Hellobee Boards

Login/Register

Facebook for babies

  1. youboots

    honeydew / 7622 posts

    Not a fan. My friends started their daughters with an ultrasound photo (!!!!) before she was born. Obnoxious. I delete my fb Account when my Aunt set up a fake account for my Grandma with photos and she was writing on her own wall with my grandmas account. I found out because I called my grandma to see if she had Internet. I sent some choice works for my Aunt and deleted my account a few days later. People are cray.

  2. BSB

    hostess / wonderful apple seed / 16729 posts

    I have a former coworker who has a FB page or maybe it's a profile for their 4 year old. I didn't think it was weird.

    I'm not sure what I will do when my LOs are here.
    I'll admit that I have a profile for my 2 dogs. (One profile that they both share.) It started out as something funny... Like deciding what jobs and what pages my dogs would like (they would like 'who let the dogs out'... Funny things like that.)

    Now, we use it so DH and I can tag photos of pictures we take with them in it. We definitely spoil our dogs and take them on vacations so it's cool to look at their profile to see where we have taken them. Yeah, I'm sure others thought it was weird and borderline crazy but all of our friends know our long struggle with IF so yeah... They know how important our dogs are. My dogs definitely helped me cope through the tough days of IF. Whatever judge me all you want.

    I do admit the FB profile for my LOs sounds appealing because if other people post pictures they can tag them in the photo. I know I probably won't be able to prevent my MIL from posting pics so if she tags them, it will be easier to see and compile all the pics and have them in one place. I don't know but maybe I don't like when people tag me in photos that aren't of me. I know some of my friends do this but maybe I want something separate. If I do this it will be a combined account like one account for the twins and I'll use initials and not their full names.

    I do have a FB group that is private so I can post pictures of the nursery and photos of them in the future and limit who sees it. Not sure if I can get the MIL to always post to that group. We'll see. Maybe I can ask her to do that. I'll see how that goes. I'll try the FB group first and decide later If we need something more.

    ETA: As for FB privacy, I know Mine and DH's FB account is pretty restricted and not public other than cover photos. I don't know how public and private MIL's profile is. Yeah, it does make me uneasy if her profile is public and she is posting pictures of my LOs in the future. Makes me think I should be firm about letting her only post pics to that private FB group.

  3. californiadreams

    pomegranate / 3411 posts

    when facebook first came out, before it was super popular, my friend had just had a baby and made a profile for her for fun. It was silly, but fun silly i guess. we didn't have 100s of "friends" on our list then either. But it only lasted a few weeks before Facebook banned the account because of the former rule that you had to be at least 18 to use Facebook.

    I would definitely never do that now with my kids now.

  4. HLK208

    pineapple / 12234 posts

    Ummm weird!!

  5. rattles

    grapefruit / 4903 posts

    It strikes me as inappropriate. But lots of people make parenting decisions I wouldn't

  6. looch

    wonderful pear / 26210 posts

    Why is it weird? I mean, it's technically against the rules/terms of service with respect to minimum age, but I think something like half of all FB accounts out there are fakes (I heard that stat on the news once, not sure how valid it really is).

    My son has a FB profile. He's 4, so yeah, it's technically not allowed. But it has allowed me to maintain some friendships with people who don't want to see picture after picture of my son. If they want to see pics of him, they can friend him. AFAIKT, no one has unfriended me because of it.

  7. BSB

    hostess / wonderful apple seed / 16729 posts

    @regberadaisy: So is this question more for FB profiles made for babies or kids in general? You say babies in your title but seems like everyone is commenting on FB profiles for kids in general. So toddlers and older kids.

  8. BabyBoecksMom

    GOLD / papaya / 10166 posts

    @mrsjyw: @regberadaisy: I know people who have done this, but it's more to not flood the news feed of people who don't want to see a ton of pics of your kid. They make it private and only add certain people (like family) as friends.

  9. regberadaisy

    GOLD / wonderful pomegranate / 28905 posts

    @bluestriped bee: the ones I'm seeing are literally of babies! Like one and under with their own account / profile. Mom and Dad are posting status updates on their own accounts then tagging their baby. Just seems unnecessary to me.
    They are still posting from their own accounts then tagging their baby!

  10. BSB

    hostess / wonderful apple seed / 16729 posts

    @regberadaisy: So, just curious, you think it's weird when it's a FB profile for a baby? But what are your thoughts on a FB profile for a toddler or an older child?

    I'm curious... That's all and I'm wondering if this question is related to how much they allow people to post pictures of their LO on social media. Someone anti-FB might find this idea of a FB profile more weird, odd, inappropriate or insert some of the adjectives used in this thread compared to someone who embraces (?) or uses FB more often to share pictures.

