Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Part 2: MN misrepresentation in recommendations: a depressing blend of abject amateurism and outright greed

291 replies

Wondermoomin · 05/05/2025 17:36

Welcome to part 2. The quote I’ve added in the title is actually a generic quote about MNHQ not specifically about product recommendations, but it’s very eloquent and quotable.

Here is part one: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5326652-mn-have-used-my-quote-to-promote-a-product-ive-never-bought

And here’s a brief summary so far:

  • MN were caught out, allegedly acting in breach of ASA guidelines among other things
  • The thread was temporarily hidden
  • MN then provided a few explanation posts saying that this was a one-off cock-up and sorry that we MNers were confused
  • Then we were told that in 99% of cases, the quotes refer to the specific products being featured; in a tiny minority, they are referring to a generic product category and will make that clearer
  • Several users easily discovered multiple other examples, suggesting that it wasn’t just 1% of cases, or a one-off cock-up
  • MN went on an editing spree of their swears by/recommendations sections (editing about 64 out of 75 things), also suggesting it’s not just 1% or an isolated cock-up
  • The thread largely disappeared from active and trending, suggesting it’s been suppressed
  • MN says it hasn’t been suppressed, threads appear in active based on popularity and how new they are
  • Another MN source shows that they do sometimes remove threads from active to give them a chance to “calm down”

Please feel free to use this thread to capture any other examples you find, to update on anything you hear back from ASA, to provide your own professional or common sense input.

If you don’t agree, it’s probably not the thread for you so please feel free to pass on by! An issue doesn’t have to be the most pressing matter of our times to be important, and I think it’s important that trusted brands don’t mislead consumers.

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

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...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5326652-mn-have-used-my-quote-to-promote-a-product-ive-never-bought

OP posts:
Thread gallery
24
IsItSnowing · 06/05/2025 09:15

TURNYOURCAPSLOCKOFF · 06/05/2025 07:28

Hope they don't use their Swears By Patio recommendation...

They might now 😂

Wondermoomin · 06/05/2025 09:13

If people do discover other examples, please can I ask that you make a complaint to ASA to help show that this is widespread.

OP posts:
Wondermoomin · 06/05/2025 09:12

Manipulating reviews on car seats and any other safety equipment is reprehensible, if that’s also happened.

It also shows how daft the “recommended product type” excuse is - fancy that, you recommend that parents own this type of product that’s required by law and nobody has gone without for decades. How helpful.

OP posts:
PandoraSocks · 06/05/2025 08:25

Blimey. This is all very murky.

HaveAGoWhyNot · 06/05/2025 08:10

An open and transparent apology with a promise to do better would be a good start. As others have said, I hope it won’t be some patronising, meaningless PR-style waffle.

Whinge · 06/05/2025 08:10

I've been lurking since the first thread and I just want to say well done to @Wondermoomin and other posters for highlighting just how widespread this issue is.

I'm curious to know if we will get another response from MNHQ this morning, especially as they've continued to send out swear by emails.

Chewygummy · 06/05/2025 07:40

This reply has been deleted

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

SwanOfThoseThings · 06/05/2025 07:35

randomchap · 06/05/2025 06:43

Surely all trust in the recommends section has gone now. They'll need to think of another, genuine, way of advertising products

At one time they used to do product tests, sending out the product for a selection of MNetters to review - the reviews seemed quite honest, people would point out flaws in the product if they didn't like it.

TURNYOURCAPSLOCKOFF · 06/05/2025 07:28

Wondermoomin · 06/05/2025 07:20

I’m aware that they may be ordering a new patio out the back of MNHQ and if they can’t bury the issue, they may choose to bury me.

Hopefully this won’t be my last on it, but thank you for everything that posters have done to uncover this issue, give their support, and provide the legal perspective. I merely found the one-off cock-up, who could have known we’d go on to find all this…

Hope they don't use their Swears By Patio recommendation...

Wondermoomin · 06/05/2025 07:20

SomeDanceToForget · 05/05/2025 23:46

Fabulous work OP.

I’m a bit worried you may just ‘disappear’ soon though. It’s amazing how many posters who have raised issues get banned soon after. Watch your back. 😉

I’m aware that they may be ordering a new patio out the back of MNHQ and if they can’t bury the issue, they may choose to bury me.

