To be fed up of Instamums 2

[Hmmmmx100]

Continued from original post...

I've joined just for this discussion after seeing it mentioned several times on instagram.
I do think that transparency of advertising is an interesting discussion and one that everyone is obviously allowed to express their opinion about.
I could write a long post about why I don't really care if they get paid to advertise or tell us about it but I think a few other people have already made similar points.
I'm commenting because I keep seeing comments about the reaction of the 'instamums' and how they should be open to discussion and I don't think it's fair.
The thread was named 'fed up of instamums'. It didn't start as a constructive discussion it started extremely negatively, named accounts and did have some very bitchy comments. If I had seen the start of that thread I probably would have reacted badly as well. They are only human and obviously had a knee jerk reaction. Most of the 'instamums' I follow even if they posted negatively about this thread have said since they understand the issues around advertising.
If people want to have a discussion about the transparency of advertising on social media and want brands and influencers to take notice then start a thread called 'transparency of advertising on social media'. It's not just 'instamums' that receive freebies and get paid. Nearly all the big accounts are offered something for including it on their page.

Hi lizzieloveshealthy, nice to see you here. I think if you have a food blog and recommend brands of food that makes total sense. Of course if it's an ad etc it should be made clear. But if you were suddenly going on expensive holidays, receiving white goods, sometimes putting ad sometimes not, that's where it becomes confusing and also then there's the question that the ethos of your account has changed completely and people are unsure what they are following.

I also like some #ads I've found loads of lovely shops on Insta through recommendations from other Insta accounts - but I've also had 2 bad experiences, one where the work on an item was completely shoddy and after pm the Insta account that had recommended they admitted the item wasn't that great
The second, the item never arrived and the Insta account it came from was shut down, luckily I'd paid through PayPal so had a refund but it did leave a bad taste.
So no not all ads and recommendations are helping the 'sisterhood'

As a discussion the thread has changed along the way. It raises many interesting points. I've never seen and read many Instagram/blog responses and there's an overwhelming sense that 'instamums' should not ever be critisiced. To be fair, many were not, but some were called out for bullying and a lack of transparency in sponsorships and advertising etc. There's a sense that this thread is in the wrong for naming individual accounts, this seems really strange. An account with a large following that is doing ads etc is no longer a little insightful, personal account. It's a money making business. Of course if you can make a living off Instagram or through your blog that is fantastic, who wouldn't want more time at home or with their families for that work. However if you use your children and put them in the public eye, then there may be discussion about that. At the end of the day there have been interesting safety elements to this conversation, knowing the layout of someone's home, where it is, where the kids go to school or what clubs they go to, when the nanny is there, when they are on holiday etc, this is strongly against advice given to our children about what is safe to put on line. The suggestion others should not discuss this is so odd.
It's also odd to read responses saying they have read the whole thread where their response indicates, actually they have not. I don't blame them, it's probably an hour of your life you won't get back reading people's posts about instagrammers, but then don't post comments saying you've read it.

Typo on I've never... I have seen and read 🙄

Also some mums went on and actually said 'I've read the thread and actually they might have a point' and have apologised as such (motherPukka, onlygirlinthehouse) well done to them for showing that we are all human and can sometimes react without knowing the full situ.
SV has just deleted the stories, not apologised for the, IMO, absolute bitch of a story that was far worse than anything anyone posted here, and has gone on the complete defense, which is understandable in a way but hold your hands up and say when you've made a mistake, we all make them, just as posters on here have said that actually they may have the wrong end of the sticks

Anyone that's me off because I'm almost at work and like you know, being a mum I shouldn't have time for this

I think people on insta need to be far more careful about the privacy of their children. There are a couple who live near me, and through their posts I know exactly where they live, where their children go to school, etc. On more than one occasion it have been out locally and recognised their children when they've been out with the nanny/grandparents. That's not right. I have 3 children and never post identifiable photos of them, both for their privacy and safety. One account in particular uses her cute children as part of her 'brand' which is not on imo.