  11. regberadaisy

    GOLD / wonderful pomegranate / 28905 posts

    @bluestriped bee: personally, I have no problems with friends/family posting pictures of my LO on Facebook or IG granted that their profile is private. I personally would not create a social media account for my child until she wants one and I deem her old enough / mature. My niece is 12 and desperately wants a FB because all her friends have one. She has a Instagram and that's been their (her parents) compromise. I'm friends with her on IG and monitor her account. She had random strangers bully her before she knew how to make her profile private. I've reported said strangers to IG. So it's not just about pictures for me. Albeit bullying is null and void when it's not actually your child using the account. But yeah, that's where I stand.

  12. rattles

    grapefruit / 4903 posts

    @bluestriped bee: I didn't mean to offend when I say it's inappropriate - there are plenty of other things that I feel that way about while still feeling they're within parental rights. My guess is that it does correlate to an overall preference re LOs on social media, but an individual profile seems to take it further. I don't like the idea of creating a permanent, public persona for my kid who can't consent to the idea, never mind the content.

  13. MrsSCB

    pomelo / 5257 posts

    @regberadaisy: same, the person I know who does this still posts all the photos on her own account but just tags her daughter's account in them. She says it's so when she's ready to manage her own account she'll be able to look through the old photos and remember the cool things they've done. Not sure why that can't be accomplished with a normal photo album or just a digital album, though... And I kind of doubt she'll want photos of herself at every age when she's old enough to manage her own account.

    @bluestriped bee: FWIW, I use Facebook a lot myself, but I still wouldn't do this. For me, it's more about creating an account and posting photos for someone who hasn't consented to that and isn't even technically old enough for an account. Who's to say they won't turn out to be a very private person who doesn't want Facebook and is mortified by the photos? I just think it should be a person's own choice.

  14. winter_wonder

    persimmon / 1479 posts

    sooo strange! I wonder how the kids will feel about that when they grow up?

  15. Mrs. Pickle

    blogger / wonderful cherry / 21628 posts

    @MrsSCB: I have a lot of the same thoughts as you. I was such a shy child I wouldn't have liked having a ton of my photos on the Internet. I'm planning to be very selective with the amount of photos I post and asking my family to do the same.

    I think it's weird.

  16. Truth Bombs

    grapefruit / 4321 posts

    Can't get behind people creating additional facebook profiles for anyone other than themselves. Babies, kids, dogs, it doesn't matter, I think it's weird. You really love your dog? Awesome! You want to keep track of pics of your kids? COOL! But why do you need to do it in a way that is so public? I take a ton of pics of my kid, I put them to a family photo stream to my mom can see them. No on else wants to see so many pictures of my kid. And definitely no one wants to see that many pictures of someone else's dog. And I don't need a social media platform to act as my photo albums.

  17. lawbee11

    GOLD / watermelon / 14076 posts

    Agree that it's weird. And I'm not shy about sharing pics of myself or LO on Facebook/IG. But her own account seems like overkill. And I don't have the time/desire to manage an extra account anyways.

  18. daniellemybelle

    cantaloupe / 6669 posts

    Ain't nobody got time for that.

    But, whatever. There are parents doing much worse things.

  19. BSB

    hostess / wonderful apple seed / 16729 posts

    @rattles: oh, I'm not really offended. Might be a bit defensive because I have a profile for my dogs. Lol! I understand some people are more anti-social media than others. I know some people who are really aware and don't want pictures of the LOs unless they ask. But I know people who use FB to post a lot of photos of their LOs and so their friends and family post pictures just as much.

    I do understand the problem of creating an online persona before they consented... But if you are already posting pictures of them on social media, the pictures are already out there. Granted your profile is probably pretty private but their online presence has already been breeched because it's posted. I guess I'm trying to understand how posting pictures of you LOs and not tagging them is protecting them more than creating a profile for them. Odds are they probably would not use that account when they are old enough have their own account. They will probably create the own account... If FB exists years from now. I guess it seems like if people really wanted to protect them from social media, that they wouldn't post any pictures of the LO and be very adamant about making sure people don't post pictures either.

    My thoughts aren't completely clear and I'm still trying to find the right words to describe what I mean but that's what my thoughts are so far. Hehe.

    @regberadaisy: Ah, I see. Yeah, bullying is tough on social media. I'm wondering if there are ways around tagging your LO in photos so you can keep track of the photos and who is posting it, but yet not create an online persona before they are ready. Like maybe create a dummy account that does not use their real name... Maybe initials? Or creating a profile that is one account for all of your kids? So it's a group persona.

    I do think that social media is so popular that you would need accounts on FB, IG, Twitter, Snapchat and others just to monitor it all. I don't think any of us have time to check each account to make sure others aren't posting pictures of their LOs.

