To be fed up of Instamums 2

[Hmmmmx100]

Continued from original post...

Yes agree that these instamums bullying people off insta is horrid. I just can't understand why some of them (MOD et al) care that someone with less than 100 followers is allegedly making a joke at their expense.

I'm pleased to hear that the lady MOD is meant to have bullied off insta is now back with a new account.

Also SV is a culprit for screen shotting insults from someone with 60 odd followers in order to garner a load of praise and adulation from her own followers. Why, after a comment from some random stranger, would you need the extra validation from a load more random strangers?

In essence- stop punching down instamums. If you get slated in the DM, then fair enough, defend yourself. If random Betty with 90 followers says they don't like you....just leave it. She might be mentally unstable, she might have had a bad day...or maybe she just doesn't like you. Not everyone will. It's part and parcel of putting yourself out there to hundreds of thousands of people.

On a positive note, someone who does parent blogging/instamumming really well is Ruth Crilly at The Uphill. She is totally down to earth, funny and writes well - I like the 'diary style' and you can tell she adores her kids and it's lovely to see. Always discloses when something is gifted or not. And lots of the baby gear she's recommended I've gone on to buy as I trust her.

apart from searching someone's taxable income that's just weird

Somebody actually did that?? OMG, some people on this thread, to say they detest IG'ers, are far far more invested in them than they care to admit to themselves!

Someone on this thread was pretty happy that some IG'ers mentioned A LOT had just submitted there accounts. And listed where to find these details. Way too far in my opinion. That's not info that should be shared. I also think it's not on that mumsnet allowed that info to stay, because the accounts are searchable in the public domain. That doesn't mean thousands of people reading an open thread on mumsnet where these people are being discussed (at times negatively) should be pointed in the direction of their accounts with their full address etc. It only takes one nutjob who decides to go and do something random or insane.
Yes that info is out there if you are really that weird but seems to me that is potentially a safety issue for those girls.
And yes they put out there a lot (and may well be reflecting on that) but isn't that a bit off? They clearly don't have very good management.

SV screenshotted someone? She didn't include their username, did she?

Someone on this thread was pretty happy that some IG'ers mentioned A LOT had just submitted there accounts

Just seen it. Not going to quote it as not going to spread the information further, but honestly, what business is it of anyone else's how much they earn? It's a legitimate job.
One many people may not be able to understand or get their head round, but a job nonetheless.

Right, going to come off this thread now as think my time would be better spent making a complaint to Advertising Standards, so I'm off to do that in relation to Martinhal holidays, washing machines etc. As a consumer, I want to continue to push for more transparency and honesty from MOD/FOD et al. And I encourage anyone else who is fed up of being misled to consider doing the same.

Not a lawyer, but it appears the CAP code is applicable to instagram accounts. The CAP code states at clause 2.1 that "marketing communications must be obviously identified as such". Clause 2.3 then states that "marketing communications must not falsely claim that the marketer is acting as a consumer... marketing communications must make clear their commercial intent, if that is not obvious from the context".

The 'Marketing arrangements' definition appears to include freebies and not just products that account holders have been paid to advertise. Receiving free or discounted goods would appear to count as 'payment' under the CAP code.

The CAP code is overseen by the Advertising Standards Agency, so it's the ASA we should be complaining to I think.

It would appear that many of these insta accounts may well be in breach of the Code, and it's not as gray an area as many of us first thought? Would be interested to hear from someone legally qualified though.

Making comments about how much people earn and then stalking accounts and making comment as to how much they must have received it's just spiteful and not relevant to the debate. I mean it's a given that some of these people make money and it's the fact they DO make money and are professionals / businesses that they should be a bit more ethical and transparent as to how they may make a living.

I also note that some IGer have read or their agents have read this thread and taken away something from it. The clear narrative, the #gift hashtag difference has been really noticeable on some accounts. Lets hope it continues.

As for the jumping on bandwagons and the vitirol that some IG tried to incite on the back of this thread without reading or understanding the points that developed for debate - you should be ashamed and really take a look at yourself for allowing the exact thing that you were berating MNer for on your posts (and IMHO they were way worse than a few bad apples here). I've done a lot of following on the back of this and my feed is at the moment a nice positive read

unfollowing mean people and then following drag queens.

I find the discussion about company accounts a bit odd. This is public information that is intended to be easily searchable and available to all. There is no private element to it, and no moral requirement to justify looking at it. It might because you are planning to do business with a company and want to see how sound it is, it might just be curiosity to see what a business of that size and that stage in its lifecycle might be expected to bring in in terms of revenue.

The Daily Mail will always run a big story on Jeremy Clarkson's company accounts when they get filed, as people are always interested. If an Instagram "sleb" sets up a company then having the accounts mentioned on MN is pretty much the same thing, just on a much smaller scale.

They'll know they've really made it when the DM picks up a story on their company accounts too!

ChunkyFicken - meandorla.co.uk/kids-online-how-much-is-safe-to-share-in-photos/
It's a great article (sharing kids' photos online).

After reading that article wouldyou I'm really surprised the author has done extensive child protection training - it reads very naive on the whole issue.

