More about kid pix online
Never mind that I pitched the very same story to the very same section of the very same paper six months ago—this story by Douglas Quenqua in today’s Sunday Style section of The New York Times is a must-read for parents who insist on putting pictures of their kids up on Facebook.
The story, titled “Guardians of Their Smiles,” delves into the pros and cons (mostly cons) of posting pictures of your kids on social networking sites. The lead anecdote focuses on a parent who was shocked to find that someone had stolen the likeness and identity of her toddler. She’s not the only one in the story to experience this same situation.
While the piece gets bogged down in the middle with a section about the differences between pictures of kids with and without clothes, overall it’s a decent take on a sensitive issue.
I’ve been relatively outspoken about my disdain for pictures of minors in quasi-public forums since L was born (and therefore, since I started this blog). A few weeks ago, I had to put my money where my mouth has been, asking a friend of mine to take down a (totally adorable) picture of his son and L chilling together in L’s pup-tent.
Powergirl was convinced after my request that this dude and his wife would no longer be our friends. Instead, he totally understood, and took the photo down immediately.
The bottom line is that it’s never too late to take a stand and protect the privacy of your kids online. Sites like Facebook don’t have to become the new family photo albums. You don’t *really* need a picture of your kid where your own (public, by the way) profile photo should go.
I know I’m being didactic, here, parents, but it’s time to wise up. Until your kids can engage in social networking on their own, they have no place on these sites, period.
I’m not a daddy – well i guess i am – but i’m more grand-daddy now. But i’m having a problem understanding your kid pix issue. I’m sympathetic, but it’s without substance. While it is unnerving to think about who might see the pix, as soon as you go outside you’ve lost that privacy (model release aside). My curmudgeon instincts tell me Scott McNealy was right when he said “Privacy? you have none, get over it”
Keep up the good work..
I’m having trouble reconciling your disdain for kid pix online with your willingness to write extensively about your daughter in a public forum. Maybe I’m alone in perceiving a disconnect here, but it seems to me that the intimate details of your child’s infancy (developmental milestones, grocery store meltdowns, etc.) are every bit as “private” as baby photos. I’m not sure why the written word gets a free pass, especially when your blog is not truly anonymous. Writing about your children online seems to have even more potential pitfalls – Joyce Maynard and her daughter Audrey are a prime example of how writing about one’s family can negatively impact parent/child relationships. I’m not trying to pass judgment on writing about one’s family online, I’m just trying to wrap my head around something I see as a “distinction without a difference.”
Gabby: The blog isn’t titled “The Daddy Dispatch” indiscriminately. Yes, while many of these anecdotes revolve around my daughter, the blog is about me and my experiences as a dad. Those aren’t intimate details about her infancy; they’re intimate details about how I’m dealing with that. I’m sharing MY feelings with readers, not HER feelings. Does this make sense?
Bob: You are correct about the baby photos; that’s why even though you built me a great VIP area to store them, I haven’t put any up!