Laws may need to be strengthened to crack down on the exploitation of child “influencers”, a senior Labour MP has warned.
Chi Onwurah, chair of the science, technology and innovation committee, said parts of the Online Safety Act – passed in October 2023 – may already be “obsolete or inadequate”.
Experts have raised concerns that there is a lack of provision in industry laws for children who earn money through brand collaborations on social media when compared to child actors and models.
This has led to some children advertising in their underwear on social media, one expert has claimed.
Those working in more traditional entertainment fields are safeguarded by performance laws,which strictly govern the hours a minor can work, the money they earn and who they are accompanied by.
The Child Influencer Project, which has curated the world’s first industry guidelines for the group, has warned of a “large gap in UK law” which is not sufficiently filled by new online safety legislation.
Image: Official portrait of Chi Onwurah.
Pic: UK Parlimeant
The group’s research found that child influencers could be exposed to as many as 20 different risks of harm, including to dignity, identity, family life, education, and their health and safety.
Ms Onwurah told Sky News there needs to be a “much clearer understanding of the nature of child influencers ‘work’ and the legal and regulatory framework around it”.
She said: “The safety and welfare of children are at the heart of the Online Safety Act and rightly so.
“However, as we know in a number of areas the act may already be obsolete or inadequate due to the lack of foresight and rigour of the last government.”
Victoria Collins, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for science, innovation and technology, agreed that regulations “need to keep pace with the times”, with child influencers on social media “protected in the same way” as child actors or models.
“Liberal Democrats would welcome steps to strengthen the Online Safety Act on this front,” she added.
‘Something has to be done’
MPs warned in 2022 that the government should “urgently address the gap in UK child labour and performance regulation that is leaving child influencers without protection”.
They asked for new laws on working hours and conditions, a mandate for the protection of the child’s earnings, a right to erasure and to bring child labour arrangements under the oversight of local authorities.
However, Dr Francis Rees, the principal investigator for the Child Influencer Project, told Sky News that even after the implementation of the Online Safety Act, “there’s still a lot wanting”.
“Something has to be done to make brands more aware of their own duty of care towards kids in this arena,” she said.
Dr Rees added that achieving performances from children on social media “can involve extremely coercive and disruptive practices”.
“We simply have to do more to protect these children who have very little say or understanding of what is really happening. Most are left without a voice and without a choice.”
What is a child influencer – and how are they at risk?
A child influencer is a person under the age of 18 who makes money through social media, whether that is using their image alone or with their family.
Dr Francis Rees, principal investigator for the Child Influencer Project, explains this is an “escalation” from the sharing of digital images and performances of the child into “some form of commercial gain or brand endorsement”.
She said issues can emerge when young people work with brands – who do not have to comply with standard practise for a child influencer as they would with an in-house production.
Dr Rees explains how, when working with a child model or actor, an advertising agency would have to make sure a performance license is in place, and make sure “everything is in accordance with many layers of legislation and regulation around child protection”.
But, outside of a professional environment, these safeguards are not in place.
She notes that 30-second videos “can take as long as three days to practice and rehearse”.
And, Dr Rees suggests, this can have a strain on the parent-child relationship.
“It’s just not as simple as taking a child on to a set and having them perform to a camera which professionals are involved in.”
The researcher pointed to one particular instance, in which children were advertising an underwear brand on social media.
She said: “The kids in the company’s own marketing material or their own media campaigns are either pulling up the band of the underwear underneath their clothing, or they’re holding the underwear up while they’re fully clothed.
“But whenever you look at any of the sponsored content produced by families with children – mum, dad, and child are in their underwear.”
Dr Rees said it is “night and day” in terms of how companies are behaving when they have responsibility for the material, versus “the lack of responsibility once they hand it over to parents with kids”.
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon has denied debanking customers based on their religious or political affiliation and stated that he has actually been working to change the rules surrounding debanking for over a decade.
During an interview with Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” on Sunday, Dimon said his bank has cut off services to people from all walks of life, but political affiliations have never been a factor.
Devin Nunes, the chair of the president’s intelligence advisory board and CEO of Trump Media, alleges the company was debanked by JPMorgan and that it was among more than 400 Trump‑linked individuals and organizations that had banking records subpoenaed by special counsel Jack Smith as part of an investigation.
Houston Morgan, the head of marketing at non-custodial crypto trading platform ShapeShift, shared a similar story in November.
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon maintains his institution doesn’t debank people for political affiliations. Source: YouTube
“People have to grow up here, OK, and stop making up things and stuff like that,” Dimon said. “I can’t talk about an individual account. We do not debank people for religious or political affiliations.
“We do debank them. They have religious or political affiliations. We debank people who are Democrats. We debank people who are Republicans. We have debanked different religious folks. Never was that for that reason.”
However, Dimon said he doesn’t like debanking and wants the rules around reporting requirements that can lead to debanking to change.
“I actually applaud the Trump administration, who’s trying to say that debanking is bad and we should change the rules. Well, damn it, I have been asking to change the rules now for 15 years. So change the rules.”
“It is really customer unfriendly, and we’re debanking people because of suspected things, or negative media, or all these various things,” Dimon added.
JPMorgan made recommendations to curb debanking: Dimon
Dimon said one of the rules banks are required to follow is sharing information with the government when subpoenaed, but he also claims JPMorgan has provided recommendations to reduce reporting and instances of debanking.
