Shari Franke Confronts Her Past and Says 'Family Vlogging Ruined My Innocence'
As Ruby Franke spiraled from popular parenting YouTuber to convicted child abuser, her relationship with her eldest daughter, Shari Franke, deteriorated. Shari was one of the primary stars of the family's now-defunct YouTube channel, 8 Passengers, and some videos captured moments that many teens (and adults, for that matter) would feel mortified to have broadcast online.
One memorable example was when Ruby accidentally removed half of Shari's left eyebrow while waxing her daughter's brows. In another, Ruby shared footage of Shari bra shopping. Their contrasting views on vlogging and Ruby's increasingly erratic behavior eventually ruptured the mother-daughter relationship so much that they stopped speaking after Shari went to college in 2021.
Now 23, the former child influencer has been outspoken in condemning Ruby's actions and in working to protect other children from experiencing the same pressures and consequences she once faced. 'Family vlogging ruined my innocence long before Ruby committed a crime,' Shari told a Utah Senate committee in October 2024. 'I promise you that my experiences are not unique and are happening to child influencers all over Utah and the country.'
At the hearing, she also told lawmakers she lost friends because of the '24/7' work required to create content for the channel and feels regretful that her best and worst moments in childhood were made public online.$20.08 at amazon.com
Shari further detailed her experiences in the recent Hulu docuseries Devil in the Family: The Ruby Franke Story and her best-selling memoir, The House of My Mother: A Daughter's Quest for Freedom. She says she and her five younger siblings were treated as de facto employees of the family business.
Partly thanks to Shari's testimony, Utah created a law requiring online creators who make more than $150,000 a year from content featuring children to set aside 15 percent of those earnings into a trust fund that the kids can access after turning 18. The law also creates a pathway for children to have posts and videos they're in removed.
Shari has no intention of broadcasting her own family's lives on the internet, though. In a December 2024 Instagram post, she announced her engagement and new boundaries about detailing her personal life online. 'For me, this is the end of me sharing my private life... I'm not going to talk about my wedding, future husband, or future kids. I'll continue to advocate for kids who didn't have a voice (so you'll still be seeing me, don't worry) but this is closure for me. I'm moving on with my life, and that's true freedom and joy ❤️.'
You Might Also Like
Nicole Richie's Surprising Adoption Story
The Story of Gypsy Rose Blanchard and Her Mother
Queen Camilla's Life in Photos
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Instagram Restricts Live Streaming to Creators With 1,000 or More Followers
This story was originally published on Social Media Today. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Social Media Today newsletter. Yeah, this is not going to go down well with smaller creators on Instagram. Over the past few weeks, you may have seen this notification pop-up in your IG feed (via Social Varsity): Yes, Instagram has increased its follower requirements for live-streaming, which will mean that users who haven't grown their account to a certain level will no longer be able to broadcast in the app. Which will be a significant blow to many smaller creators who use IG Live for varying purpose, and have been able to connect to smaller groups via live-streams. Now, you'll have to do video calls instead. Which, if you only have 1,000 followers, will probably work anyway, but that'll also reduce any discoverability benefits that come from live-streaming on IG. So why the change? I asked Meta about the update, and it told me… nothing. Meta didn't get back to me with an explanation on the update, so I can only speculate on the possible reasons. For one, live-streaming is expensive to support, and maybe Meta decided that it's not worth paying to fund live-streams with only eight viewers. People can also use live-streams for less than savory purpose, by creating a new account, referring people to it, then broadcasting NSFW material. If it gets banned, so be it, and maybe, by increasing the threshold to 1,000 followers, that'll eliminate those who may be looking to use its tools for this purpose. It could also help to increase the quality of live-streams, by ensuring that only people with some sort of audience can broadcast. Like, you're less likely to be a full kook if you have at least a thousand people following you, and maybe, that could then increase the overall perception of streaming as a medium. The change also brings IG more into line with the live-streaming requirements of other platforms. On TikTok, users also need to have 1,000 followers to be able to live-stream, while YouTubers need at least 50 subscribers, which, considering the viewer-to-subscriber ratio, is probably about the same thing. YouTube also recently increased the age limit of live-streaming in the app to 16, the same age restriction that IG implemented back in April. So there's been broader action on live-streaming in general, for seemingly various reasons, and this is just another update along the same lines. Which, again, is bad news for smaller creators, but maybe you'll just have to put more time into building an audience before you broadcast.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
YouTube's Easing its Monetization Restrictions on Videos That Include Bad Language
