Instamums 4

[mammyoftwo]

Following on from Instamums 3.2

Take Martha and Kelly bee as an example

You lost me when you quoted cadyheron, kitkat.

Every parent chooses how they parent right or wrongly , however it doesnt give them automatic veto, that what they do is not up for discussion, open discussion is healthy. I dont belive people should be discussed in a rude way but it shouldn't just be stopped due to a few rude unnecessary comments. How does anyone change opinions on anything if they just listen to people who argree with them.

Lol @KitKat1002's last post.

So you know these instamamas and your husband just happens to be a senior ad executive?

Pull the other one.

It's an excuse to complain about the haves and have-nots

You know fuck all about me or any of us on the thread, really. But interesting that your argument just boils down (again) to 'jealous!'

And also, similar to what CadyHeron said, about the fact that if you feel inadequate because of someone's feed, that's you're issue, not theirs....

In response to this, 'I feel like a failure. This is what Instagram does.', I'd like to say... no. it's not Instagram's (or an Instagram persona) responsibility to create a level playing field for everyone. Instagram is there for everyone to have a go at creating a feed that works for them, and for some of them to make money off of it.

If you feel like you're not choosing the "right jumper" or wearing the right stuff (as all of us occasionally feel when looking at fashion mags, right?), then look for stuff that is in line with the stuff you like, and the stuff you wear. It's not the responsibility of an Instagrammer to make you feel good. If an influencer is leading a rich lifestyle and flogging stuff (responsibly, of course, let's not open that can of worms), then it's your responsibility to choose wisely. Want it? Buy it. Don't want it? Don't be one of their customers/fans, don't aspire to live that life.

Kitkat1002 many of these parents seem so money focussed and fame obsessed they are unable to actually put their children's best interests ahead of their own greed. Hence the need for regulations and boundaries. You state you don't use your kids, but plenty are using their kids to make money and that is a different ball game. Choosing to share intimate details of your children's lives is an individual choice and for most will I'm sure be without disaster, however there's still the impact on mental health with growing children that is frequently ignored.
Most of what is shared of, and about children goes completely against all the internet safety advice from police and other bodies, so how do you justify that and in turn teach them how to be safe.
I can't help but think most of these people don't answer to this because they simply don't know how to and are just hoping it will all be ok.
If these people were confident in their choices for their children they would be stating it. But the reality is if they do and in 5 years time have a critically depressed child who won't leave the house because everyone stares at their family and kids take the piss, then they'll have it stated in black and white that they felt selling their kids on social media was justifiable and worth the end gain.
And the point of the thread? Discussion. Like a lot of mumsnet threads...

Oh, dear, Pavlolva. Struck a nerve, did I? Just because we have good jobs doesn't mean I'm above all this, did I say that? I said we are ALL learning about this stuff.

Your defensiveness reveals a lot though.

@KitKat1002 If you say so.

I don't believe for one second you know these people, or that you're one of them.

I think you'd like to be though. That's why you're fangirling.

KitKat1002 see your saying that like it’s that simple for everyone, would you also tell someone who was anorexic to go and eat something? No probably not, the laws in advertising are there to orotect the consumers just abide by them.

One of the things that means advertising has to be regulated is that children are easily influenced by it and can not even discern the difference between advertising gloss and the truth until a certain age (I think 8 or 9? - up until then they will believe adverts literally). YouTubers such as Zoella have many young fans and it’s important that they understand how her lifestyle works. I don’t think children are ‘daft’ as has been said by one of the instafans here. Nor are those with learning disabilities who are often vulnerable to similar ploys.

Re child protection, for those who don’t care about random people knowing your children’s address and personal details (and the ethical concerns of what children should get to keep to themselves), what about the fact that any photo of your child on the internet is potentially out there forever and accessible to anyone who wants to use it in any capacity? While I tend not to be a hysterical mother worrying about dodgy people around every street corner, it’s a fact that images of children taken from the internet (entirely innocent images not taken for child sex abuse purposes) have been found amongst the collections of paedophiles. As I said, I’m not hysterical about this and know the limits of what we can control and how much we can protect our children, but this is certainly something that has encouraged me to keep my Instagram private and very restricted, to keep this risk lower.

Are you flogging a rich lifestyle if the lifestyle you are flogging, you get your stuff for free? Free or being paid to flog it.
This is what i cant understand. You want to be personally relatable but are not at all authentic.

Pavlova, I think the term "fangirl" is about someone who's obsessed with someone in an unhealthy way... when all I'm doing is defending people I know who are actually good humans and who are learning just like the rest of us.

