Instamums 3, 2.0

[blackmirror1]

Seeing as the original 3 got zapped.

Thank you chocolate tea, interesting indeed. I've started reading The Simple Things magazine to get me off my screen when commuting. (Ps this is not an #ad 😏)

Been dipping in & out of these threads for a while. IMO the ethical issues around IGers using their kids is very similar to reality TV families who used their kids to get on TV. The whole issue of kids being used this way really needs to be looked at more closely. As we've seen you can't always trust the parents to have their childrens' best interests at heart.

I'm not that familiar with UK law but is there an office/person who looks out for childrens' rights in the media?

Obviously as a midwife MOD also has to adhere to the NMC code of conduct which has very clear guidelines on the use of social media, so I guess she has to watch what she comments on in case it is taken the wrong way?

Wow. I don’t think any of these women are thick I think (and yes I’m referring to MOD as you called her thick) she’s a midwife and from what I’ve heard a very good one but probably has had no media background or pr training and who would she? At least MP and MOD have come on here and started taking about the issues. The rest of them hide behind their feed and act as if nothing is happening

The bit I struggle with is the ‘fair game/ you’ve put yourself out there’. I agree in principle absolutely - I mean, who didn’t slag off Darren Day in Heat Magazine when he stuck his tongue down some other Z-lister, leaving Suzanne Shaw heartbroken? It has - and always will be - right to critique media and those fronting it. But what we are seeing here is a whole new media - even if it only lasts for a few more months. A media (speaking more specifically about the parenting realm) that delves deeper into people’s lives (absolutely their choice) in a bid to connect with others. (Or connect with others and make money as is my situation). Clemmie started out to feel less alone as a young mum and to share stories to make people feel less isolated in the birth process. There was distance in the old trash rags and in traditional media. Things were being ‘reported’ on but not actively delivered to you from the horse’s mouth. Celebrities were in films or on shows or presenting shows but rarely presented a version of themselves directly and often unedited to the public. So I think it comes down to an understanding that while someone like MOD is ‘fair game’, perhaps there’s a small compromise to be made along the way. Without a PR team around her or anyone else online (which might well change), it feels like she has given so much more of her actual self that maybe on a human level it’s not fair to discuss her in the same vein as someone who is simply being reported on for rolling out of clubs with different members of S Club. Someone whose house you don’t know. Someone who hasn’t shown you the specific perineal massage oil to help with childbirth. Someone who has - regardless of whether it’s right or not - shared their life. It’s not a strong argument, perhaps, but it ‘feels’ unfair maybe. It feels like the branding side of it should be discussed and torn apart but the personal side, a little less than traditional celebrity where there is a barrier to entry.Anyhow I’m rambling and not sure I’ve made my point clearly. But just mulling things over.

I don’t think many people cared about Darren Day or his tongue’s whereabouts but you get the example.

@badmotherpukka her Instagram page suggests she is managed by the Grace o Leary management team. Maybe this has just all got really big really quickly, however if your children and their privacy and safety were at the heart of something and you actually made them the focus of makeup no money would you not take protective steps and or get advice to specifically manage that situation when things started to get more serious?

MP- i’m not sure I understand your point. If someone has chosen to create a highly profitable brand from their personal life and their children then what right to privacy can they expect? Without outing myself, considering this from a psychological perspective, the use of children as part of a brand, the constant sharing of images, the paying more attention to your phone that your children is all deeply worrying. Children who are on TV or in theatre have strict regulations to ensure they aren’t exploited (including funds being put in a named bank account for them to access when they turn 18) but there is no regulation in relation to children and social media and the decisions are being made by parents who are conflicted because their ‘brand’ wouldn’t be so valuable without their children.

F

*making money! Not makeup no money 🙄

I agree one should (as a matter of manners and ethical behaviour) not criticise in a personal attack way. However, surely the more personal nature of Instagram is what has allowed the influencer development? Advertisers utilised instagrammers because they saw people having a ‘real’ connection to ‘real’ people and hence the sponsorships and the gifted holidays etc. Then the followers started to question what was real and what wasn’t - this is the flip side of the USP of the influencer and their success. I really don’t see how you can have one without the other, although nasty personal comments are obviously exempt from this. But if anything, in my opinion, the instagrammers have gained more than traditional celebrities through the personal and immediate nature of their interactions, and so commensurately they may lose more through it (in terms of being criticised for not being genuine or honest, I mean). I don’t mean this in a ‘tit for tat’ way. I mean that most things in life are balanced and have a flip side.

If FOD took his kids off his Instagram, where would he be? And if MOD did, well perhaps she'd have a semi decent account where she could advertise what the heck she liked with very few people giving a damn. Do the 4 children have funds set up that the monies from Dorset Cereals got paid into? Seeing as they were made to act in that dreadful ad. As they pose on the beach with their freebies are they aware they are being sold out? Maybe they won't care. But maybe they will. The older one strikes as being a little reluctant and shy.