This story was originally published on Social Media Today. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Social Media Today newsletter. YouTube has announced an update to its Advertiser Friendly Guidelines, which will mean that you can now include profanity early on in your videos, and still maintain monetization. Which is a reversal of a monetization policy change that YouTube launched back in 2023, and it could be popular among many creators who've had their content demonetized due to violations of the platform's profanity rules. To recap, back in 2022, YouTube unveiled an update to its Advertiser Friendly Guidelines, including new rules around the presentation of inappropriate language and violence in uploaded clips. As a result, many gaming creators, in particular, found themselves at risk of violating the rules, because the games that they're streaming sometimes feature violence, while creators also expressed frustration at how the new rules around profanity would limit monetization in all videos that featured bad language within the first 15 seconds. YouTube sought to address the concerns about profanity in 2023, by reducing its restriction on ads to only videos that included strong profanity within the first 7 seconds. Which was better, though many creators have still been frustrated by how the policy is applied. So now, YouTube will let you maintain full monetization for clips, even if they do include bad language in the first seven seconds. As explained by YouTube's head of monetization policy Connor Kavanagh: 'Today we're updating our Advertiser Friendly Guidelines for content with strong profanity in the first seven seconds. These uploads will now be eligible to earn full ad revenue […] Previously, uploads with strong profanity in the first seven seconds would not be eligible for monetization, and would have gotten the yellow dollar icon.' For those unaware, YouTube's basic monetization levels are: There are further qualifiers within each segment, but these are the basic three levels of content monetization. So, yellow monetization means some restriction, and YouTube's now removing this for videos that include swear words in those initial seconds. Why do the first seconds of a video matter so much? 'Advertisers expect ads on YouTube to have distance between profanity and the ad that just served. Those expectations have changed, and advertisers already have the ability to target content to their desired level of profanity.' So the early playback restriction relates to ad proximity, but YouTube is now confident that it can maintain monetization for clips that include such, based on the expanded placement controls that advertisers have. Though there are still some provisos around bad language in your videos: 'While you can now use these words in the first seven seconds without impacting monetization status, it's important to note that monetization will remain limited if you use moderate or strong profanity in titles or thumbnails. Additionally, [videos that include] strong profanity with high frequency will still face restrictions.' In summary, bad language in your videos will now have less impact on your monetization potential, but a lot of bad language will still lead to restrictions. Seems pretty straightforward, but you can refer to YouTube's updated Advertiser Friendly Guidelines for more insight.
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
See Jason Momoa raze off his iconic beard to film 'Dune 3': 'I hate it!'
Jason Momoa is getting back into character with a startling transformation. The DC superhero, 45, took an electric shaver to his famous facial hair in a July 30 Instagram video as he prepares to reprise his role as Duncan Idaho in the third "Dune" movie. "This is the kickoff. 'Dune 3,'" Momoa said. Later, as he gazed at his newly unveiled jawline, he said: "Ah, only for you, Denis," referring to director Denis Villeneuve. "Dune: Part Three," in production now, is reportedly aiming for a December 2026 theatrical release with franchise stars Zendaya and Timothée Chalamet. Momoa's 16-year-old son Nakoa-Wolf Momoa is also part of the highly anticipated sci-fi film's cast. A post shared by Jason Momoa (@prideofgypsies) Momoa bent over in laughter when he was nearly halfway through the hairy effort. Later, as he saw his bare-faced reflection, he exclaimed, "Damn it, I hate it!" The "Aquaman" and upcoming "Chief of War" leading man noted it's been six years since he last shaved and tied it back to his Hawaiian water brand, Mananalu, which he'd founded around the same time. As he razed off his beard and mustache, he told viewers about the work that his company has been doing to shift away from single-use plastic water bottles, remove them from the ocean and sourcing local water to cut down carbon emissions. Sweet family outing: See Jason Momoa's children support him at the 'Chief of War' premiere Jason Momoa's family ties to 'Dune: Part 3' It's hard to remember a time that the man who played the Dothraki leader Khal Drogo in "Game of Thrones" and half-Atlantean underwater superhero in the "Aquaman" movies sported a bare face. In the first "Dune" film, which came out in 2021, Momoa's Duncan Idaho had a visible jawline. While details on the third installment are scarce, the father of two has opened up about the impact it's had on son Nakoa-Wolf. "He's in for a rude awakening is what he's in for," Momoa told Extra TV at the July 18 "Chief of War" premiere. 'He's into the workforce for the first time. It's going to be good. He did it on his own. I don't want to help him, and he's done it all on his own, and good for him." "I couldn't do what he's doing at his age. There's no way I could sit in a room with Denis Villeneuve and hold my own. I was on 'Baywatch' at 19. He's 16 and holding" his own with Villeneuve, Momoa added.