“We don’t give information to the government just because they ask. We’re subpoenaed. We are required by court to give it to the government. And I have been following subpoenas with this administration, the last administration, the administration before that and the one before that. And I don’t agree with a lot of it,” Dimon said.
“The government does a lot of things that can anger banks. So, let’s just take a deep breath and fix the problems, as opposed to, like, blame someone who’s put in that position,” he added.
At the same time, Dimon said both sides of politics are equal offenders when it comes to leaning on banks.
“Democratic and Republican governments have come after us both; let’s not act like this is just one side doing this. This has been going on for a long time. And we should stop militarizing the government that kind of way.”
The Trump administration did not mention cryptocurrency or blockchain in its latest national security strategy, despite the industry’s growing ties to the financial system and President Donald Trump’s claim of increased competition from overseas.
Trump’s national security strategy, outlining his administration’s priorities, released on Friday, instead said the “core, vital national interests” of the US revolved around artificial intelligence and quantum computing.
“We want to ensure that US technology and US standards — particularly in AI, biotech, and quantum computing — drive the world forward,” the administration said.
The omission of crypto from the national security strategy comes despite Trump telling CBS’ 60 Minutes last month that he did not want to “have China be number one in the world in crypto” and has previously said he wants all Bitcoin (BTC) mining to take place in the US.
CIA Deputy Director Michael Ellis also said in May that crypto was “another area of technological competition where we need to make sure the United States is well-positioned against China and other adversaries.”
There is, however, one section of the document that states that Trump wants to preserve and grow “America’s financial sector dominance” by using the country’s “leadership in digital finance and innovation” to ensure market liquidity and security, which could be a hint at crypto.
A highlighted excerpt of the document says the US should grow its “financial sector dominance.” Source: The White House
Trump has pushed forward crypto policies
The Trump administration has been supportive of crypto this year, moving forward with a slew of promised policies that have led to more financial institution adoption of the technology.
Trump helped the stablecoin-regulating GENIUS Act become law and has signed executive orders creating a crypto task force and banning a central bank digital currency, while also overseeing federal agencies’ abandonment of many crypto-related enforcement actions.
The administration has also established a Bitcoin reserve and crypto stockpile, comprising forfeited digital assets, while the government is exploring “budget-neutral” methods of acquiring more.
Bitcoin traded below $90,000 over the weekend as the market digested the national security strategy document, which called on US allies to “contribute far more” to defence.
It asked NATO countries to spend 5% of their GDP, up from the current 2%, which would mean heightened government borrowing that would drive up inflation, making it harder for central banks to cut interest rates.
The Federal Reserve’s interest rate decision this week is what is driving crypto markets, with many hoping for a cut that historically spurs investors to make riskier bets.
The market is expecting interest rates to drop when the Fed meets on Tuesday and Wednesday, with CME’s FedWatch showing nearly 88.5% betting on a 25 basis point cut.
Young people could lose their right to universal credit if they refuse to engage with help from a new scheme without good reason, the government has warned.
Almost one million will gain from plans to get them off benefits and into the workforce, according to officials.
It comes as the number of young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) has risen by more than a quarter since the COVID pandemic, with around 940,000 16 to 24-year-olds considered as NEET as of September this year, said the Office for National Statistics.
That is an increase of 195,000 in the last two years, mainly driven by increasing sickness and disability rates.
The £820m package includes funding to create 350,000 new workplace opportunities, including training and work experience, which will be offered in industries including construction, hospitality and healthcare.
Around 900,000 people on universal credit will be given a “dedicated work support session”.
That will be followed by four weeks of “intensive support” to help them find work in one of up to six “pathways”, which are: work, work experience, apprenticeships, wider training, learning, or a workplace training programme with a guaranteed interview at the end.
However, Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden has warned that young people could lose some of their benefits if they refuse to engage with the scheme without good reason.
The government says these pathways will be delivered in coordination with employers, while government-backed guaranteed jobs will be provided for up to 55,000 young people from spring 2026, but only in those areas with the highest need.
However, shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately, from the Conservatives, said the scheme is “an admission the government has no plan for growth, no plan to create real jobs, and no way of measuring whether any of this money delivers results”.
She told Sky News the proposals are a “classic Labour approach” for tackling youth unemployment.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:57
Youth jobs plan ‘the wrong answer’
“What we’ve seen today announced by the government is funding the best part of £1bn on work placements, and government-created jobs for young people. That sounds all very well,” she told Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips.
“But the fact is, and that’s the absurdity of it is, just two weeks ago, we had a budget from the chancellor, which is expected to destroy 200,000 jobs.
“So the problem we have here is a government whose policies are destroying jobs, destroying opportunities for young people, now saying they’re going to spend taxpayers’ money on creating work placements. It’s just simply the wrong answer.”
Ms Whately also said the government needs to tackle people who are unmotivated to work at all, and agreed with Mr McFadden on taking away the right to universal credit if they refuse opportunities to work.
But she said the “main reason” young people are out of work is because “they’re moving on to sickness benefits”.
Ms Whately also pointed to the government’s diminished attempt to slash benefits earlier in the year, where planned welfare cuts were significantly scaled down after opposition from their own MPs.
The funding will also expand youth hubs to help provide advice on writing CVs or seeking training, and also provide housing and mental health support.
Some £34m from the funding will be used to launch a new “Risk of NEET indicator tool”, aimed at identifying those young people who need support before they leave education and become unemployed.
Monitoring of attendance in further education will be bolstered, and automatic enrolment in further education will also be piloted for young people without a place.