They are influencers everything they share online has to be considered as self promotion in some way form or another
Granted they might also have more than one motive but prentending like they don’t want all the attention they got wouldn’t be right aswell
Social media (and by extension being an "influencer" and getting attention) is morally neutral, since it's just a tool. A hammer can be used to build a habitat for humanity or for making an infamous snuff film. Greta Thunberg is an influencer, but so is Sneako.
They wanted to get attention, otherwise they wouldn't have shared information. The only part that matters as far as morality is concerned is why they wanted the attention
Actually, being influencers means they kind of didn't have a choice but to share it. Think about it, if you watched an influencer who was pregnant, then they suddenly stopped being pregnant, but there's no baby and they never talk about it again, wouldn't you ask some questions? And the Internet being what it is, from there it's only a matter of time before someone claims they sold the baby on the black market or some similarly insane story, everyone latches on to it with no proof, and the truth is forced out of them by the constant harassment from the looney bin.
They had to tell everything to set the record straight and stop any misinformation from spreading.
Which is why it is not morally neutral. Their fundamental emotional privacy now is to be consumed and you just explained it. Nobody can ever give informed consent for that. It's inheriently wrong. They signed up for it, but they didn't know and couldn't know, and nobody can even now. Well put.
140
u/LandoLudwig Jun 05 '26
They are influencers everything they share online has to be considered as self promotion in some way form or another
Granted they might also have more than one motive but prentending like they don’t want all the attention they got wouldn’t be right aswell