  20. loveisstrange

    pineapple / 12526 posts

    Shit. I suck at my own social media, let alone maintaining one for my kid.

    Not for me.

  21. LuLu Mom

    GOLD / wonderful olive / 19030 posts

    @littlebug: was just going to say, I haven't seen much for babies (I have IG though) however I have seen a few FB profiles for people's dogs...which is strange.

  22. sunny

    coconut / 8430 posts

    I have a friend who did this. It's so they could post tons of pics of their kids and not have anyone get annoyed. You can "friend" the kid profile and see the pics, or you can just be friends with the parent profile and not see all the kid pics. I don't find it weird at all.

  23. catomd00

    grapefruit / 4418 posts

    Making a profile for another person especially a child is weird to me. I know a few people who do it and I just don't get it at all. If you only want certain people to see your pictures, just create a limited album. Idk I just find it wrong to create an account for someone without their permission.

  24. PawPrints

    pomegranate / 3658 posts

    @rattles: This exactly: "I don't like the idea of creating a permanent, public persona for my kid who can't consent to the idea, never mind the content."

    @bluestriped bee: Part of the reason to not tag LO in photos is that FB has facial recognition such that if you upload enough tagged photos of a person, they start to auto-detect that person's face. So when someone else posts a photo of them, FB will ask "Do you want to tag Abby Jenkins?" or whatever. In theory this could result in a future scenario where a stranger can take your picture in public and then identify who you are. Adults can chose to allow that by uploading/tagging photos of themselves, but I don't think it's the greatest thing to do to a child who can't consent.

    [ETA] Tagging also makes the photos findable via searching, for example by future friends, bullies, romantic partners, employers, etc.

    I post some photos of LO on FB but no profile and no tagging, and not a ton of pictures. Nothing embarrassing though. She can create a profile for herself when she's old enough but I feel like a social media presence is something a person chooses to create for themselves, not have established for them.

  25. MrsSCB

    pomelo / 5257 posts

    @Mrs. Pickle: exactly, I was thinking of my sister who has always been extremely private since about middle school. She would have hated this.

  26. regberadaisy

    GOLD / wonderful pomegranate / 28905 posts

    And the other thing is it is never recommender to put location on for your pictures on your pictures because then technically a predator can find out where your child is at x time. And these people are putting status updates "I'm here at cya with my daughter Jane (tag here). Yes, I know it's "private" but when you have 243 friends....how well do you really know your "friends"?! But I'm paranoid like that.

  27. BSB

    hostess / wonderful apple seed / 16729 posts

    @PawPrints: You have a good point about FB's facial recognition. That does make sense but I believe you can only tag people in photos that you are friends with. So it's not like John Doe is uploading a random picture of you LO and FB is suggesting people he doesn't know.
    And you say that you aren't posting anything embarrassing. You are making your own decision on what embarrassing is. A baby picture with her shirt off might be embarrassing to your daughter when she gets older. Or maybe she is anti-social media and finds it annoying that you have any pictures online. They might not be tagged but they are on your account where others can look through your pictures to find them. Your pictures are out there for your friends to see. I'm not sure what I'm trying to get at. Maybe social media is a hairy issue that doesn't really have a way from saving your child from embarrassment in life. You know unless we turn into hermit crabs and stop sharing photos online. I'm probably rambling and making vague assumptions. I'm trying to figure out what's right and what's wrong as well.

  28. Mrs. Oatmeal

    blogger / honeydew / 7081 posts

    Wouldn't do it. I don't really understand the concept, because the baby obviously isn't posting photos and status updates.

  29. PawPrints

    pomegranate / 3658 posts

    @bluestriped bee: I hear what you're saying, and I don't disagree really. I went through that line of logic when I was pregnant and nearly decided to keep all pictures off of social media altogether. I wound up deciding that a total LO-photo-blackout would just involve too much butting heads with relatives as well as resisting the strong temptation on my own part. Sharing photos is fun. So I try to be thoughtful and considerate and respectful about how I do it. It's just something that should be done with care.

    Regarding FB's facial recognition - this may be a bit tin foil hat for some people, but given revelations about the government's mass data collection and citizen surveillance over the last couple years, I don't think it's at all a stretch to imagine that the NSA has that data. That means someone attending an anti-government protest can have their photo taken and identified and logged just by appearing in public. Again, just something to be considerate about.

  30. PawPrints

    pomegranate / 3658 posts

  31. regberadaisy

    GOLD / wonderful pomegranate / 28905 posts

    @PawPrints: so some of that is a little out there for me. Buuuut I'm not naive enough to rule it all completely out.
    I hate that friends of friends tagged immediately see my pictures!!! It's an extremely annoying auto setting.

Reply

You must login / Register to post

© copyright 2011-2014 Hellobee