Instamums (continued)

[MrBull]

Not a TAAT

Whilst not instamums, I follow our1930sfixerupper - 2 guys who do lots of sponsored interiors posts and are part of the instamum set.

Really shocked to see them advertising the lottery. Recognise that tagged AD and also for over sixteens, but they admit they don’t do the lottery themselves.

Really surprised anyone who comfortably promote gambling

I know that account, they are lovely. And also very clear with disclosure (especially compared to their mates which puts some of the other shady disclosure into perspective ).

Totally missed the lottery thing. Gambling/lottery doesn't feel like a great fit for their page but if they have followed the rules I don't really have too much issue with it. They are clearly not appealing to kids, unless they are into suburban gardening and house renovations. I suppose the money meant it was too good to turn down but it is a really odd collaboration, I wonder how it came about?

I quite like Ross and Ian too. Their account is more ad heavy than some though. I don't have a problem with that when they're disclosed but like the meldrums, they can be a harder watch sometimes because of having to weed through that content (more so on stories with them
I think). I've not seen the lotto advertising but that does seem an odd match with them. Their actual owned content is good though and they have a beautiful garden/house. I could definitely do with someone as handy as Ian at my house!

I don't think their content is particularly more ad heavy than others, they just disclose it more clearly.

Well that's maybe it. Their ads are very clearly ads, whilst others are sneaking them in as normal posts. I just find the ads a bit of a turn off if there's too many and have noticed that's an account I sometimes swipe past on stories if they start a chain of ad posts.

I feel advertising is more of a chore in stories though, more invasive and in my personal space somehow, if that makes any sense? That applies to them all, not just this account.

Agree that they’ve disclosed this AD clearly. I just think it’s demonstates that nothing is off limits if the price is right really.

Personally I abhore gambling and I appreciate my stance on this relates to personal experience. However, I’m surprised that they’d be willing to collaborate with something that isn’t as wholesome as their usual Emma Bridgwater ceramics

Does anyone know what is the link with Soho farmhouse and The instamum’s? They are often featured there in bikes, it’s never disclosed as anything but surely they can’t all be coincidental members?

I think the soho farmhouse is one of those things that they probably WANT to all be seen there (as membership is in the thousands per year) so it’s an exclusive club.
I know friends that don’t have memberships but go in as ‘guests’ of members and they take loads of photos to give the impression they too can afford the membership

a lot of brands host events there so if you're invited you don't have to necessarily have to have a membership.

My sister had her hen party there, it is pretty incredible but very Truman Show I've never seen so many posers around the pool and expensive cars in the car park

SM is claiming 1: we’ve bitched about her jumpers for six pages 2: called her smug 3: but it’s ok cos half the posts are supporting her.

None of these things are true. They’re just making stuff up now.
I made the point that telling average Mum public to #boycottthehighstreet was ridiculous. SM doesn’t even acknowledge it and just goes straight for the MN are wankers.

Re sharenting and the implications for children, this is interesting reading. blogs.lse.ac.uk/parenting4digitalfuture/2017/09/20/under-the-limelight/
When you think how much we know about all these Instakids, their names, addresses, schools etc, it is shocking. Would be so good to hear just one of these businesswomen/men instaparents explaining how it is actually ok to shill their kids but I am not holding my breath .....

Now it makes more sense why I blocked her. What a load of crap.

The biggest problem with these threads is they fuel the smug-support and anti-mumsnet comments on Instagram. It’s actually really good for business and middle class white mummas to belittle anyone who dares have a different viewpoint or question anything. It stands to reason not everyone will like a cheesy ‘mama’ top, that doesn’t mean I don’t think raising money for charity is not a good thing. All these brands are now super wealthy and in a privileged position and able to all ‘get each other’s backs’ when actually it’s a sign their businesses are so successful they aren’t like by everyone who sees them everywhere. Big deal. But it just fuels the divide between rich instamums with 4 holidays a year and private schools and those of us they are peddling their wares to and living off.

Personally feel a bit irritated as I bought one for someone as a gift (they loved it) and I’m now wishing I hadn’t.

The sweatshirts are really nice.

It’s a strange business attitude to slag off people who use a forum and openly state forums are essentially beneath you, when it’s obvious that many normal people who use forums have. A) bought the jumpers and b) use Instagram
And ‘who has time to go on a forum and anonymously rant’? The people who have time to spend hours on Instagram being her customers 🙄 and actually most people were not ranting at all. They simply either liked them or did not.

Well, to be fair to her, there is actually another lengthy thread slagging off the jumpers 😂 Not just hers though, but all the slogan ones.

The middle class instamums will find most of their audience on these boards. Hence why the savviest of them don't mention them!

(Mention them... 'them' being these threads.)

To hate those “Mother” / “Mama” / “Mutha” sweatshirts / jumpers?!http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/3374704-To-hate-those-Mother-Mama-Mutha-sweatshirts-jumpers

Oh it makes a bit more sense now!

Ahh yeah now it makes more sense

There are so many high profile instamums and bloggers commenting on the SM's post about these mumsnet threads (Mod, hirons, manvsbaby, gi fletcher). I 100% understand that the personal attacks take their toll (and I've mentioned before but there are actually far more hateful forums than mumsnet for that) and I get frustrated, as do others, when these threads turn into pile-ons on particular instagrammers - but above all this, none (and please correct me if I'm wrong) ever say - actually these mums have raised some fair points about: sharing images of our children online or the business of ad and gifts disclosure etc etc. The successful ones have done very well out of instagram but actually to dismiss these threads where hundreds of comments have been legitimate and constructive (and a lot of comments are from their actual followers) - and only focus on the bitchy ones is frustrating. Stand up and answer some of the big questions and maybe they'll actually find a lot of positivity and support here for them. Even that slogan sweater thread wasn't that bad overall if you read it and weed out the nasty comments. People mainly commenting that it's a trend that's probably seen it's day. Like all fashion trends!

this is when confusion can happen when a 'thread' is mentioned but not clear where or what has been discussed.

In relation to what you've just mention @MrBull I wonder (and playing devils advocate here) do they have to answer those big questions about their children and sharing images online? If they're happily sharing those pictures then they must be comfortable doing so. If they're using their children in ads do they need to explain why they're doing it? Can't we the audience just accept that's their choice and not something we would choose to do.

We all see in society (playground, school, supermarket etc) parents making choices that we might not agree with eg seeing an overweight child eating fast food, explicit language used by a parent to a child but do we expect those parents to justify these actions?

( for clarity I'm just giving another view point on this I'm not siding with one side of the coin)

I do see where you are coming from, it is their choice and they don't have to justify it (I would except ads from this - the rules exist for everyone and it isn't a matter of personal preference). I do find it interesting though that when MP (for example) does a post about child privacy, the comments are largely tumbleweed from fellow bloggers. If someone does a post about those meanies over at mumsnet criticising their business model then it's open season for a pile on about how awful we all are.

Yes, re the privacy, it's their decision ultimately but not even to discuss or acknowledge it?

Re the advertising, I don't think they should ignore people calling out shady disclosure (particularly of gifts) because they're making money out of us and it's against the regulations set by the ASA. It shouldn't be a personal choice to disclose or not to disclose things.