You do seem to enjoy when Anna gets on here and has the same rational discussion with you as I am right now. So.. you may need to look up that definition for yourself.

@kitkat1002 the fact you hide your identity makes it obvious you don't stand by your words.
A huge problem with these accounts is people not owning their choices.
I unfollowed the ultimategirlgang as all she seems to do is drink and twerk. But I fully respect her 'I'm me if you don't like it fuck off' attitude.
I didn't like it so I went but she owns her choices and account.

Who's the stalker now @KitKat1002 Have you been following my posts?

Why don't you reveal who you are on IG then maybe I'll fangirl over you

*are you really living a rich lifestyle not flogging a rich lifestyle

Seriously? I'm on a thread on Mumsnet and responding to posts, and you call that stalking? Wow. Okay.

No thanks, btw.

You are nothing like MP, kitkat. Don't flatter yourself.

You are nothing like MP, kitkat. Don't flatter yourself.

Yeah, what @Fruitbowl2 said 👆

You're just poorly attempting to defend businesses. Lots of nice people run businesses. But you can't just use the lame, we are all learning card.
So when it all goes tits up for the kids, all the parents are going to go 'sorry we were just learning'.
I agree to some degree that followers have a responsibility to themselves and who they follow and how they get sucked in, but the very fact these instagrammers are paid influencers and the ads are so profitable indicates exactly why guidelines need to be adhered to.
There is a reason advertising is controlled.

It’s not about the haves and have nots at all. Really, it’s a shame this comes up.

It’s about discussing the effects of big shifts that are happening and what it might mean for those in it but not actively choosing to be

Children might not be less safe due to online activity - no idea - but there’s definitely a link to mental health in all this - linked to control and autonomy

So why not talk about it? I do mostly because I want to work out how I feel about it and seeing what others think helps shape this, Mn is good for that

Hmm. Fruitbowl, I never said I was like her, did I?

Just popping on in reply to Kelly bees knees Instagram and every instagrammer jumping on the back of it thinking it’s great!

First off I think the point has been missed but whatever. Secondly I totally understand what she’s saying BUT who is blaming hashtags for being unhappy? I’m certainly not, I’m not unhappy at all, im just sick of everything being an #ad whiteout it being made clear and people selling there souls on ads they would never use, people constantly @ at compnies to try and get free crap and the constant unboxing gifts and I’m mainly more annoyed cos some of these people I follow I genuinely love and I loved their stories and real life and now they only post when it’s an #ad or #gifted

Thirdly - ‘the stop morning about crap’ again agree with the sentiment we could all moan a little less about trivial things but to be fair Kelly doesn’t half moan a lot of the time, yes we shouldn’t mon because we could get hit by bus but we all do it so don’t make out you don’t!

People are using their kids, invading their privacy, using their children’s medical problems to make money (not talking about raising awareness or charity). I don’t like it. And I will moan about that.

Lastly feathering the empty nest and her absolutely narky passive aggressiveness - I’ve unfollowed and she loves a good useless moan about shouty over the road.
Seems to me they love to moan but just don’t like hearing it about them and how they make money.

You aren't interested in discussion like MP is though, are you @KitKat1002 You told us in the previous thread that if we don't like it, we should 'unfollow' and not try and 'school' these Instagrammers. You aren't interested in differing opinions, your last wall of text suggested that if anyone questioned these bloggers, it's due to jealousy rather than anything else.

And I repeat. I don't for one second think you have a big IG account.

I said on an earlier thread that big bloggers want to grow their numbers either because they are massive narcissists or because they want to exploit their followers. It’s clear from this discussion that it’s a bit of both. There have been plenty of people come onto the thread to explain the adverse and corrosive effects this form of media have on them and yet we still get told it’s “our” problem, not theirs. I think it really comes down to empathy and whether you are comfortable that what you can do can damage other people’s lives (of course it won’t be all people, but enough to be a problem). I don’t have to get into debt myself to realise this could be a problem for other people and that this sort of influencing is wrong as a result. And discussing it? It’s not obsessive. This is a new form of media and having a detailed debate about what it does to us is necessary. Trying to portray us as “weirdos” says more about you than it does about us.

who are learning just like the rest of us

I'm an architect. If I design a totally unsuitable building that people can use and which falls down within a month, I can say it's ok, I'm just learning like the rest of us.

No. Didn't think so. You are professionals, running what seems to be successful marketing businesses, you should have learned your craft before you started.

It's funny how the whole jealousy thing is used so often to shut down a debate.