Instamums in the Telegraph

[caperberries]

Is there a new thread about this?

But the people who do these ads on Instagram could (I’m not saying they do) but they might put money into their children’s accounts from the money they get from the ads they do. I just have seen children in tv etc doing scenes that sometimes I simply can not watch, for example that awful but so informative documentary on the sex trafficing situation (that disturbed me) and I can imagine if some people recognised them girls in the street they might be discriminated for that (as you hear things like actors being abused in public for roles they’ve played on screen) some people can’t seperate the real person from the actor. The ads I’ve seen on insta with children in are always light hearted, the kids aren’t not enjoying it& they are never uncomfortable, I personally can’t seem to see a difference between a pampers ad or a little tykes ad on television to one on Instagram (again really just wondering) I might just be looking at it wrong and want to hear other people’s views.

BoreandTired He has gained mod superfans presumably waiting for word of her return.

Also I understand there are strict guidelines for tv roles etc but that’s perhsps because they are actually properly working (purely the kids) the ads on insta can’t be more than a minute long if posted on a timeline or is it 40 seconds or something for a story, so it’s not like they are pressured to be working long hours. The whole insta #ad is so new and I can see why it annoys people But the more I’ve thought about it I just couldn’t seem to feel worse for the tv kiddies than the ones featured on insta.

@Lovegenerateslove

I asked the same question re child models & actors on a previous thread. Personally I am doubtful that an agency would care more about a child than it's own parents. They obviously earn money from their clients and that is all these child models are clients, a commodity.

Children feature on many parents insta accounts anyway. Many of the #ads are just kids playing as normal but they happen to be wearing, for example, a Boden dress and the picture will be #AD and usually with an affiliate link. I don't see the problem with this at all.

It’s a question of privacy. A child’s day to day private life in that Boden dress is presented for anyone to see - and it’s on the internet, so it’s there forever. Meal times, bath times, days out, school days, everything. The parents are selling their children’s right to privacy for profit - long before they are able to even understand, let alone consent.

In the case of the prominent accounts, hundreds of thousands of strangers know these children’s names, their date of birth, their mother’s maiden name, their first pet.. and have access to hundreds of pictures for facial recognition.

How is this in any way comparable to a child appearing (for example) in a Boden catalogue?

All this attention will surely bring the ODs more followers and all brands seem to care about are the numbers.

Lovegenerateslove with child actors & models they’re also playing a part. With Instagram advertising, it’s very much real ie we know where they are, what they’re doing, their names & ages. We know all about their lives. Plus it’s daily, so their faces become very recognisable as opposed to a child in a tv ad that you might see once every couple of weeks for a few seconds while the campaign is running.

@caperberries agree with your post.
There seem to be a very small percent of posters here who have nonissue, don't consider the privacy issues to be a problem and feel these parents are very good and offering these kids their best lives. Then you have the majority of posters who are much more concerned about the long term impact and level of sharing and information. There are some accounts where you can see from the comments people feel like they know these children. Sadly the more this is voiced or discussed, the more it's accused of being false or jealousy.
Having teenagers I feel strongly for the right to privacy of children and for them to be in control of their online footprint at an appropriate time in their lives. I find it fairly abhorrent that parents would give up good jobs in favour of monetising their children, and the fact their is no body overseeing or protecting them from their parents greed is just another area they can abuse and profit from.
There are accounts that post carefully and more anonymously and there are accounts that do not feature children.
Often it seems that the only people who don't have an issue with it are those that openlybsgsre their own children and would very much like the lifestyle and opportunities these accounts have.

*openly share!

BoredandTired also having older children, I agree. (And I find teenagers much better behaved on line than those involved in the recent antics on IG).

I would love just one of the insta parents to explain why they think it is acceptable to monetise their children. Anybody?

When I saw FODs post last night there was no paid partnership tag or #ad. So if this is his monthly offering, surely it should be tagged? Or is it just a fun story that he's put on, which happens to be in the car? In which case it comes back to PP posts about when does an item need tagging and when does it not?

In the case of the prominent accounts, hundreds of thousands of strangers know these children’s names, their date of birth, their mother’s maiden name, their first pet.. and have access to hundreds of pictures for facial recognition.

I was going to say similar...
Yesterday on one account everyone was busy congratulating an instamum getting to 10k followers. All I could think is, like me, you now have 10,000 complete strangers who know both your child's full names including surname, place of birth, your full name, very much nearly know your address (could easily find out if inclined), husbands name, siblings, family .....it goes on....
If that's what it takes to have my kids dressed in free clothes and to be gifted free kitchen towel and spray then no thanks!

Many of the #ads are just kids playing as normal but they happen to be wearing, for example, a Boden dress and the picture will be #AD and usually with an affiliate link. I don't see the problem with this at all.

Oh come on, how many times have they shouted at the child to direct it "Tilly, Tilly, this way, look at the camera..." runs over to put product in the shot more prominently..."Tilly, Tilly, smile...."

Totally interrupting natural family life and their playtime to get their "shot" to earn them the £££'s

It's just really sad.

It’s a question of privacy. A child’s day to day private life in that Boden dress is presented for anyone to see - and it’s on the internet, so it’s there forever. Meal times, bath times, days out, school days, everything. The parents are selling their children’s right to privacy for profit - long before they are able to even understand, let alone consent.

