Home › Blogs › sox's blog

hypocrite

September 29, 2009 - 5:00pm — sox

I'm very anti- Jon and Kate Plus 8 (oops, I guess I should say Kate Plus 8). I don't like the fact that they are making money off of exploiting their children. Yet it occurred to me that I read dooce.com religiously. Sure, it's a different medium and she's got a lot of other content besides kid stuff, but is the end result any different?

Not that I'm going to stop following her...it's just a thought.

Comments

September 29, 2009 - 10:22pm — Hillary

Another topic for theblogclub?

Interesting comment, Sue. As a reader of several mommy blogs, as well as posting, of course, about my daughter, it is a good discussion to ponder. One family member commented to me that they think it is wrong that I post about Annie for others to read, as she could be hurt by this when she is older. While others ask me to post more so that they can feel in touch with her life and growth. So is exploitation just for money, or do we also exploit our children to have the personal fulfillment of sharing our experiences with others? Is it not exploitation if we make our blogs private, so only friends and family can read it, or does that matter? Very modern philosophical problems we face, don't we? I certainly have no answers, but think it is important to think about these things. Thanks!

September 29, 2009 - 9:07pm — kaptaink (not verified)

i'm with emd

I think they are different things.

I read that cameras are in the house with those kids for most of the day, every day. Even if that is an exaggeration, you can imagine how hard that would be on the kids and the family dynamic. The same article talked about how there is a group in the states that is actively campaigning to see reality tv conform to the same rules regarding the amount of time children are permitted to spend in front of the camera that t.v. and movie productions have had to adhere to for years. It made total sense to me. Why protect child actors and yet leave child reality t.v. "performers" flapping in the wind without any protection? I'm certain the reason the child actor legislation was enacted was to protect children from exploitation at the hands of their guardians.

While dooce often writes about her children and even publishes photos of her kids, the intrusion into the kids lives is nowhere near the same comparison. Yes, she reveals facts about her life, but I'm guessing we only get to see a small part of that world. She talks about boundaries and it isn't hard to see that they are in place. I'm not clear what the boundaries are for J&K+8... no bathtub shots?

Having gone through a divorce, I simply cannot imagine parading that difficult time in my life and the resulting transition in front of a t.v. crew and millions of viewers. It wouldn't be healthy for me and it most certainly wouldn't be healthy for my daughter.

September 29, 2009 - 8:03pm — emd

I do see a difference

I don't pay to read dooce, while I do pay to watch J&K+8, so that is one difference. Secondly, dooce is known for her writing, regardless of topic and JK8 are on TV to exploit their children. I think it comes down to intent. Would you read dooce less if she didn't talk about her kids?