I was really shocked when I read the first of the Instamums threads and found out who MoD was and how cross people were. The Gas and Air blog started during my first pregnancy; Clemmie was a local midwife and her blog was recommended to me by my own team who worked with her. She was midwife to some of my friends. I ended up in various representative roles and went to meetings with her. I never heard a bad word about her and loved her blog.

I don't 'do' Instagram, but I had a look at the account, and I can quite see why people who started following her in her midwife role might feel that things are too different for them. I don't relate to her lifestyle and I have very limited disposable income so wouldn't buy the things she advertises. I don't think I could bear to spend my time looking at picture of people richer, more stylish and more beautiful than me! I follow the Scummy Mummies on Facebook and I'd noticed ads creeping in and I really hope they carry on keeping it real as I'd feel so sad to lose the entertainment they give me.

Yes sorry MP I think you're off beam here. MOD is with Curtis Brown agency and Grace OLeary. She's not alone innocently skipping through insta, she's been collaborating with brands for years. She's just been called up on it. Calling her thick isn't kind, but the alternative is that she's obtuse and/or manipulative, given her response to date.

@flyingbird that is absolutely the vibe they give off to me. Eye roll, do we have to, the kids are fine they went to Disney.

Unfortunately based on her responses it is natural to question her intelligence or perhaps drunkness, however unfortunately that will just be the next big story, mumsnetters called me thick, and fantastic another deflection. They were mean to me. I really hope a body steps in to regulate the children at least then they will be forced to make sensible decisions. If they don't just get the cash and it has to go into funds then will they be quite so keen to put them out there 🤷🏻‍♀️

I don’t know the specifics of how it works behind the scenes at Independent but speaking from the Gleam side, as ‘influencer talent’ (I am fully aware those two words make for uncomfortable reading) you don’t get someone helping you navigate this arena. Maybe on a larger scale (“don’t call yourselves the Primark Beckhams again Matt”) but not at this detailed level or in terms of responding to comments. You’re on your own. But that might change, of course. The growth has been another level huge for Clemmie and Simon and I’m certainly not here as their PR spokesperson. But I do think it’s a very different type of celebrity, which is why the reaction to any negativity is so extreme sometimes. It’s all more personal. On every level. I don’t have any answers.

FlyingBird yes, a sense of entitlement is often offputting and it is one of the things that millennials are often criticised for. I wonder if they, for whom social media etc is just normal rather than me, a v late Gen Xer, don’t feel turned off by entitlement in others? Maybe all the fans who aren’t bothered are younger and entitled themselves! I’m joking, but sort of wondering too because how someone is perceived is so subjective and therefore interesting to wonder about the different perceptions.

I have had a very privileged upbringing and life compared with 99% of the world I’d think, but I’m not good looking and I’ve suffered from serious illness which has massively disrupted lots of life plans (still consider myself privileged due to other factors). I often see a sense of competely unconscious entitlement in people for whom
things have not gone wrong in a major way (caveat: I know that I do not know the ins and outs of everyone’s history). They sort of assume everything will and should be lovely because it generally always has been. I generally assume that things will go wrong and be problematic based on past events!

I am not applying this to MoD. I haven’t followed her and don’t have enough of a sense of her online personality and how I’d perceive it, and in any event want to make sure I don’t criticise someone for something personal and subjective (e.g. sense of entitlement which I perceive) rather then objective (e.g. following ASA regulations!).

Ok maybe the PR is a red herring then MP, how about a bit of common sense from a grown woman who is a midwife with 4 children.

@badmotherpukka if they are on their own, that's kind of sad and selfish. It means their responses and choices are their own and neither one of these clearly capable adults (trained respected midwife and consultant) is capable of answering intelligently to debate or putting their own greed before their children's safety and privacy. I have no idea of Mae's school or date of birth, no idea her full name or your road etc but the Hooper children, every little thing is out there.

@DomesticDrudge I think we are on the same page. I agree with critiquing, dissecting, discussing, challenging everything about this new set up. The mechanic of it. The stage mom ‘sharenting’ side of it. All of it, really. My point - perhaps not clearly made - is that traditional celebrities have more of a barrier to public entry. They are reported on; they present, act, star but never present a real insight to their lives like online talent/celebrity increasingly seems to. I’m not saying it’s right to open your door to the world but I think that’s why the ‘hater’ chat has risen to the fore. Because it’s all more personal. It feels like a personal attack. Followers react as if their friend has been called a wanker. I don’t have answers or much more insight but it’s a completely different beast to traditional celebrity that’s for sure.