Insta Mum 3

[Babaloo88]

Why is the other thread closed?!? I was enjoying reading through it?!!

I didn’t read all of the last thread, but there wasn’t any reason for it to go

Mn is for free discussion or it should be and is a fairly simple transaction. I know I’m supplying content when I post but I’m fine with it as I want to chat to other posters here

When we can’t even discuss children on social media or unclear murky selling in general that annoys me

I hope this doesn’t become a place where we have to put up with instamum type selling, I’m here not following them there for a reason and don’t want family branded children as brand selling here

@cndyheron i don't think I'll waste time replying to you further as deleting an active and established thread for no apparent reason is clearly off.

I didn't. I did reply to questions being posed though. That seem to turn out to be not questions posted after all and rhetorical questions being asked.
Any questioning was frowned upon.

And if people want to jeer or take the piss then so what really? No one is saying that mumsnet is the pinnacle of political debate where solutions are formed , sometimes mums just want to have a gossip or criticise things / people that are annoying them, it's what an Internet forum is about but clearly not every topic can be discussed .....

Here we go again with the alluding to under current of discussion

I’m really miffed that the other thread was deleted. If people on this forum who contribute is many other ways and make the site what it is, and still want to chat and debate the subject, why the fuck can’t we?

Totally agree with you @marshobradyo , I actually think it's exploiting the child and quite shamelessly.

@flyingbird what was the reply?

I was surprised the last thread was pulled....are we not allowed to air our views ...ironic

Seems like our Justine actually doesn't agree with the whole social media and children mix either so why this sudden , what can only be deemed as stance of defence and support , for instamums ?

Sounds like Justine needs a place at this particular table!

The constant and very repetitive nature of the threads is a reflection of posters getting their minds around the sheer extent of hidden advertising by instamums and the safeguarding issues around the children.

Mumsnet would full well know people take time to process new concepts.

But as pointed out earlier it is no more constant and repetitive than MIL threads, parking threads, wedding threads, washing threads and SAHP threads. These are the issues that MN's audience is interested in so they generate a lot of discussion.

@flyingbird thanks for that ! Really quite obvious then isn't it. Looks like I'll be on the look out for a mums forum where they don't promote child exploitation and gag their posters about expressing their views. I hope others do the same or come up with a way to make this highly visible as it's all quite implorable .

I got so tired of all the insta mum thing.
This week there was a lack of then allnoff on a ship, the blatant selling it s just annoying.

I don't care if they get feeebies once they tell us but it a barrage of it now everything is gifted or a promotion and I don't believe any of them have an original thought in their head.
They re all wearing the same leopard print tracks tops matching their kids, applying the same foundation lighting jo Malone candles telling us they adore the brand regardless of the lunch st the ivy they have just been plied with.....
meh.
I ve unfollowed.

I liked insta because it gave a windo into people s lives I could relate to.
Now I don't trust that they re not trying to flash me the label on their skirt or sofa.

I m not 100 percent comfortable with the kids on insta too, I just think it s sticky.

Like someone else aaid, there are threads where mn users get torn apart for next to nothing. They are not protected. Pulling the thread was unnecessary.

I am assuming there is a parallel thread on another forum that shall remain unnamed, I've seen mentions of that before where things can't be discussed on here. Seems daft that has to happen.

Just for clarity, Mumsnet, I would like to know which of these discussion points infringes on the Mumsnet Talk rules:

1. The decline of relatable influencers in the wake of monetised feeds.

2. Issues around safeguarding of children, and their inability to give informed consent.

3. Advertising techniques used by influencers that either contravene, or circumnavigate, ASA guidelines.

And also why we can't continue to discuss these points, seeing as the issues are ongoing? These influencers aren't going to stop posting, so why should we stop talking?

On the subject of names, and personal attacks, I don't think I've made any unnecessarily cruel or harsh comments. I haven't called anybody a wanker. Or revealed any personal information about influencers. So why are you silencing me?

@jamoncrumpets - just this.
I would also say that I thought KF did a good job with her cruise review. It's not for me, that's for sure, but it was very well done and absolutely above board (yikes, no pun intended!).

I'm still bewildered by mumsnet's rationale for stopping the discussion.

MNKate said the Instamums were real people and many were MN users (although from my memory, apart from one, the other bloggers who came onto the threads had to register to do so). But isn't that half the problem? The lines between the person and the business have become so blurred that criticism of the business can be construed as an attack on the person. That was my point about Pedlars - there were threads and threads about one business, mocking their products and how they marketed them to consumers. It seems mumsnet don't like discussions on Insta bloggers because they are "just like us", but thats the very root of many of the issues people have with their business model, imo.

Quite happy to not mention influencers by name, if that facilitates discussion. Seems daft because they've put themselves out there in the public eye but if we're going to hold them to different standards than other z list celebs on here I'll play ball.

I hunk we want to effect change and until that happens the discussion will repeat and circle itself.

It’s a shame that MN feels like the girl gang of INSTAGRAM has bullied it into submission. At least that’s my take on it.

The popular girls saying MN we won’t work with you.

And the poster who keeps on saying they are just ordinary mums.....c’mon. They are not! One of them is now a famous author as is her husband with a book tour and big fat cheque to prove it!

Back to the use of kids.....

I have come to the conclusion that I can no longer snap my kids for my little squares. But I am a nobody.

Do the instaparents bank the £££ that explicitly use their children for their future. Hard stare at FOD?

**think!

Not hunk 🙄

Just find it really odd that the threads where people/accounts were mentioned by name, were not pulled and yet the thread where there was no 'jeering' or account comments that were critical in any way, was pulled. I have no issue with people feeling exasperated or annoyed or having a moan, when people portray themselves as just like you as a USP, but they clearly are not, it is frustrating. I felt the discussion grew and changed and comments reflected that. It simply feels like no one is allowed to discuss Instagram anywhere, which is bizarre.

This has probably been asked before, but what exactly is an Insta Mum? I don’t do Insta...

@atalune that's a point been raised many times. I'm sure these children in these families benefit from the increased income, some on here argue it does them no harm. However there are no regulations even for the adverts. So it seems the parents can use their children to make money and keep it with no regulated provision for the children individually or recognition formally of their 'work'. Grey area which personally I hope is regulated soon as it's not right to exploit children.