I've never looked at these instamum posts really so this is a whole new world

I've looked at Charlotte Taylor's blog a few times before and I suspect she is fragile rather than a professional victim. I stopped reading though when I started to feel uncomfortable about the amount of information that is being shared about her children. I do wonder how her older child's father feels about that. I'm assuming her DD's father is essentially complicit in it all but I'm not convinced it's in anyone's best interest (let alone a child's) to have that amount of personal information to be shared without their specific consent

What I'm quite fascinated about are the videos that some bloggers (presume they are on instagram) share. I mean, does anyone genuinely want to watch what someone got in their Tesco delivery?

I had a quick look at the Susie Verril Instagram. I was struck by a comment that she made about doing this so she didn't have to ask her partner for his bank card to buy a loaf of bread. I'm sure there will be more huffy.....huffy....only joking vile jelus bully comments for picking up on this but I'm a SAHM. I previously had a good professional career and still do bits and bobs of work. There's no frigging way it would be acceptable for our (and it's our) money to be arranged in such a way that I felt I had to set up an Instagram account with a million photos of our DCs to earn a but of money

Oh now clemmie Telford has waded in

"Female bitchiness is the worst"

Is it? Is it really?

I also saw one of them locally. It doesn't feel right that she doesn't know me, but I know where she lives and how her house looks like, where she and her husband work, their kids names and surname, their date of birth and where the birthdays get celebrated and even some of the presents they got. I know when they go away and where, what car they drive and so on. And like me, other 350k people some of which could be weirdos and could use all this information in a dangerous way. I find it naive and unsafe, all for the sake of £££ and freebies?

I mean this very genuinely, but two points spring to mind:

1. It's good that these jobs are essentially self-employed roles as it sounds like a lot of these Instagram bloggers (of whatever the word is) would really struggle in a more formal workplace with robust, evidence based performance review systems; and

1. That said, these are essentially client facing roles. Ouch. It does hurt when a client or prospective client says they don't like or have an issue with your product. But you ignore that at your peril

I'm disappointed that Clemmie Telford has commented in this way.

Yes there was one oddball that commented on her children's appearance but that was a total anomaly on this thread. And presumably the person that wrote that comment isn't 'all there'. None of the other MN-ers thought that comment was acceptable and told her she had crossed the mark and then we all moved on. Surely these instagrammers expect that with all the perks they get, there's bound to be the odd weirdo who it's best to just ignore.

All the other MN comments on Clemmie Telford were positive. people seem to like her posts and find her genuine.

The general consensus on the thread was that people are fed up of being misled by #ad's that aren't labelled as such. MOD and FOD had such a strong trustworthy 'brand', that people now distrust because it doesn't appear that they've been transparent about what's sponsored and what's not. They are clearly fairly well off and have huge followings, so they can be selective about holidays and sponsor arrangements that they agree to. Why have they gone into seemingly murky arrangements with companies such as Martinhal, misled their followers about what's gone on behind the scenes...instead of just being honest about what's an #ad and what's not?

Clemmie T was subject to what looked like a very personal attack on the first thread, whether it was meant in that manner or not - so of everyone weighing in I think she has the most right, as it were.

And actually, she's one of the only people who haven't said 'those Mumsnet bitches' but specifically said that the individual poster should be ashamed of themselves - not the website/forum itself, as if we're all one homogeneous hive-mind. Fair play to her really.

SHH15 - fair point re the its not only an instamum issue; however as a lot of the people here seem to only follow instamums and drag queens I don't think its unreasonable to use that particular angle when discussing the issues.

It is a debate that is worth having, and while it did start of unconstructive it doesn't mean that it should be silenced or shut down or anyone who is commenting here is just hateful or not willing to support the sisterhood .

Also, as horrible as it is - when you put your life out there and are actively hunting for followers so you can make money from your account, you are changing the goal posts for yourself. Whether we like it or not people ARE going to judge, ARE going to write bitchy spiteful comments (just go down the GOMI hole to see what the black widow nest that is). Doesn't make it right, but its part of the territory and will never stop. Kudos to Clemmie for calling out a personal attack on her kids - and she has every right to do so, but all the other posts about how anyone on here questioning the ethics of advertising / freebies etc are being jealous and mean and spiteful is short sighted. Yes there are a few bad apples at the start of this debate but those have fallen and there is real discussion to be had over this issue.

I do note that StyleMeSunday (who I love) has a competition on her page and she specifically has posted that people who are her friends/relatives they can't enter it because its unethical. This is the first time I have ever noticed anyone on instagram (mum or no mum) make this specific and I applaud this type of professionalisim and acknowledgement that her page is at the end of the day business and should be run as such.

