logo
Two Cautionary Tales for the Family Vlogger

Two Cautionary Tales for the Family Vlogger

Yahoo31-03-2025

In 2018, when YouTube's official Instagram account posted a Mother's Day tribute, the vlogger Ruby Franke was front and center. Over the years, 8 Passengers—the YouTube channel where Franke documented life with her husband, Kevin, and their six children—had amassed nearly 2.5 million subscribers and generated upwards of $100,000 in monthly income at its peak. In some ways, she was a vision of modern motherhood: photogenic, committed, successful. But six years after her Mother's Day shout-out, Franke's image had crumbled. In February 2024, she and her business partner, Jodi Hildebrandt, were sentenced to at least four years in prison after both pleaded guilty to four counts of aggravated child abuse following the discovery that they had been starving, beating, and physically restraining Ruby's two youngest children.
The influencer exposé is now a true-crime subgenre unto itself, and Devil in the Family: The Fall of Ruby Franke—a new Hulu docuseries about the Frankes released at the end of February—is not the first public account of this one family's ordeal. But the show is also one of two new documentaries that explore how the creator economy encouraged family vloggers to perform an ideal of perfect American motherhood, sometimes to the detriment of their children's well-being. Their channels thrived by peddling maternal relatability, wrapped in palatable aesthetics, and helped usher in an era of digital culture promising that other women could earn money and praise just by turning a camera on their everyday lives. This social-media shift had tangible real-life effects: Not only did many unconsenting minors have their childhoods broadcast to the whole world, but their mothers also helped entrench—or, some might say, re-entrench—a broader view of the nuclear family as not just a worthy pursuit but a moral cause. Watching old clips from 8 Passengers, it's easy to see that Franke was selling a lifestyle, not just monetizing random family footage. Devil in the Family frames Franke's approach to motherhood and vlogging as a vehicle for her core mandate: evangelism, both religious and cultural. The documentary suggests that the vlogger—who is Mormon—saw her family's success as a reflection of God's satisfaction. But these same religious principles were also distorted to justify poor treatment of the Franke children. Early in the series, Kevin recalls Ruby remarking that the kids were 'losing their light' when they complained about constantly being filmed for YouTube—evidence of a spiritual malaise, not simple dissatisfaction with the work of always being on camera.
Even before the gorier details of Franke's conduct were made public, her parenting had drawn scrutiny from once-devoted followers. In one pivotal instance, 8 Passengers received a deluge of disapproving comments after Chad, the Frankes' then-teenage son, revealed that his mother had been punishing him by forcing him to sleep in their basement for seven months, on a beanbag chair. 'We saw it as an innocent religious family that's being attacked unjustly by cancel culture, and cancel culture is winning,' Kevin says of the critiques in the doc, one of many moments in which he alludes to his and his wife's belief that 8 Passengers was a vital beacon of traditional values. Some of the documentary's most uncomfortable asides are those in which he appears to still be enamored with Ruby, even after she asked him to move out and cut off contact with the family, and after her abuse of their children had come to light. The dissonance is jarring to witness, especially in the final episode, which includes extensive descriptions (and some disturbing images) of the physical abuse that the two youngest children suffered.
But part of 8 Passengers' appeal had always come from Ruby's no-nonsense views on child-rearing. Her emphasis on discipline was as central to the channel's appeal as the light-flooded home where the Frankes filmed. Ruby modeled strategies for how other parents might stamp out concerning behavior they witnessed in their own children, casting school-age rebellion as a matter of grave importance to the health of the family. On 8 Passengers, she mocked or castigated her children for infractions as minor as failing to wake up on time for preschool, forgetting to pack their own lunch for school, or inquiring which movie the family would be going to see.
The intensity of her approach escalated after Ruby shut down the Frankes' original channel and began making parenting-advice content with Jodi: 'Your woke child is a walking zombie,' Ruby says in one clip from Moms of Truth, a social-media group they started after 8 Passengers, imploring parents to assert control over the wicked forces taking hold of their kids. In this framing, children are not autonomous individuals worthy of respect, but future standard-bearers of their parents' values—which means that the greatest sign of a mother's success is producing obedient children. That view has tremendous societal implications: Researchers have found that the values survey respondents prioritize in their parenting often correlate with those they prioritize in their politics.
[Read: How parents of child influencers package their kids' lives for Instagram]
