Advanced search

Can we chat about fashion Instagrammers/influencers..

(972 Posts)
Cherrypie32 Fri 28-Dec-18 10:44:09

..because I don’t have anyone in real life to carp about it to. So, I follow a few, am addicted to the stories/feeds of some but don’t always know why. The ‘high end’ ones, The Frugality, Dress Like A Mum, Emma Hill etc pop up but quite designer and high end for me. I like the ramblings of Does My Bum but I’m nothing like her body shape so don’t wear her clothes. There are a few more ‘high street’ ones I follow, Steal My Style, What Kathy Did, Forty not Frumpy and more but they tend to be repetitive. Is this because they are so heavily sponsored to flog something? At the moment they are all banging on bout All Saints leather bikers and maxi skirts. And they all copy each other so there’s not much new to look at. There are a few I follow with nowhere near the amount of followers that seem more creative and have different body shapes so I presume that they have more liberty to do this as aren’t under afflilate deals.
I don’t need advice to ‘unfollow’, I enjoy looking at it all, just interested in how it all works really.

Totallyscrumptiouspoppet Thu 31-Jan-19 17:57:06

Basically he called me a busy c*#@ (a word for ladies bits)

PleaseDoNotBend Thu 31-Jan-19 17:53:51

Oh lol I want to see what Mario had to say. If you are on a browser you can just use the choose file button on the bottom and upload. I don't know how it works on the app.

MarshaBradyo Thu 31-Jan-19 17:48:40

And if it does have a big impact that’s fine too, all the influencing by deception was becoming huge

Totallyscrumptiouspoppet Thu 31-Jan-19 17:47:40

I got a lovely reply I got from mario falcone all I did was comment #ad on his #sp post.
I have a screenshot shot but I don't know how to put it up. Help???

MarshaBradyo Thu 31-Jan-19 17:47:05

It might not you get a lot of people posting why do you have to do this don’t bother I don’t care

Followers can be very loyal - particularly when they round on someone as below

JeanPagett Thu 31-Jan-19 17:45:33

I wasn't saying they have a "right" to be pissed off. Just that I can see why these rules have been met with resentment and obfuscation by (some) influencers - clearly they really will have a huge impact on their incomes.

There seem a lot of people on threads like this who very very keen to report infractions.

Totallyscrumptiouspoppet Thu 31-Jan-19 17:43:27

Hi can someone tell me how to attach a screenshot please???

PleaseDoNotBend Thu 31-Jan-19 17:38:53

Well this is what the CMA says, and we discussed it earlier in the thread (I admit I found this particular point confusing too) and it was said that bloggers should disclose past deals with a brand even if they bought something separately from them themselves because it may not be truly arms length if they have received previous remuneration for promotional services from the same brand in the recent past, so consumers need to be made aware of this fact. She didn't have to show the sideboard prominently and tag West Elm. So looks like Emma Hill is right.

Be clear about your relationship with a brand or business. If you are including discount codes, competitions or giveaways, or references to your own range of products, don’t assume this is enough to make the relationship clear. Make sure you are transparent and state that the post is a promotion. Past relationships matter too. Even if you don’t have a current relationship with a brand, if there was a past relationship (or you received product loans, gifts and/or other incentives) people need to know about this. Only relationships within a reasonable period need to be declared: anything within the last year is likely to be relevant to followers. If you aren’t transparent about these circumstances, you could be misleading people.

MaryPoppinjay Thu 31-Jan-19 17:38:21

Do you think we’ll ever MODs or Lisa Dawson’s instagrammable kitchen on their grids ever again?

If they have been gifted/discounted (at levels not available to general public) the small brands won’t be happy their investment isn’t getting much airtime.

ChiaraMontague Thu 31-Jan-19 17:33:57

What I find disgusting is that the influencers have deliberately misled their followers about the extent of their commercial relationships and the advertising on their grids; not the fact that advertising is happening on Instagram.
I was thinking about the advertising on popular podcasts, it is obvious when something is an advert (even when the adverts are recorded by the podcaster and are similar to the style of the podcast). I don’t mind this advertising at all, it’s clear and I’m free to listen, skip or ignore as I want. It’s not the same as someone pretending to be a consumer.

AtHomeInFrance Thu 31-Jan-19 17:24:15

....... but, what is right? Emma Hill is disclosing her sunglasses as bought, but has worked with the brand previously and MOD says she is not required to declare a previous relationship if she has paid for the item in the post. One of them must be right.

AtHomeInFrance Thu 31-Jan-19 17:16:20

Guess that means that the kitchen was fully paid for then! I'm sure MOD's kitchen was fully paid for by her given her knowledge of how to disclose a post!
Really unfortunate to jump on someone for being anonymous. I am, because I value my Internet security and would never give up my privacy. Shows a real lack of understanding and petulance.