I have tried posting this to MotherPukka and maybe she has not turned off her comments so I am posting what I wanted to say here, in the hope that some of the Instamums read this.

I followed the MN thread from the start because I fell out of love with the Instamums and was interested to hear what others had to say. I felt the thread was mostly a good discussion, with valid points raised and people were very grateful for your honest input and exchange @mother_pukka. For me, I unfollowed because I was fed up with the contrived posts, the staged pictures and lack of transparency over#ad #spon # freebie #whatever and chose to unfollow the mass, apart from your good self Anna who I feel is being open and honest whilst seriously campaigning a good cause! I don't buy magazines and I don't want my feed full of ads or pics all the same people attending all the same promos. I also feel the whole sistahood feminist thing only exists if you are part of the gang and this reminded me of school girl gangs and bullying. You're either in or your out. Just with this MN thread alone, I personally have read more nastiness on IG than MN, but again, that's my opinion and I have read and witnessed follower bullying on many other posts too. I totally agree with that attitude of if you don't like don't follow (so I don't follow) but people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones - if public can't give their opinions without being accused of trolling, shot down and bullied - then these Instamums shouldn't be in the public eye. We are luckier than most in that we have freedom of speech, plenty of women don't so why the hypocrisy in the name of feminism and sistahood?
Unlike most of the Instamums who have been passive aggressive going on their pages crying poor me people are being nasty about us, poor me I am just a working mum etc why have none of them engaged like you (MotherPukka) did?

Well that's my two cents. I too am now off to follow loads of drag queens

DPs company ran a competition online. I was allowed to enter, to share, raise awareness etc, but I was not allowed to win, and we all knew that. I just helped with a bit of free advertising. And for what it's worth I truly do like the brand they are, and would own one myself.

Mod/Fod are often so contradictory - Boycott Johnson&Johnson whilst being paid by Proctor & Gamble. - #supportsmallbusiness with all the cash from Google and Boots.
It's Nice to be Nice/Sisterhood etc whilst bullying another Instagram Mum off Instagram.

They even managed to turn getting a nanny into a faux-Feminist statement of asking for help when you need it.

I follow insta people and enjoy them but with regard to this discussion their personal lives are now public.

And public things are up for discussion, comment, criticism. And not everyone is nice. It's a hard pill to swallow. If your life is public you lose ownership of the commentary.

I had a quick look at the Susie Verril Instagram. I was struck by a comment that she made about doing this so she didn't have to ask her partner for his bank card to buy a loaf of bread. I'm sure there will be more huffy.....huffy....only joking vile jelus bully comments for picking up on this but I'm a SAHM. I previously had a good professional career and still do bits and bobs of work. There's no frigging way it would be acceptable for our (and it's our) money to be arranged in such a way that I felt I had to set up an Instagram account with a million photos of our DCs to earn a but of money

This struck me when I read it too, but I haven't mentioned it as I think it's detracting from the debate that we're trying to have. I have given up my career to look after my child and I don't have to ask my partner for his bank card to buy anything. Firstly, HE does the weekly shop and secondly I have my own account with my own spends and i would by bread out of the joint account.

It's a whole other debate but while I've kept following Susie Verrill even after her horrible comments on Saturday night this has stuck with me and I think I'll have to unfollow her because, as a SAHM who isn't earning her "own money", this has well and truly alienated me

Have skim read both threads and actually know a couple of the instamums mentioned personally (and they are both lovely people). A few points spring to mind:

Instaparents are brands in themselves.

People have emotional attachments to brands (Apple, Coke, John Lewis, etc).

People form emotional attachments with brands they perceive to be authentic.

When those brands move away from that authenticity, they lose trust and people feel manipulated. Brands/instaparents ignore this at their peril.

With the exception of MotherPukka (that I know of) none of these instaparents have a cause or a point of view beyond 'having kids is hard and my body is shit but I'm okay with it'.

The 'having kids is hard and my body is shit but I'm okay with it' angle can ring a bit hollow when it's blatantly obvious that these women are beyond averagely wealthy, even before they get paid for endorsements, and they are also above averagely good looking.

There is no acknowledgement of that privilege, which can be grating.

