Instamums 4

[mammyoftwo]

Following on from Instamums 3.2

@CadyHeron not being rude, but why are you here?
I didn't come to slag them off or bloggers. I genuinely have barely ever been on mumsnet prior to this and stumbled across threads being discussed. I was so eye opened to realise so much stuff I thought people had bought were freebies etc and then in turn realised that actually these new businesses were based on children. So I quite honestly was interested in this chat and discussion which is completely not possible on Instagram.

Sorry did I leave you out Heron.

again,

WTAF are you even on about? Your posts make no sense.
The first one didn't, so I made a confused face, hoping you'd explain,and now you come back with another inane comment.

If it’s about transparency then stick to transparency. The thing is.....it isn’t. These threads are now being used to beat them with a stick for every little thing they do. And I was involved in the other thread, all I ever cared about was transparency. But this is becoming something else now. It’s just a let’s gripe about insta mums for every thing we don’t like, and I think that’s unfair.

@Fruitbowl2 you've lost me.

Thank fk it's not just me, some posts make zero sense lol

I agree that this thread has basically run its course and everything that could/should have been said (and more...) has been said. I’m sure the instamums in question ‘get it’ and if they don’t then leave it up to the ASA to fine them instead of becoming too absorbed. It’s not healthy to hold the resentment I’ve seen on these threads towards individuals you don’t know and no doubt have/will never meet.

@sofia I follow over 500 people on Instagram! Did you want a list? Why is it relevant. It's probably more relevant that 550 that I follow are not on here being discussed because they run their accounts differently?

@CadyHeron not being rude, but why are you here?

because I'm interested in the discussion to be had between influencers and how they're perceived.
I'm engaging nicely with those who say they have an issue with privacy. Which is what the thread professed to be about in the first place.
Not so much with those who just want somewhere to be bitchy.

@laurahill88 you are taking it very seriously. Resentment towards whom?
At the end of the day, check social blade, these threads generate traffic, generate followers, generate business. The instagrammers are really not fussed.

And I was involved in the other thread, all I ever cared about was transparency. But this is becoming something else now. It’s just a let’s gripe about insta mums for every thing we don’t like, and I think that’s unfair.

I hear you. Not really involved much in the other threads myself (only briefly in the last one) but this rings true.
You have those like yourself who are all about genuinely wanting to know about transparency which is fair enough.
It's clear though that for some it really isn't that they're bothered about transparency/child protection and they just want somewhere to be mean.

@cadyheron the thread seemed to have several main topics, all quite valid. I definitely started out feeling concerned based on my own children's experience with social media and how they are with me and what's previously been put out there. I certainly don't think these people are all bad but I'd imagine when a kind of crazy fame and money come at you very fast it must be hard to keep track of it all and see the future that clearly.
I also thought the management companies would play far more of a role. It seems strange that they don't.

It’s just a let’s gripe about insta mums for every thing we don’t like, and I think that’s unfair.

This is what it boils down to and why 'influencing' is such a problematic business model.

These instamums aren't your friend next door and you have absolutely no need to know anything about their children.

They are income generating businesses and it is entirely reasonable to discuss the products, service, compliance, advertising and ethics of businesses.

To be fair, I think the instamums themselves are still trying to reconcile the intimacy of Instagram with their business obligations.

@flyingbird I agree completely. My daughter deleted a Facebook selfie because it only got 53 likes and her previous one got 76. It's such a hard world to navigate. I expect the majority of these kids will cope but there will be those that really struggle.

@FlyingBird exactly this. One of my (above average) intelligent students was explaining just this to my class yesterday. I wish that adults could understand the message that they/we are drip feeding to the younger generations. We have to be better than this grabby, greedy hashtag world and stop selling this bollocks to our children.

@Mumofkids you say nearly all the instagrammers you follow are running their accounts "properly@. You don't seem to have heard of the majority of instagrammers mentioned on here, why are you on this thread?

Spot on flyingbird!

I've been away from a screen doing real life, but popped back in to see if the thread has been active during the day. I could write an essay on some of the points raised and spend an hour copying and pasting answers already given upthread to questions answered! (sofialemon I'm looking at you, you appear particularly adept at stirring the pot by asking the same question over and over!)

I guess, my current standpoind would be:

1. IG users - declare your ads/gifts/brand endorsements etc etc etc. Culture is changing. Consumers will no longer accept the "we're all new to this, we're learning" excuse. Unless practice changes, complaints to the ASA are about to start. Big Time!!
2. IF users - get your dc off your social media accounts (in regards using them for brand endorsement/advertisements etc. In these cases I'm going to go as far as to say an independent agent should be used. Guidelines and legislation should be introduced re: how much these children "work" to support their families. Working animals on-set have better rights than these IG kids!. Re: including children in SM content, the safest advice is: DON'T!!

Just to add obviously anyone can post on here for whatever reason. It just seems strange if as you say the people you follow are following the guidelines anyway.

That should say:

1. IG users

It's late o'clock!

These instamums aren't your friend next door and you have absolutely no need to know anything about their children.

People surely know that? As in, they're not your friend next door.
If not,they need to clue themselves up and not be so naive.
You can follow someone all you like, enjoy their posts, but if you feel you have to compete which comes across in some of the previous posts then you (general you) need to look at yourself.
If you have a family instagram feed/blog feed then you post relevant stuff family wise. If someone is out there wishing they had the lifestyle they're seeing online, doesn't the problem lie with them?
You can't stop people posting because it doesnt fit your own world view or narrative.
We're all different.
If you don't like, you don't have to follow. Find something more to what you do like.

@mammyoftwo

1. IF users - get your dc off your social media accounts (in regards using them for brand endorsement/advertisements etc. In these cases I'm going to go as far as to say an independent agent should be used. Guidelines and legislation should be introduced re: how much these children "work" to support their families. Working animals on-set have better rights than these IG kids!. Re: including children in SM content, the safest advice is: DON'T!!

This reads as though you think instamums are forcing their kids to "work" and that you feel they can't be trusted to do what is best for their children and so need a 3rd party, i.e an agent, involved. Is that what you mean?

Not wanting to repeat myself but their kids their rules. We are in no position to tell anyone what they can and can’t post on insta. I wouldn’t post photos of mine on a public account, but I’m not going to judge those that do.

@sofialemon I follow all of the ones on here except the ones I've unfollowed and 3 mentioned by you. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Sofia - clearly I said 95% of the people I follow are not mentioned on here and I've not noticed any obvious fake ads, blags or freebies. The 5% have been discussed here. Just because I don't follow the same people as you doesn't mean I can't post on mumsnet.

Cady - the ASA disagrees with you and I'm going to go with them being experts in this arena. The ASA clearly states not all consumers are able to identify advertising and they should not be misled.

Sofia - if an Instagram account is featuring minors and generating income then of course the children are working. They are contributing to the family's household income. Other working children have their earnings placed in trust because many stage parents have shown over the years they don't always make decisions in their children's best interests. That's also why other working children have contracts, agents and lawyers.

Is there a reason why instachildren don't deserve independent representation like other working children?

@Mumofkids
@sofia I follow over 500 people on Instagram! Did you want a list? Why is it relevant. It's probably more relevant that 550 that I follow are not on here being discussed because they run their accounts differently?

Sorry, I took that to mean none of the people you follow were being discussed on here.