquelyn hasn’t commented on the difficulty and there’s no proof that she is knowingly exploiting her baby in any method.
That mentioned, I’m fairly assured it’s shitty parenting to provide your then one-year-old spicy lollies, movie their response whereas consuming it, earlier than sharing it on social media for the likes.
Critics declare that some customers are actively looking for posts of Wren sporting revealing outfits or consuming suggestively-shaped meals – it’s frikkin’ disgusting.
Numerous criticism has come from different mummy bloggers on the platform, and I gotta say that looks like the pot calling the kettle black.
For years now there was a debate in regards to the morality of taking advantage of pictures of your kids on-line when they’re too younger to provide their consent.
I really don’t actually care, simply depart your youngsters out of it
And you may wager the identical degenerates which might be stalking Wren’s profile are doing it to different youngsters, who’re being utilized by their dad and mom to earn money on social media.
So right here’s a thought: perhaps simply don’t do this.
Take a selfie and share that as a substitute, or a pic of your doggo, I really don’t actually care, simply depart your youngsters out of it, as a result of social media could be a cesspit and children who can’t presumably give official consent shouldn’t be on there.
However who is admittedly accountable right here?
It’s the outdated, “weapons don’t kill folks, folks kill folks” argument.
Whereas that’s technically true, the high-capacity magazines and rapid-fire functionality of AR-15s skew the burden of duty in the direction of gun producers.
Equally, tech giants spend a whole bunch of tens of millions of {dollars} and rent literal geniuses to jot down algorithms that solely exist to get folks hooked on social media platforms, and persuade them to maintain sharing content material.
Jacquelyn and poor little Wren Eleanor by no means stood an opportunity.
