Instamums 4

[mammyoftwo]

Following on from Instamums 3.2

Well it was wickes they were running around a few days ago, then a few days later it's Waitrose ...

Eh?

What valid points?

Genuinely interested here

@gobbolinothewitchescat I would never suggest it is appropriate for anybody to share their home address or details of children on social media - however, am I missing something? I can honestly say I personally have never come across any ‘instamum’ profiles or otherwise blatantly disclosing this information? Also naked photos in the bath? That is a very extreme way to word it and I’ve personally never seen full frontal pictures on Instagram.
That’s a fairly large assumption of children being unable to take internet safety serious because their parents shared a few snaps of their happy childhoods.

@fruitbowl2 to be fair I never suggested he was negligent I said he was getting carried away with his laughs and some of the things he was doing for show, well if I was the children's mother I'd be highly irritated and having a word.
As for saying he does d these things staged with helpers, oh please. He's just getting carried away. But be careful what you share as some stuff begins to look bad.
The ads should be declared, the kids used by the business should be paid and regulated. Whether they are MOFOS or Binky or Pussin Boots.

Try reading back both our points.
Still waiting for an answer to what this thread is actually meant for if it's not concern over the children being put out there, by the way. (Not necessarily by you, just in general.This thread is extremely fast moving.)

It's that time of night when the trolls and sock puppets come out, innit.

From some of Sofia and Cady's replies it's blantantly obvious you don't even have the first clue who we're even talking about. So why are you so passionate about defending them?

Neither of you seem to realise the amount of work that goes into FOD's account or that he lets two toddlers run in different directions around a supermarket whilst filming them for five minutes.

@laurahill88 yes obviously all these things have been disclosed or the conversation would not be happening.

@PavlovaPrincess 3 bloggers & brands threads, 4 instamums threads & they all just repeat the same thing over and over, with the same old jealous, bitter individuals filling them up with a thousand comments moaning about how other people choose to live their lives because they have nothing better to do. Get. Over. It.

I know this discussion thus far has focused on Instagram & the exposure of children/non-disclosure of gifted/paid/ads via the medium of images, but YouTube is a whole different beast & (IMO) deserves as much debate and attention as the Instagram phenomena for the same two issues.

cady the thread was originally to do with the Ad/sponsorship issue.... but as is common with threads,it evolved and other points of discussion emerged

@Gobbolinothewitchscat FFS, give it a rest re instamums putti g to much info on their accounts.

You seem to mainly be referring to MOD who as far as I'm aware has never put her address, work location, name of her kids school etc on insta. I seem to recall a bit of mumsnet sleuthing and someone actually linking the house on one of these threads (could have been the S&B thread).

Mumsnetters have also clearly looked up some instamums on Companies House. It's all just a bit sad and pathetic (and slightly stalkerish). If doing all this, and slating the various bloggers under the pretence of educating people re a lack of transparency on insta make you feel better then crack on.

Face&palm interestingly their advertising rules are different, all freebies do have to be marked as ads. I agree their feeds are much more slick.

“YouTube is a whole different beast & (IMO) deserves as much debate and attention as the Instagram phenomena for the same two issues.”

Please god no!

Queue another 19 threads on the topic

My comments weren't directed at you mumofkids.

I havent referred to anyone blogger or instgrammer by name.

It must be very tiresome when people point out inconsistencies in your posts but unfortnately it's not within your gift to tell them when to shut up

It's that time of night when the trolls and sock puppets come out, innit.

No idea who you're referring to in regards to as trolls or sock puppets, as it certainly isn''t me.
Regular poster with just one account. Definitely never sock puppeted either.

From some of Sofia and Cady's replies it's blantantly obvious you don't even have the first clue who we're even talking about.
Thanks to these threads, I've been looking through both accounts even though I'd never heard of them before (bet they're glad of all the extra traffic and hits.)
So I do know who you're talking about.

*putting too. I apologise for any other spelling or grammatical errors. I know how some mumsnetters like to pick up on that.

3boys they are entitled to advertise as much as they want. Its their job. So they should comply with the rules. No its or buts about it.

3boys there's the hide thread option if you can't bear the YouTube discussion?

Sofia that isn't quite correct. MOFOD have (accidentally I'm sure) given a large amount away about themselves on IG and in online interviews, including work locations and kids' schools.

That's exactly the point flyingbird and what was originally being discussed, quite sensibly.

To be fair, I have been browsing through certain feeds today and instantly I know where they work.Within about five seconds of looking. Literally.
I wouldn't be comfortable putting that much identifying detail out there. You have to be sensible and not putting your actual location out there.

Yes. You are missing something laurahill A lot of instgrammers etc publish pictures that make it very obvious where they live. Many have set up limited companies ans have to lodge accounts each year with companies house which state their company's registered address. A lot have used their home addresses. Even if they change that address to that of their accountant's etc at a later stage, those historic accounts are still accesible.

I said "naked" (not "full frontal") pictures of children in the bath. Naked means no clothes on and that is an entirely correct description of the photos not "extreme" at all