Page 18 | MN have used my quote to promote a product I’ve never bought 🤔

Wondermoomin · 2025-05-01T19:52:57+00:00

AIBU to expect MN recommendations, where they quote a poster/member, to be genuine? I like being able to rely on recommendations in MN swears by and other emails. I excitedly opened an email with the subject “Big bargains for our most loyal Mumsnetters” wondering what MN could make me buy this time (I should probably get other hobbies). Imagine my surprise to see my own username quoted there with a recommendation! Imagine my further surprise when I realised it was a post I wrote almost 8 years ago, and it was being used directly under a specific product to give the impression I was recommending it - and I’ve never even owned that particular thing --mine was more expensive--. I don’t like posts being misrepresented as a recommendation for a specific product. It makes me question the credibility of other MN recommendations. Hoping I’ll manage to attach screenshots. PS my gazebo broke but I’ve replaced it. Still not with the brand I supposedly recommended according to the MN email.

Hobnobswantshernameback · 02/05/2025 17:31

I do wish mumsnet would stop bullshitting and pretending they are some twee kitchen table held together with sticky back plastic set up.
you make millions, employ a load of staff and trying to act all coy and "it's all just held together with gaffer tape" ooh silly us what a palaver doesn't really wash
does it

WhatdoesitmeanKeith · 02/05/2025 17:31

A ‘category endorsement’ is not A Thing. Well, it wasn’t, until it was made up just now as some sort of explanation.

These explanations are really patronising to MN users. Honesty is always the best policy,

Chewygummy · 02/05/2025 17:30

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 02/05/2025 17:29

Wondermoomin · 02/05/2025 17:27

In any particular week? I mean… you’re a bit late to the party, I posted that 8 years ago. I don’t think I’m being difficult here, the explanations are tying things in knots.

Show quote history

As said occasionally we'll choose a seasonal category and look for a quote that explains in a generic way why that product is useful. I agree that 8 years old is a bit too old though, and I'm quite surprised we used your quote - so that's something else we'll look at.

Chewygummy · 02/05/2025 17:29

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Jones1228 · 02/05/2025 17:29

Philthefridge · 02/05/2025 17:05

I hope they'd get a good percentage deal on it.

Show quote history

typically 40% or above

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 02/05/2025 17:27

Agapornis · 02/05/2025 17:25

But you're NOT choosing those specific "things that Mnetters have said they like" - you're choosing different things! It's not like 'this jumper comes in red and blue', it's 'this is a merino jumper and this is a polyester jumper'. They are not like-for-like products.

Edited

That's not the case. We occasionally might focus on a seasonal category - eg it's a heatwave so lets recommend the fans our users have said they like this week, but in general we're surfacing whats been discussed in the previous week.

Original poster

Wondermoomin · 02/05/2025 17:27

JustineMumsnet · 02/05/2025 17:25

I think what may not be clear is that we don't tend to negotiate commissions on a product by product basis - there are affiliate networks and most online products are covered by them. So we don't really think too hard about commission rates. We really are trying to surface the products or categories that users are liking in any particular week.

In any particular week? I mean… you’re a bit late to the party, I posted that 8 years ago. I don’t think I’m being difficult here, the explanations are tying things in knots.

OP posts:

ZoggyStirdust · 02/05/2025 17:25

JustineMumsnet · 02/05/2025 17:20

Technically there are a number of examples of times when we don't earn commission - Amazon, for instance, has a 24 hour cookie window, so if someone clinks a link and adds something to their basket but doesn't buy it for 24 hours then we don't earn commission. And if we promote a brand via editorial content (always labelled 'in partnership with' etc) then we typically don't earn a commission.

I'm not trying to suggest we're not generally trying to earn an affiliate commission when we send out product recommendations in newsletters. The point is we don't pick products on that basis. We choose things that Mnetters have said they like and we think others will too.