Share pictures of your child if you want, there is absolutely NO need to share nude/partially nude images of your child. It is such a violation of privacy and I will never be convinced otherwise.

Thinking laterally, while the idea of a stranger somewhere thinking vile thoughts about my own child is entirely heinous, it is unlikely to have any actual affect on our lives whatsoever.

^this is so naive. So it won't be your child that eta abused because a paedophile has viewed nude images of your child online.... no but another child somewhere else maybe abused because of it. It it well^ documented how viewing violent pornography makes sex offenders more likely to offend for example, the same is true of paedophiles viewing abusive content. Why TF as a parent, would you want to risk the possibility of your child's image being used in such a way, let alone the massive violation of your child's privacy.

Like I said before, I know first hand the emotional damage this sort of childhood inflicts, as well as having done a lot of child protection training in my profession.

As an aside, nude or particulate nude images of children are supposed to contravene the colomintiy standards of both Facebook and Instagram and result in the picture being removed - however, when you actually report such images they do nothing!

Oh italics fail

*community standards

I think she is trying to say that if they are using a photograph which is neither violent nor abusive in itself (i.e. Which is wholly innocent), and they are putting that to an unpleasant use, the effect is somewhat similar to letting your child run around undressed or half undressed on a beach. You can't know if every other person on the beach is looking at them innocently or having unpleasant thoughts. If someone is having unpleasant thoughts as they look at them will you or your child ever know that or be affected by that?

Is the knowledge that someone might be having those thoughts sufficient to make you change your behaviour on that beach and cover your child up? If so are we now in an era where undressed or half undressed children are unacceptable in any public situation.

Similarly someone could 'misuse' any photo of a child from the internet, even fully clothed ones. Is that enough of a risk to remove all photographs of children?

These are difficult and emotive questions and I don't know the answers but there are valid arguments either way.

But again that argument is based largely on whether you yourself/or your child are directly affected by it... no consideration for the knock on affect that it could cause another child to be abused in real life. I think we all need to take some responsibility in creating a safe (and innocent - wouldn't that be lovely?) online community. Unfortunately this is the real world where people are actively seeking out images of nude children for abusive reasons.

Now I'm not trying to sound hysterical like THERES A PAEDO ON EVERY STREET!!!!!
but the internet has allowed paedophiles to form online communities where they share images of children and I think we all need to act collectively to minimize this behaviour by not adding to the opportunity.

My main concern is that however innocent (I'm not always convinced the motives for sharing nude pictures is completely "innocent" - I think there's some parental attention seeking going on too) sharing nude pictures of children is such a violation of their right to privacy.

I wonder how many of these parents would be happy with their own nude image being shared so publicly??

And yes, I wouldnt let my child go nude on a public beach (not that she wants to, at almost 3 she already has a very strong sense of personal privacy - that's just her personality)

I'm genuinely interested to know why you think it's a great article Wouldyou? It just smacks of self-serving justification.

It wouldn't take much for her future daughter's mates to find that particular picture as it's on her blog but even if they didn't she makes breaching her child's privacy sound like an act of a true devotion in which "parents' love overflows online".

What utter bollocks.

Of course delight in the beauty of your child, take such photos but why share them with thousands of strangers via a medium that is known to promote and aid paedophiles?

While she has shared her own "(adorable) childhood photos" including one of her in a swimsuit, it is hardly the same thing is it? Her daughter has had that particular choice about eventually sharing such pics forever taken away from her.

And as for saying we should be able to share such photos: talk about stating the obvious. But sadly we don't live in an ideal world.

We don't own our children . And as they can't give informed consent to their parents posting such images just to make the blog or feed look lovely or to make a point online and therefore help their social media-based business seems to be a fairly major point that article missed.

It will be really interesting to see how these children parent.

Here here Chunky!!

My own experience of a childhood with a DM who constantly violated my own personal boundaries and privacy has made me super conscious of upholding these for my own DD

Been following this thread for a while , thought I was the only one who got fed up with it all ! We constantly hear of safeguarding ... what safeguarding on IG with a lot of these mums it doesn't seem to exist . Re sponsored / collaboration posts instamums aren't the only ones who are sometimes less than transparent with their 'freebies' I follow a prominent life style blogger sorry (cough) she is now an influencer 🤦‍♂️ and am yet to see any #ad but in her newspaper interviews she states all the paint freebies etc she has got for her new million pound house !! 😂

a prominent life style blogger sorry (cough) she is now an influencer

I know exactly who you mean!

Anothertime would that be rvk_loves ?? I stopped following her account a few months ago... although the pretty pictures were nice to look at, the commentary became too nauseating (everything was the bluest/prettiest/yummiest)

Haha how did you guess 😂😂👍 too many pretty pictures and ' oh I admire you so much ' in the comments . I do understand that lots of people make money from IG but lets be transparent about it !! Also amazes me that someone with all that money wants freebies !!

louise pentland appears to be moaning about a botchy comment she's read somewhere

No wonder insta is quiet..... they are all busy on the internet searching to see who is talking about them!