Brands are bought and sold on the size of their audience/consumer base. As the target audience for these brands, the opinions on this thread (when not personal) are totally valid and the instaparents should be analytical in taking on board the feedback rather than emotional and defensive.

If you lay your family life bare on the internet, at some point you are going to lose control of how people receive what you're putting out there.

There are a lot of very strange people online who would say weird shit about your children, stalk your house, etc. Personally that would worry me enough to make me not want to do it.

Yes agree about SV's comments being ill judged and quite insulting for SAHM's

She often puts her foot in it (as we all do) but I've never seen her hold her hands up and apologise. She's missed the mark again, but will just convincer herself that we're all jealous bitches it our cess pit. It definitely must warp their sense of self when everything on their insta' is 99% praise of every detail of their life. I wouldn't even dare post "is this an #add?" as I'd be labelled a troll and scared away. Like people on this thread keep saying, they have put themselves in the public eye and they accept all the perks of that. They are a brand tho and it's only right that their audience can discuss them as such (in a respectful way).

Can't believe the double standards of MOD with Johnson&Johnson and P&G!!! Thank you for alerting us to that- I hadn't appreciated that was going on.

My bigger concern was that luffly, jumpy, Greg was keeping her short and she had to do this. That was certainly the implication.

I had to register and comment on this thread as it's been sent to me by so many people (fellow mums, mainly) and seems to have kickstarted a genuinely valid and necessary conversation.

As someone with a PR background who has been working with 'mummy bloggers' and online influencers (as well as Mumsnet/Netmums etc) for the past 12 years, I find it interesting how the field has changed as new social media platforms emerge and more and more people are able to amplify their voices to become brand ambassadors, experts and influencers. Some brands will just go with the influencer who has the biggest number of followers without even checking to see if their content/tone of voice/engagement is valid for their brand and legitimate. This has happened since way back when - PRs not doing basic research and lazily sending out emails to 'Dear Mummy Blogger' etc - generally pissing off said blogger in the process.

One thing that hasn't changed, however, is the reaction an audience of loyal followers will give when an influencer 'sells out' as they see it. And this reaction is generally all down to how it's handled by said influencer. As many have said on this thread - if you start hawking products every other post it will piss people off. If you start hawking stuff that isn't relevant or beneficial to anybody but yourself it will piss people off. If you find a nice balance - people will understand.

The negativity around this thread is mainly because of a few idiots making personal comments (the one about CT's kids is inexcusable, no matter what 'your take' is on it) but then you're always going to get that in a thread with a combined 1.5k posts!

The comments on Instagram directed at 'Mumsnet' as a whole are far worse than anything I've read on here and if I were the influencers I would think long and hard about allowing that kind of dialogue to go on underneath my posts. Any brand looking at that will be put off immediately. I would not recommend any of my clients work with Susie Verrill after her response to this thread and I'm also shocked by the responses of other 'big name' influencers who have commented on her post in an equally irresponsible manner.

Motherpukka has shown exactly how to engage in debate around this topic and I think it's clear to see she has a background in PR herself - the others should take a leaf out of her book and reconsider their responses. If you're putting every facet of your life out there you need to develop a tougher skin and you need to be able to debate any negativity in a mature and professional manner.

Clemmie Telford is, quite rightly, upset about a comment she perceived as being a negative one regarding her children. I'd have felt the same. As has been discussed, if it was an instance of tone not translating into plain text it highlights the dangers of text and something we can all take heed of in the future.

What is disappointing is this one comment being jumped on by others (I don't include CT, I would defend my child too, misconstrued comment or not)to dismiss the thread in its entirety as bitchy/jealous and elicit some virulently anti mumsnet comments, whilst entirely ignoring the main issues being debated.

I will defend Mumsnet to anyone, yes as with all areas in an open society, there are people and topics I find difficult, distasteful and at odds with my views but that doesn't mean they aren't entitled to raise their views. The support I received following baby loss and then scary moments during this current pregnancy has been thoughtful, kind and helpful.

Instagrammers, as a conduit for companies, a living, breathing advert, need more regulation and integrity than I think is currently seen. I know people have raised comparisons with free trips celebrities get in travel supplements, for example, but there it is obvious what the arrangement is, and usually there is a small section saying x travelled courtesy of y company, this is less obvious on Instagram. It will be interesting to see how things pan out.