In Devil in the Family, two of the Franke children speak for themselves. Shari and Chad, now ages 21 and 20, discuss the psychological toll of having their adolescent years mined for content. Their commentary is striking, in part because it defies the idea that children tend to be eager collaborators in their parents' blogging business. The entire infrastructure of family vlogging relies on the labor of minors, but their participation has only recently been recognized as work. Although family vloggers have been making a living online for more than a decade, Chad and Shari are among the first children of influencers to comment publicly as adults. (The younger children, who are still minors, are not interviewed, and their faces are blurred out in the old footage.)
The two relay how their mother's desire to project blissful domesticity had strained the family well before news of her abuses turned the internet against her. These remarks echo some of the criticism in Shari's new memoir, The House of My Mother, which challenges the notion that parent-child relationships are unbreakable bonds. Shari's disinterest in rekindling a relationship with her mother, and her insistence on referring to her parents by their first names, pushes back against the expectation that children express unconditional gratitude for the parents who raised them. This cultural belief leaves children particularly vulnerable to abuse at home, the memoir suggests, because it reinforces a hierarchy in which parents hold absolute power.
The events detailed in An Update on Our Family, a recent HBO documentary inspired by a New York magazine article, are less straightforward than the Frankes' story. But the dynamics that propelled Myka Stauffer, another controversial 'momfluencer,' to social-media fame share some connective tissue with the Frankes' early vlogging days. Though the Stauffers were subject to a sheriff's-office investigation after viewers called to report suspicions of child endangerment, authorities found no evidence that the couple had committed any crimes. Instead, their predicament illustrated something more difficult to pinpoint as an obvious moral failing—the tragic dilemma of parents who'd taken on more than they could handle, seemingly motivated at least partly by the promise of a large following.
Not long into their own social-media careers, Myka and her husband, James, realized that viewers responded enthusiastically to the reveal of a new child, the ultimate proof of a couple's stability and closeness. When the Stauffers recorded their path to adopting a young boy from China with special needs, their subscriber count grew exponentially. Once the child arrived in the United States, the Ohio couple made him a fixture of their channel, documenting him alongside their three biological children. That included their sponsored content, such as a baby-detergent ad in which Myka claimed that the product helped her bond with the 3-year-old—whom the Stauffers had renamed 'Huxley'—because 'I can still feel like I'm snuggling that brand-new baby, and I get that baby scent that I never got from my son.'
The Stauffers visibly struggled with Huxley's developmental needs, tearfully describing his diagnoses for the camera. Still, they assured viewers that they were steadfast in their commitment, because to reject him would have been to deny God's will for their life. Followers praised the couple for their ostensibly selfless, Christlike decision to give a foreign child a chance at a better life, and the Stauffers leaned into the idea that God had chosen them to adopt Huxley in a show of faith. But the Stauffers seemingly failed to deliver on the ideals that had helped attract roughly 1 million subscribers to their various accounts: An Update on Our Family takes its name from the title of the last video that Myka and James uploaded to their joint YouTube channel, in which the two 30-somethings admitted to their subscribers that they had placed Huxley with a new family that was better suited to the child's needs. In a written statement, Myka denied having adopted Huxley for financial gain: 'While we did receive a small portion of money from videos featuring Huxley and his journey, every penny and much more went back into his care,' she said.
The dizzying montage of social-media reactions to this decision, which is presented in the documentary, shows how angrily viewers responded. And the storm of vitriol that followed the Stauffers' joint decision was directed almost entirely at Myka, just as Ruby Franke, before the extent of her abuse came to light, bore the brunt of public critique for her parenting style. In each case, part of what enabled the husbands to bypass the overwhelming criticism hurled at their wives is the widespread notion that fathers are less responsible for child-rearing than mothers are. The image that Ruby and Myka sold to their viewers relied on the veneration of motherly authority—the idea that the domestic sphere is where women hold court and exert quiet control.
Years after the dramatic crescendos of the women's controversies, family vlogging no longer has the same uncomplicated, aspirational allure it once did. Since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, the work of balancing motherhood with professional demands has become significantly more difficult for a lot of American women, making some types of lifestyle blogging feel less like cheerful entertainment or useful resources and more like optimized artifice. Of course, the Stauffers' and the Frankes' extreme experiences don't represent the average vlogger's. But as family bloggers begin to speak up about moving away from states with laws intended to protect their children, the medium's tricky ethical and economic considerations are becoming more transparent to viewers. For many women who rose to prominence by turning their children into stars, saying goodbye to the profits—and the power—may still be even harder than logging off.
Article originally published at The Atlantic