Popcorninapot Thu 31-Jan-19 17:15:23

I agree on the instamum being different. I follow mainly interiors accounts for ideas and inspiration for my house renovation. I personally am not bothered whether things in these pictures are gifted or not because if the gifting means a better look and more ideas that's great. I've not accepted any collaborations but if a company I liked offered to provide the materials for my bathroom renovation on the understanding I would advertise it for them then fine - that sort of business arrangement is as old as time!

But would be very different if I was using Instagram to follow fellow mums for general bonding about family life, and then to find their entire life was funded by brands.

MarshaBradyo Thu 31-Jan-19 17:08:04

Emma Hill is so much better at this stuff than MOD

She is clear and understanding

Perhaps there’s a difference between the fashion ones and Instamum ones - the latter just throws it all in, family / children etc, to sell to start with so it is more personal

theharlotletter Thu 31-Jan-19 17:05:39

I'm okay with an influencer posing in a gifted dress, or posing with a gifted handbag. I get it. But now I'm seeing that not only is the dress gifted, but so is the

Honestly, it's just too much.

MaryPoppinjay Thu 31-Jan-19 17:04:04

The policeman is so patronising and aggressive isn’t it! Actually you do need your followers to police you as you are doing a pretty rubbish job of it yourself. Not surprised person calling her out set up blank account - nobody wants a pile of her followers coming down at them - she should be fully aware of this given it happens every time.

Popcorninapot Thu 31-Jan-19 17:03:52

@PleaseDoNotBend Fair enough. It's actually their own fault for using 'gifted'. Which was obviously intentional to detract from the fact it's bog standard advertising. But now has the affect of making it look like they constantly get given free stuff. Hard to argue that things are gifts and also that you work so hard on your content.

PleaseDoNotBend Thu 31-Jan-19 17:00:56

I think people are saying that the amount of gifted not previously disclosed is obscene (ie the extent of the deception), not that gifting is obscene in itself.

PleaseDoNotBend Thu 31-Jan-19 16:59:10

Yeah I saw that too, nice use of a policeman emoji as well to mock and scare off anyone else who dares to put their head over the parapet and ask a question. Maybe she forgot that she did an AD with West Elm 4 months ago.

Popcorninapot Thu 31-Jan-19 16:58:28

I don't disagree with any of that @MaryPoppinjay . I am very late to Instagram so have always seen it as a commercial media. I guess the comments of 'oh look at all the free stuff they get, it's obscene" detract from the argument a bit. It's not free, it's a commercial transaction, whether it's accounted for properly or not.

MaryPoppinjay Thu 31-Jan-19 16:55:11

MOD has shouted down a comment calling her out on not using AD on her recent post. However if she has tagged WestElm she has def worked with them so even if she bought stuff should be disclosing. So obvs not ‘well aware how to disclose such a post’.

MarshaBradyo Thu 31-Jan-19 16:46:36

I don’t get your post at all Jean

Just because they were correct that deceiving people meant they could get better growth and more £ doesn’t mean they have a right to be pissed off

The opposite is true. Consumers have a right to transparency

MaryPoppinjay Thu 31-Jan-19 16:45:20

@Popcorninapot not sure anybody has explicitly said they have a problem with advertising on Instagram rather that is has been and is continuing to be hidden. Completely agree there needs to be some financial remuneration for those that work on it but be clear that you are profiting in a substantial way from advertising.

I very much doubt the smaller influencers have set themselves up as a limited company for their ‘influencing’ work - just jumped on the golden bandwagon of free stuff. The large ones certainly as corporation tax is far more kind than income tax.

And also, in a way they have tricked people into thinking they are their ‘friends’ (not in the traditional phone up for a chat sense). Note the emotional responses and fangirling whenever anybody dares to call them out. Social media stars get big quickly and without a lot of talent (often) due to their accessibility. Brands have exploited this access for good reason.

Popcorninapot Thu 31-Jan-19 16:26:22

*for advertising

Popcorninapot Thu 31-Jan-19 16:25:09

I think this thread is in danger of veering off a bit. I am in complete agreement that advertising goods on Instagram and not declaring it is completely unacceptable. It's good to see better disclosure happening and hopefully it will settle down and just become the norm to disclose clearly. The moaning about having to follow normal trade rules for your business is ridiculous and embarrassing.

However I don't object to advertising on Instagram overall. I think that's an inevitable evolution in marketing, just like tv advertising would have been at the time, and putting ads onto Facebook feeds. It makes complete business sense that sending someone with a decent following a chair or a dress is cheaper than hiring a model, a location and a photographer as they would normally have done and then pay to publish it in a magazine.

This is not people just getting lots of free stuff, these people are running a business advertising brands, probably in their own limited company. Which is fine, Instagram is a big magazine really. These are not our friends lying to us. If they are not declaring this form of payment to hmrc then they will be in for big problems but we don't know they are not and that's their business really. But they absolutely should be following the trading standards forbadvertising that all other forms of marketing have to adhere to.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »