Get that baby off the Web, Jamie. Give kids privacy

WHEN she saw a photo of her tiny grandchild wriggling on a tiled floor, Jamie Oliver’s mother ordered him to pick the baby up immediately. Perhaps she should also have implored her limelight-loving son to stop subjecting his baby son to the scrutiny of strangers, by posting endless photographs of him on Instagram.

The Olivers are one of the most exposed celebrity families on social media. Jamie has his culinary empire, and his wife Jools has a children’s clothing line, so a happy family image is an integral part of their brand.

The Beckhams, who have just taken the unprecedented step of trademarking their children’s names, may be at the vanguard of the trend for profiting from family life.

But many famous, and indeed far from famous, families share the same narcissistic appetite for attention and, dare we say it, cash.

The blogosphere is filled with ordinary mothers who regularly invade their children’s privacy in order to attract sponsorship deals and followers.

Exploiting their children in this way may boost their bank balance, but the problem is that the long-term effects of internet exposure on children is unknown.

This is the first generation of mothers to saddle their babies with a digital imprint from the day they were born – if not conceived – and to keep an online record of their childhoods to potentially humiliate and embarrass them when they turn into angsty teenagers.

Who knows whether their constant search for instafame is sowing the seeds for future problems, or whether in this brave new world of social media, the concept of privacy becomes so meaningless that never having it is immaterial.