Influencer ethics on Instagram 2

[MadameGrizzly]

It appears we haven't quite finished workshopping the ethical issues of 'influencing' on Instagram: disclose of advertising, the exploitation of minors and the similarities to MLM schemes.

I'm going to hire two trainees whose job it will be to tell me I'm wonderful every day publicly and post all my photos and write all my captions and let me take credit in InstaStories for their ideas, and if anything goes wrong it will be their fault and I'll shout at them..

So just like a normal partner then? 😂. Dont forgwt to send them loads of work (by DM, natch) the night before thwy go on holiday with "pls deal"

Anyway, you are jealous of me as I have my wheely bag. I don't use it now for taking papers to the Tribunal. Instead it accompanies me to worthy lunches where I use it to load all the centre pieces in

Anyway, got to dash. I am completing my submission for the Legal 500. Hoping to get into the top tier as got loads of feedback saying "OMG!!!!! I love you, Gobbo. You are amazeballs and gorgeous" Just hope all the old crustys in the other tiers understand the emoticons

The thing that strikes me from all of mod's posts (and all of the other instamums like SV and CT begrudgingly tagging #gifted and acting like they're doing us a massive favour by doing so) is the complete lack of self awareness of how lucky they are, they seem to think they've worked harder than anyone else and that's why they're where they are now, despite the fact that to get there they have sacrificed their children's privacy and stealthily marketed items to people, that's basically what their job is now, marketing.
Yes I know mod midwifes 1 day a week but I think it's quite telling that she thinks this is a "selfless" job.

I always imagine MOD and SV would start conversing with the disrespectful participants of this thread with a big Diane Abbot-esque patronising sigh.

The Diane Abbot analogy is perfect. Also, she has always totally failed to explain why her child attends a private school

flying - sadly not gifted despite me doing many sadface instastories asking for freebies recommendations. I have monogramed it with a felt tip pen though

If you need an explanatory case note, you are not "using your initiative" #duh

Don't know if this has already been discussed on other threads (only just catching up with these now) but one thing that bothers me is how some of these instamums exploit and leech from small businesses - usually run by mums. One friend who has just started a vintage kids' clothes business was approached by an instamum and asked to 'gift' something to her daughter - that way, she didn't have to disclose that it was an ad. My friend, quite rightly, said no as she couldn't afford to - and the same applied to an author friend who was asked to send free copies of her new book to an instamum - not one copy, but 3! The worst case, though, that I know of is another mum whose beauty business products were 'nominated' for some awards (run by an instamum) and that the products would 'win' if she paid for the collaboration.

I think the issue isn't just about the non disclosure of ads, it seems there is a far more murky area of exploiting other women starting out in business.

Reading the comments with interest. Interesting to see Mother of Daughters commenting. I'm unsure if she unfortunately comes across badly or whether she doesn't realise that her answers are either evasive or self-entitled, which is a shame as she's taken the time to respond and engage.
What I find overwhelmingly sad and telling, and I'm surprised she shared is that she felt FOD crossed a line with a pic he shared recently. This implies to me that they are not coming from the same place and surely with a brand, they need to be.
It's clear from her comments it's something on her mind, yet as it's his sole account purpose there appears to be nothing she can do. It's also noticeable that after parenting critism on previous threads, since she went to St Lucia and he went on an over-sharing frenzy, he's actually been far more restrained and careful (minus the potty)
But how sad. That she's not happy with what is shared of her children, and she manages a successful account with or without them (just probably gets more offers with them) yet he has kept up a pic she doesn't think is appropriate and basically monetises them. I can't imagine feeling my husband used our children as a money making opportunity and that I was powerless to protect them as his greed and need for fame was dominant.
I disagree though with her saying her older children consent to photos, as they are too young to have any real idea of social media and the potential implications.
I follow someone who met FOD at a book meet and had to unfollow them as they posted loads of pics saying how much they loved him. Like he was famous.
I have also noticed that the accounts I've unfollowed due to ads keep getting recommended to me, which is really annoying.
One IGer just had a weekend away which was heavily mentioned but only in stories (which I rarely watch) did it say #gifted. That annoys me for some reason.

both dh and I have work accounts (we both work within the arts) and personal accounts on instagram, I know all his passwords. If he posted anything that made me raise an eyebrow, I would give him a reality check, log in and edit or delete if need be.

My advice to MOD would be to just go delete the potty post from FOD's feed. No-one needs to have a photograph out there on the internet of them taking a poop.

I agree, I would have wrestled the phone out my husband's hand and deleted it myself but I would never have had to do that anyway because if I asked him, he would remove it.

The last thread was so useful (so many useful points about #Ad and disclosure and children and ethics still being made) and then just became farcical.

Seriously, pots and pans being unethical? Why MOD? Aren’t primark hauls (crap none needs that will end up on landfill) way more unethical? Are you commenting on every thread on MN in the same vein? (A new house? Some people would be grateful just to have any house!)

M/FOD need to be held to high standards for disclosure but to call them (her) out based on wanting nice things? Why does it matter if they could live on the living wage? A lot of us would struggle to live on that. I’m not getting this vein of criticism at all.

So they're all doing KK posts today. The sisterhood remains firmly this side of the pond.

Yes primark hauls are totally unethical

Wheezing I think only one person 'called her out' on this basis, other people took her up on it and the pp said she wouldn't comment about it anymore. It was self moderated.

I really hope KK starts tweeting #bekind so the inagrammers demansing unyielding obsequience realise how ridiculous a concept it is

BoredandTired I recommend blocking the accounts you unfollow. The algorithm didn't know what to do with itself when I did that earlier today

Phew this made it through the 'bully' filter.

FlyingBird, I don't think anyone could argue that Paul Weller has been anything other than fiercely protective of his children's right to privacy in that example. I can quite easily see a situation though where children take action against parents in the future because they believe their parents were negligent in consenting to their privacy being compromised, and hence their right to privacy being lessened because of their "fame".

Very interesting FlyingB all the more reason to value it on behalf of your children

KK has taken the lollipop ad down now, so, y'know, actually responding to valid criticism. Obviously it should never have been there in the first place but at least somebody in her PR team is paying attention.

I can't believe Mod has waded in on the KK thing, if I'm honest.

For the record, I find KK and her family abhorrent, but then I'm not starting campaigns about being bullied on the internet and giving out all that 'holier than thou' sisterhood bullshit. The hypocrisy is astonishing and even worse, they can't see it (even when someone like that poster @neverwas has screenshotted points it out).