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

New '1984' foreword includes warning about ‘problematic' characters
New '1984' foreword includes warning about ‘problematic' characters

Miami Herald

timean hour ago

  • Miami Herald

New '1984' foreword includes warning about ‘problematic' characters

The 75th anniversary edition of George Orwell's novel 1984, which coined the term 'thoughtcrime' to describe the act of having thoughts that question the ruling party's ideology, has become an ironic lightning rod in debates over alleged trigger warnings and the role of historical context in classic literature. The introduction to the new edition, endorsed by Orwell's estate and written by the American author Dolen Perkins-Valdezm, is at the center of the storm, drawing fire from conservative commentators as well as public intellectuals, and prompting a wide spectrum of reaction from academics who study Orwell's work. Perkins-Valdez opens the introduction with a self-reflective exercise: imagining what it would be like to read 1984 for the first time today. She writes that 'a sliver of connection can be difficult for someone like me to find in a novel that does not speak much to race and ethnicity,' noting the complete absence of Black characters. She also describes her pause at the protagonist Winston Smith's 'despicable' misogyny, but ultimately chooses to continue reading, writing: 'I know the difference between a flawed character and a flawed story.' 'I'm enjoying the novel on its own terms, not as a classic but as a good story; that is, until Winston reveals himself to be a problematic character,' she writes. 'For example, we learn of him: 'He disliked nearly all women, and especially the young and pretty ones.' Whoa, wait a minute, Orwell.' That framing was enough to provoke sharp critique from novelist and essayist Walter Kirn on the podcast America This Week, co-hosted with journalist Matt Taibbi. Kirn characterized the foreword as a kind of ideological overreach. 'Thank you for your trigger warning for 1984,' he said. 'It is the most 1984ish thing I've ever f***ing read.' Later in the episode, which debuted on June 1, Kirn blasted what he saw as an imposed 'permission structure' by publishers and academic elites. 'It's a sort of Ministry of Truthism,' he said, referring to the Ministry of Truth that features prominently in the dystopian novel. 'They're giving you a little guidebook to say, 'Here's how you're supposed to feel when you read this.'' Conservative commentator such as Ed Morrissey described the foreword as part of 'an attempt to rob [Orwell's work] of meaning by denigrating it as 'problematic.'' Morrissey argued that trigger warnings on literary classics serve to 'distract readers at the start from its purpose with red herrings over issues of taste.' But not all responses aligned with that view. Academic rebuttal Peter Brian Rose-Barry, a philosophy professor at Saginaw Valley State University and author of George Orwell: The Ethics of Equality, disputed the entire premise. 'There just isn't [a trigger warning],' he told Newsweek in an email after examining the edition. 'She never accuses Orwell of thoughtcrime. She never calls for censorship or cancelling Orwell.' In Rose-Barry's view, the foreword is neither invasive nor ideological, but reflective. 'Perkins-Valdez suggests in her introduction that 'love and artistic beauty can act as healing forces in a totalitarian state,'' he noted. 'Now, I find that deeply suspect... but I'd use this introduction to generate a discussion in my class.' Taibbi and Kirn, by contrast, took issue with that exact line during the podcast. 'Love heals? In 1984?' Taibbi asked. 'The whole thing ends with Winston broken, saying he loves Big Brother,' the symbol of the totalitarian state at the heart of the book. Kirn laughed and added, 'It's the kind of revisionist uplift you get from a book club discussion after someone just watched The Handmaid's Tale.' Perkins-Valdez, a Black writer, Harvard graduate and professor of literature at American University, also noted the novel's lack of racial representation: 'That sliver of connection can be difficult for someone like me to find in a novel that does not speak much to race and ethnicity at all.' Kirn responded to that sentiment on the show by pointing out that Orwell was writing about midcentury Britain: 'When Orwell wrote the book, Black people made up maybe one percent of the population. It's like expecting white characters in every Nigerian novel.' Richard Keeble, former chair of the Orwell Society, argued that critiques of Orwell's treatment of race and gender have long been part of academic discourse. 'Questioning Orwell's representation of Blacks in 1984 can usefully lead us to consider the evolution of his ideas on race generally,' he told Newsweek. 'Yet Orwell struggled throughout his life, and not with complete success, to exorcise what Edward Said called 'Orientalism.'' Keeble added, 'Trigger warnings and interpretative forewords... join the rich firmament of Orwellian scholarship-being themselves open to critique and analysis.' Cultural overreach While critics like Kirn view Perkins-Valdez's new foreword as a symptom of virtue signaling run amok, others see it as part of a long-standing literary dialogue. Laura Beers, a historian at American University and author of Orwell's Ghosts: Wisdom and Warnings for the Twenty-First Century, acknowledged that such reactions reflect deeper political divides. But she defended the legitimacy of approaching Orwell through modern ethical and social lenses. 'What makes 1984 such a great novel is that it was written to transcend a specific historical context,' she told Newsweek. 'Although it has frequently been appropriated by the right as a critique of 'socialism,' it was never meant to be solely a critique of Stalin's Russia.' 'Rather,' she added, 'it was a commentary on how absolute power corrupts absolutely, and the risk to all societies, including democracies like Britain and the United States, of the unchecked concentration of power.' Beers also addressed the role of interpretive material in shaping the reading experience. 'Obviously, yes, in that 'interpretive forewords' give a reader an initial context in which to situate the texts that they are reading,' she said. 'That said, such forewords are more often a reflection on the attitudes and biases of their own time.' While the foreword has prompted the familiar battle lines playing out across the Trump-era culture wars, Beers sees the conversation itself as in keeping with Orwell's legacy. 'By attempting to place Orwell's work in conversation with changing values and historical understandings in the decades since he was writing,' she said, 'scholars like Perkins-Valdez are exercising the very freedom to express uncomfortable and difficult opinions that Orwell explicitly championed.' Related Articles Gabbard Links 'Ministry of Truth' to Obama Speech, Calls Biden 'Front Man'Tulsi Gabbard Compares Biden Admin to Dictatorship Over 'Ministry of Truth'Joe Biden's Disinformation Board Likened to Orwell's 'Ministry of Truth'Memory Holes, Mobs and Speaker Pelosi | Opinion 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.

