IF they finished sweeping the chimney, that is.
This segues us nicely to YouTube. Just because no one's getting scalped or blown up doesn't mean that strapping a camera to your child is a good way to translate their cuteness/idiocy into private island vouchers. I mean, it is. The pay is f*****g fantastic. But that's not the point.
NOT THE POINT.
I'm not the first person to question how major child vloggers like Ryan ToysReview got into this game. There are a lot of quotes from their parents talking about how the power always lies with the child -- they chose to start the vlog, and if it all gets too much, they can throw in the towel, no questions asked. And while that's certainly more comforting to hear than "No supper until they've finished their reaction videos," it still raises some concerns.
The thing is, there's a reason that society has collectively agreed not to trust children to make long-term decisions: They suck at them. Only the most enterprising elementary school kids decide that they want to get into vlogging because they feel like they're destined for a video empire. Also, they'll all probably end up fighting Superman.
They feel okay with bringing it all crashing down because it isn't a career to them; it's something to do between Steven Universe reruns. It's often a career for their parents, however, who manage their channels, appointments, Twitter beefs, etc. I'm not saying that these parents would force their kids to perform indefinitely, but there are already forms of entertainment that are built on making kids do weird theatrical s**t in front of people for money. It isn't hard to imagine another one springing up to join it.