Show quote history

So on this occasion can we correctly assume you were trying to earn affiliate income, hence promoting the product and illegally attributing quotes to it to make it seem more attractive?

trying to claim you don’t always earn income just because sometimes you miss out on a technicality is a bit disingenuous.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 02/05/2025 17:25

I think what may not be clear is that we don't tend to negotiate commissions on a product by product basis - there are affiliate networks and most online products are covered by them. So we don't really think too hard about commission rates. We really are trying to surface the products or categories that users are liking in any particular week.

Agapornis · 02/05/2025 17:25

But you're NOT choosing those specific "things that Mnetters have said they like" - you're choosing different things! It's not like 'this jumper comes in red and blue', it's 'this is a merino jumper and this is a polyester jumper'. They are not like-for-like products.

JessyCarr · 02/05/2025 17:25

JustineMumsnet · 02/05/2025 17:20

Technically there are a number of examples of times when we don't earn commission - Amazon, for instance, has a 24 hour cookie window, so if someone clinks a link and adds something to their basket but doesn't buy it for 24 hours then we don't earn commission. And if we promote a brand via editorial content (always labelled 'in partnership with' etc) then we typically don't earn a commission.

I'm not trying to suggest we're not generally trying to earn an affiliate commission when we send out product recommendations in newsletters. The point is we don't pick products on that basis. We choose things that Mnetters have said they like and we think others will too.

Show quote history

But who said they liked that particular gazebo (in order for it to be chosen for promotion)? What was unusable/unprintable about their recommendation(s) that meant you had to rely on the OP’s generic comments from 8 years ago?

Chewygummy · 02/05/2025 17:24

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Agapornis · 02/05/2025 17:23

I don't think the OP questioned the existence of affiliate links at an existential level. It's okay to want to make money off that - I doubt MN Premium fees pay the bills.

But using quotes that are about a different product than the one you're advertising is wrong.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 02/05/2025 17:20

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Technically there are a number of examples of times when we don't earn commission - Amazon, for instance, has a 24 hour cookie window, so if someone clinks a link and adds something to their basket but doesn't buy it for 24 hours then we don't earn commission. And if we promote a brand via editorial content (always labelled 'in partnership with' etc) then we typically don't earn a commission.

I'm not trying to suggest we're not generally trying to earn an affiliate commission when we send out product recommendations in newsletters. The point is we don't pick products on that basis. We choose things that Mnetters have said they like and we think others will too.

Philthefridge · 02/05/2025 17:18

Sortofdontwantto · 02/05/2025 17:16

So if not a random choice
what drives the decision?

the percentage of money they get from the affiliate links. On another thread a year or so ago MN stated this is between 3-8% of the product cost.

below, they talk about how they get hundreds of approaches a day to do this. I’d assume those with the higher % become the brands that the random MN editor then ‘likes’ and recommends.

www.skimlinks.com/resources/case-studies/mumsnet-case-study/

Which is what many of us assumed. It's business. But Justine's post totally obfuscates that.

Chewygummy · 02/05/2025 17:18

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Chewygummy · 02/05/2025 17:17

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Chewygummy · 02/05/2025 17:16

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Sortofdontwantto · 02/05/2025 17:16

So if not a random choice
what drives the decision?

the percentage of money they get from the affiliate links. On another thread a year or so ago MN stated this is between 3-8% of the product cost.

below, they talk about how they get hundreds of approaches a day to do this. I’d assume those with the higher % become the brands that the random MN editor then ‘likes’ and recommends.

www.skimlinks.com/resources/case-studies/mumsnet-case-study/

Agapornis · 02/05/2025 17:14

Category endorsement? So just because I like my cat, does that mean I endorse all cats? 🤔 That's the only category I can think of where that would possibly be true.

I don't like all fridges.
I don't like all pop-up gazebos.
I don't like all lawnmowers.
I don't like all tablets.
I don't like all washing lines.

I'm not a real parent*, so you wouldn't want to use my recommendations anyway.

*not of human children

Jones1228 · 02/05/2025 17:13

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

MI5 here. Glad someone is taking this matter seriously enough for the both of us!

Philthefridge · 02/05/2025 17:10

Why that gazebo?

Chewygummy · 02/05/2025 17:09

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Chewygummy · 02/05/2025 17:08

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.