Gavin Newsom condemns National Guard deployment amid ICE raids, protests in LA
Gavin Newsom condemns National Guard deployment amid ICE raids, protests in LA

Miami Herald

timean hour ago

  • Miami Herald

Gavin Newsom condemns National Guard deployment amid ICE raids, protests in LA

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday evening criticized federal officials' decision to deploy 2,000 members of the California National Guard to the Los Angeles area as 'purposefully inflammatory.' U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents deployed flash grenades and tear gas to disperse a protest at a Home Depot in Paramount, where people had gathered to protest a series of raids immigration officials had carried out around the city on Friday. SEIU California union president David Huerta, a frequent Newsom ally, was injured while protesting Friday and remained in federal custody over the weekend. 'The federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers,' Newsom said in a social media post. 'That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' In an earlier post announcing he had deployed CHP officers to 'maintain safety on Los Angeles highways to keep the peace.' 'It's not (the CHP's) job to assist in federal immigration enforcement,' Newsom said. 'The federal government is sowing chaos so they can have an excuse to escalate. That is not the way any civilized country behaves.' The Department of Homeland Security said Saturday that recent ICE operations in the south state resulted in the arrest of 118 people, including five individuals the agency identified as gang members. The agency said those arrested included individuals with prior convictions for drug trafficking, assault and other offenses. Federal officials linked the arrests to heightened tensions in the region, and said ICE agents had been targeted during protests. The department reported a '413% increase in assaults' on officers and alleged that some agents' family members had been doxed. Homeland Security officials criticized the Los Angeles Police Department in the statement, saying it took officers more than two hours to respond to a disturbance outside a federal building Friday night. 'The violent targeting of law enforcement in Los Angeles by lawless rioters is despicable and Mayor (Karen) Bass and Governor Newsom must call for it to end,' Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in the statement. 'The men and women of ICE put their lives on the line to protect and defend the lives of American citizens.' McLaughlin went on to criticize House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.J. and others including Bass for 'contributing to the surge in assaults of our ICE officers' 'From comparisons to the modern-day Nazi gestapo to glorifying rioters, the violent rhetoric of these sanctuary politicians is beyond the pale. This violence against ICE must end,' she said. 'Lawlessness that has been allowed to fester' Tom Homan, the White House 'border czar,' told Fox News on Saturday that the administration planned to send in National Guardsmen to quell the protests, saying ICE would not 'apologize for enforcing the law.' Under the Insurrection Act of 1792, federal authorities can override state law and deploy state militia in specific circumstances, such as in 'emergencies, civil disturbances, and other reasons authorized by state law.' In 2020, the Trump administration called up guardsmen from 11 states to put down anti-police brutality protests in Washington, D.C. It was unclear what authority Homan, who has no official title within either Homeland Security or ICE, or any other officials had invoked to send in the National Guard. In a statement Saturday night, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the deployment, accusing California officials of failing to maintain order. 'California's feckless Democrat leaders have completely abdicated their responsibility to protect their citizens,' she said. 'That is why President Trump has signed a Presidential Memorandum deploying 2,000 National Guardsmen to address the lawlessness that has been allowed to fester.' 'The Commander-in-Chief will ensure the laws of the United States are executed fully and completely.' The protests at the Home Depot in Paramount escalated into a violent clash with federal agents, prompting federal officials to declare the gathering an unlawful assembly. Flash-bang grenades and pepper balls were deployed, according to the Los Angeles Times, and several protesters were injured. Federal officials said one immigration agent was injured when a rock shattered his vehicle's windshield, and the U.S. Marshals Service reported arrests for obstructing operations, according to the Times. Bass said reports of violence in Paramount, an independent city patrolled by the L.A. Sheriff's Department, were 'deeply concerning' and emphasized that while peaceful protest was protected, 'violence and destruction are unacceptable.' Showdown in Paramount 'creates chaos and fear' Paramount Mayor Peggy Lemons told the Times that the city had no prior notice of federal operations and was not coordinating with immigration authorities. 'That creates chaos and fear,' she said. In a statement posted to social media, Rep. Nanette Barragán, who represents south Los Angeles, condemned the use of tear gas and heavy-handed tactics by ICE and other federal agencies. 'This is unacceptable,' she wrote, urging constituents to 'know your rights.' Newsom, who was previously in Los Angeles this week, said in a statement that local authorities had 'no unmet needs' and were able to 'access law enforcement assistance at a moment's notice.' 'The Guard has been admirably serving L.A. throughout recovery,' he said. 'This is the wrong mission and will erode public trust.'

