It's kind of like steering a super tanker, you have to think ahead, and it happens slowly, but regulation is driven by what society wants - we elect the rule makers. Citizens should be making representations to the regulator if they would like to see a rule change. Sadly, eager, innocent passengers probably do not know enough to understand how much safety they are surrendering when they patronize chisel charters, so they probably won't be complaining about that type of service until after the accident. But we experienced pilots know better.
Eager PPL's will equate taking random citizen flying for compensation, to taking their family member. I don't buy it. Anyone's family member is a part of their life, in whom they have some emotional investment, random citizen with money, no. And, PPL knows that family member knows "where they've come from" in piloting. Sure, every pilot is entitled to transition from newly minted PPL to experienced pilot. However the risk taking, showing off, and pressure to continue a flight must be kept to a minimum during that phase of their learning. PPL X knows that cousin Y will go another day if the weather's iffy on flying day. Chisel Charter PPL will more likely see opportunity lost, and press on to collect the compensation, even if flying is a poor choice that day.
AOC's have three responsibilities here: To do their part to deny access to rental chisel charter PPL's, to comment back to regulators that their hard earned privilege and flying safety are being compromised by chisel charters, and, doing their part to inform the public as to the differences between an AOC service and chisel charters in terms of safety and oversight.
In the mean time, the PPL's who are providing this service to the general public around the spirit of AOC authorized services, should be ashamed of themselves, and they know it. The fact that social media provides a communication means to enable such a dubious service, does not legitimize it!