Hopefully this won’t be my last on it, but thank you for everything that posters have done to uncover this issue, give their support, and provide the legal perspective. I merely found the one-off cock-up, who could have known we’d go on to find all this…

OP posts:
Chewygummy · 06/05/2025 06:54

This reply has been deleted

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

SlagPit · 06/05/2025 06:50

I'm disappointed. MNHQ this is very shabby.

randomchap · 06/05/2025 06:43

Surely all trust in the recommends section has gone now. They'll need to think of another, genuine, way of advertising products

Spies · 06/05/2025 06:11

Crackerjacked · 06/05/2025 05:26

im just reading up on this. Why do you all keep saying it’s in the Active thread? What’s the implication that I’m missing?

The previous thread started by Wondermoomin raising this issue last week mysteriously vanished from active threads despite MNHQ saying they hadn't removed it from active threads. We all suspect it was in fact very heavily suppressed from appearing so no more people saw the thread and learnt what was happening. This thread by comparison rises to the top of active threads each time it's posted on.

Great detective work to those who have uncovered more examples of this. I wonder if we will get a response today...

Crackerjacked · 06/05/2025 05:26

im just reading up on this. Why do you all keep saying it’s in the Active thread? What’s the implication that I’m missing?

RainbowLife · 06/05/2025 04:20

I subscribe to Which?
I wonder what they would say.

GrandmasCat · 06/05/2025 02:30

Placemarking

ANightwatcher · 06/05/2025 02:19

I just noticed a comment on the other thread about NW either not being identifiable or that anyone could claim to be a NWer

You can tell the real ones by the blue background we have when posting 😄

AutumnFroglets · 06/05/2025 01:00

Placemarking. Thanks OP for starting another.

ThisQuirkyPoet · 06/05/2025 00:50

Wow. Read this thread a few days ago before it mysteriously disappeared. Fake recommendations for gazebos are one thing, but doing this for car seats with the headline 'safest picks tested by parents' is surely crossing a whole other line.

JulepTulip · 05/05/2025 23:50

They’ll say that they’ve edited them out of an abundance of caution to go above and beyond for their Mumsnetters. Or something similar. They will claim that it has all been done for our best interests even though only a tiny fraction needed it. Of course no one can actually judge that for themselves now.

SomeDanceToForget · 05/05/2025 23:46

Fabulous work OP.

I’m a bit worried you may just ‘disappear’ soon though. It’s amazing how many posters who have raised issues get banned soon after. Watch your back. 😉

NamechangeforLCJ · 05/05/2025 23:33

Catchame · 05/05/2025 23:04

I was chatting with a friend about this very thing. She was furious about the possibility people have been buying car seat/child safety-related equipment etc based on dodgy/fictional MN reviews.

Did no one, at any point, say 'hang on guys, isn't this really, really unethical?'

I just counted on the Pregnancy and Baby Care Swears By page that 44 articles have been edited between 1 May and today (yes, they were editing an article today rather than responding to any of our concerns).

The articles they have amended are for things like baby seats, cots and mattresses. All these are items that you would expect a site for mothers to take particular care over recommending.

Why have all these articles been edited so recently, including over the Bank Holiday weekend?

https://www.mumsnet.com/h/swearsby/pregnancy-and-baby-care

(BTW my tally on the last thread was from this page, which is supposed to be “See all in Swears By” but doesn’t seem to include the baby specific articles, so it’s an additional 44 I have just counted https://www.mumsnet.com/h/swearsby)

Pregnancy and baby care: authentic product reviews and expert advice | Mumsnet

From pregnancy tests to pushchairs, baby monitors to baby bouncers, explore authentic reviews and parent-led recommendations on the best products for pregnancy, birth and beyond.

https://www.mumsnet.com/h/swearsby/pregnancy-and-baby-care

NamechangeforLCJ · 05/05/2025 23:15

MNPopcornMonitor · 05/05/2025 22:41

I see that the editing blitz has continued over the weekend - hadn’t realised that.

It’s really not a good look for MN that these topics on products for pregnancy and early parenthood apparently needed emergency attention over a Bank Holiday weekend.

Wow. That is all new since I posted on Saturday (3 May) about the numbers of Swears By articles I had seen that had been edited. They really have been working hard to eliminate that “tiny fraction” of posts that had recommendations that weren’t for the specific product.

Swipe left for the next trending thread