Julianne Hough Shares Intimate Video of Her 'Egg-Freezing Journey': 'Navigating Fertility Is Never Simple'
Julianne Hough Shares Intimate Video of Her 'Egg-Freezing Journey': 'Navigating Fertility Is Never Simple'

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Julianne Hough Shares Intimate Video of Her 'Egg-Freezing Journey': 'Navigating Fertility Is Never Simple'

Julianne Hough shared a video on Instagram revealing that she's undergoing her third round of egg freezing "Here we go. All in the name of having a little baby," the Dancing with the Stars alum said in the clip Hough described the process as "one of the most vulnerable experiences… physically, emotionally, and for sure hormonally"Julianne Hough is sharing her journey to becoming a mother one day. The Dancing with the Stars alum revealed that she was freezing her eggs in a video offering an intimate look at the process, which she shared on her Instagram on Saturday, June 7. 'Here we go,' Hough said in the video that she dubbed her "egg freezing journey," noting it was 'all in the name of having a little baby.' The video takes viewers through the course of 10 days, where Hough is seen smiling and dancing while she injects herself. She is also seen going to doctor's appointments. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Julianne Hough (@juleshough) By day eight, she noted that her 'hormones were kicking in. My boobs are bigger. Everything is happening.' is now available in the Apple App Store! Download it now for the most binge-worthy celeb content, exclusive video clips, astrology updates and more! Hough went into greater detail in a lengthy caption accompanying the video, thanking Dr. Carolyn Alexander and her team at Southeast Crescent Regional Commission, which specializes in fertility care and helping to create families, according to its website. 'Navigating fertility is never simple, especially with endometriosis and my own personal timeline and hopes around having children… but with them, I've always felt safe, supported and fully informed,' she wrote, adding that this was now her third round of egg freezing.'I know it's not always the most comfortable thing to talk about, let alone share publicly. But I've realized how important it is to open up about these things,' she continued. 'Women all over the world are quietly walking into doctors' offices, making huge, brave decisions about their bodies and their futures.' Hough described the process as "one of the most vulnerable experiences… physically, emotionally, and for sure hormonally." She further reflected on why she wanted to be so transparent with her fans. 'If sharing just a small piece of my journey helps someone feel less alone, or inspires them to ask questions and explore what's right for them, then I feel like it's worth it,' she wrote. In a 2020 interview with Women's Health, Hough shared that her endometriosis — which is a reproductive condition in which uterine tissue grows outside of the uterus, causing cramping and chronic pain — made her want to freeze her eggs. 'I think the healthier I am from the inside out — as far as my beliefs, my energy, what I'm putting into my body — the better prepared I'll be when the time comes,' she said at the time, when she was married to Brooks Laich. 'We never actually tried to get pregnant. It was more of a precautionary measure: Let's do our due diligence for the future by freezing eggs.' Hough ended her June 7 post by once again thanking her medical team for their unwavering care. 'I truly couldn't be more grateful for this team who's been with me since my second endometriosis laparoscopy surgery back in 2017… they've been like family ever since 💛,' she wrote. Her post received an overwhelming amount of support from celebrities and fans alike, who applauded her for being so open. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer​​, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Jenna Dewan simply commented: "❤️❤️❤️❤️." 'Absolutely amazing! Thank you so much for sharing the most incredibly personal experience with us. So many women struggle with fertility and for you to be extremely open like this and show exactly the steps it's inspiring,' a follower wrote. Read the original article on People

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store