Exactly

I was at a playground the other day and heard a Dad calling out for his two kids. Who happened to have the same two names as the kids of an Instamum I follow. My head whipped round to see if I recognised them as her kids. It wasn't them as it happens. But in that moment, I realised how much those kids had been commodified and how their privacy was gone with the wind. Stable door open, horse bolted.

I do not want complete and utter strangers on a playground to recognise my kids.

Is it worth just recapping the narrative here? I feel like we need a single version of the truth.

We firstly identified and have debated a range of ethical issues and instagram/ SM challenges.

Two well-know instamums joined the thread to debate it (@badmotherpukka and @anyalovesrosie).

At the same time, and not in any way promoted by or done by someone here, an instagrammer (Laura Hesketh) questioned MOD's hashtag which shamed KK, suggesting that there were parallels between the ways they operated. Laura H was then both accused of trolling by MOD on the thread and by DM; and also harassed on the thread and DM by a large number of MOD followers. This conversation continued the next day on another MOD post. There were some inconsistencies about who blocked whom.

People on this thread discussed this event, including what MOD said/ did/ tone, and also how she responded to/ handled her followers' words/ actions. We agreed that she may or may not have responsibility for a) setting a tone/being explicit with her followers about what is ok and b) for actively moderating her thread (or paying someone to moderate it for her, given the size of her following), removing incendiary/ aggressive posts.

MOD stepped away from insta. We don't know why, but there has been speculation.

Tangentially, an Instagrammer (NSSN)posted about MOD's experiences being akin to rape. There was a strong sense here that a) her understanding of the situation was on shaky ground and b) the metaphor was appalling. Her post was taken down.

At around the same time, but apparently unrelated, another Instagrammer (CB) made a story in which she cried because of a cruel DM. We discussed that here, and the response of a friend (SV) who made a story about cutting people in defence. That Instagrammer has since retracted her statement and been very open and reflective.

On this MN thread, another poster (Offish) commented about an event she attended, some aspects of which she found wanting. Others who had attended the same event felt the same way. The Instagrammer (WS) who ran the event vigorous defended herself on her insta stories (while running around the garden, away from her kids). A friend of this Instagrammer (TMWC) also went on her stories to defend her mate. She was fairly aggressive, and her followers waded in, again in a threatening tone (although they were apparently defending the poster, thinking people were attacking her for getting free sandals - I was not aware of anyone attacking her for getting free sandals).

Is that about the sum of it? I just feel like we need a single version of the truth.

@Bullnoway

Oddish didn't attend the event

She made a a comment about Laura's defence post that she had made, but she wasn't at the event and didn't claim to be

Ah. Sorry. Someone attended the event. Let's be clear who.

ChocolateTea it didn't look much fun. It looked very much like fulfilling a contractual obligation.

It’s a question of privacy. A child’s day to day private life in that Boden dress is presented for anyone to see - and it’s on the internet, so it’s there forever. Meal times, bath times, days out, school days, everything. The parents are selling their children’s right to privacy for profit - long before they are able to even understand, let alone consent.

And in addition to this, those children will look back on all of their childhood photos have have to wonder whether each one was a genuine 'moment' or whether it had been set up to flog cereal. It's genuinely a bit Truman Show for them.

Child actors know when they are working and when they are living their real life.

I think it was a poster called @ForTheGram

@Bullnoway that's about the sum of it, but I think it's also important to mention that these threads about the Instamums had completely died down until MOD reposted NB plagiarised #dearmumsnet post.

Also @Sofialemon we get that you're not bothered about the Instamums monetising their kids or about child privacy issues but can I ask you what your views on FOD posting that photo of one of the twins on the potty are? Surely that's a line in the sand even for you.

Yes, I was the person that attended the WeeSlice event, if you search my user name you'll see my previous posts on it.

I don't want this to flare discussion up again to be honest as I didn't expect my comments to create such strong opinions and backlash. However I'd like to say thank you to the Mumsnetters who asked if I was ok. I'm fine, but it was quite shocking watching someone on the internet publicly calling me a fucking prick and a liar. I'm actually neither and was simply commenting on my experience. I am genuinely sorry for any distress that my comments have caused WeeSlice, Thatmumwithcancer or anyone else. I'm saying that here because I'm not willing to publicly face the wrath of anyone who who has misunderstood or misconstrued my posts on IG.

Having reflected on it I'd say that of course the more well known instagrammers are likely to connect with each other above unknowns in a setting such as the WeeSlice event, they already kind of know each other through their IG activity. And it's important to remember that these people are not necessarily as outgoing and confident in real life as they may appear - I appreciate that.

I stand by the fact that I felt like an outsider but the non insta famous people I chatted to were lovely. I didn't speak with WeeSlice, I almost did but she got distracted and I got a 'hang on babe' brush off, never for her to return. I could however have made more of an effort myself to reconnect with her.

My feedback to WS and anyone else hosting such an event is to be aware that for some attendees there is an expectation above goodie bags and cocktails. Hosting the event is required and as the organiser it's your job to make everyone feel included, wether that's within your comfort zone or not. I just felt like afterwards the learnings she posted seemed like digs suggesting that people abused her generosity which reinforced to me the feeling that some of us there were gate crashing her party (even though I didn't even bring a child with me!). There were a few photos posted of the instafamous folk and actually it would have gone a long way if she had suggested a group photo and ensured that she had spoken to everyone, perhaps even made a few introductions.

I won't post about this again but am finding the overall discussion very interesting.

All of your posts have been very measured, Gram, including your latest one. The abuse you got was inexcusable.