Instamums (continued)

[MrBull]

Not a TAAT

Shirley

Selfish Mother
Not so smug now

Hi all,

As we've said previously in this type of thread - discussion about Instagram/ethics is perfectly fine, but when it turns into a protracted discussion about specific people, it turns into a bit of a pile on. If we could swerve it back to generalities, that would be great (and do also keep Talk Guidelines in mind).

Thanks all

MEDIOCRE

I know we jest, but I do think this illustrates our point. How are they any better on that post than what they claim the mumsnet forum to be?

Apologies if my swearies offend by the way. I meant to ** them.

On that note, I’d like a sweater with REPORTED on please.

In fact why doesn’t Instagram charge them? Like eBay? How come it’s free to use for those making thousands of £ out of it?

You do realise that the big name accounts earning thousands really aren't the norm? It'd be bloody hard to scrape together 1 or two hundred pounds per year, never mind the several thousands you seem to think they all get.
All that would do would be penalising people who need any extra income.
All the cake businesses/gardening services etc on FB. Their pages would take a hit too. Or is it only for the ones you think are earning too much money? How would you even know that though? Not being privy to their finances?

@anyamumsnet hey, why does this thread get a warning and not the other mama sweater one?

I’ll take a TALK GUIDELINES one if there’s enough room on the sweater

Peppa P

I've another,
PILE ON

Cady I already answered the question, it isn't free to use. All SM appeared great at the start - wow whizzy technology, cool interfaces, connect with friends - it is only now we realise we gave up our privacy, our rights to our photos, details of our children's identities and got sucked into scrolling endlessly through advertisements in return.

#talkguidelines on the back?

This has made me laugh 😂

Me too...although I’m now googling buying tote bags in bulk...the Spring/Summer range will see an accessories range launched!

Cady I already answered the question, it isn't free to use. it is only now we realise we gave up our privacy, our rights to our photos, details of our children's identities and got sucked into scrolling endlessly through advertisements in return

OK, it's not free in that sense, as in we are the products on social media, but that's not what the other poster said.
She said why aren't they being charged? I said where does that end.

They probably are being charged if they choose to promote their account like they would if they did Facebook ads. And the ebay fees are based on transactions aren't they? IG doesn't actually have a direct shopping facility on it though if they introduced it I am sure they would charge a transaction fee for using it. I'm also sure that is not too far off.

Find out what real austerity looks like, read about domestic violence with men and women who are desperate to escape, and the online strangers that offer help FREE OF CHARGE, and don't use it as an opportunity to plug a profitable agenda.

What has that got to do with people IGing/blogging etc though? How bloody boring would it be if all accounts were the same?
I for one want to see different feeds. So people who have big houses and a comfortable life shouldn't IG as it makes people feel inadequate?
People with a nice family set up should be quiet too?
At the risk of the old chestnut again, but there are a range of accounts to follow. No-ones forcing you to look at designer type ones.

@spiritleveller - yes, FB different in that way I suppose in that if you want to promote any posts on a business page (like the sponsored posts) you do get charged a small sum.
IG is a bit of a different set up though as there's no pages as such - you all just have feeds to put your squares on and it's all a level playing field.
Nothing to stop anyone trying to make a bit of money from it.

They'll be paying tax on anything they earn too I assume. The flip side is that whilst they don't pay to use the platform (unless they pay for a sponsored post) they don't earn any money for any original content they share on instagram either. Unlike YouTube (where I think they can earn something per hit).

@cadyheron I don’t mean charge the average person, but the ones making money. I make money on eBay, eBay makes money off me. And I’m sorry I think you are ludicrously naive, many accounts are making lots of money, at least the ones I follow or have followed. And if you are paid to advertise on Instagram, you should have to pay a fee. It would actually mean there was some kind of regulation.

I definitely see sponsored posts on Instagram and instastories Cady, I think it's the same as Facebook in that regard. It's often much more obvious advertising though, like for an insurance company or whatever.

IG business accounts are very different from personal accounts

I guess the Insta model encourages people to monetise their feed then through brands (if they are inclined to do so). They are simply a billboard facility in a way that eBay isn't (because you have to have an actual product to sell on eBay to make money). On Insta the product is YOU.

Instagram makes money from sponsored posts but to get there it had to maximise the number of people using the platform which is why it is free to use. The more accounts interactions and data shared, the better and more precise the algorithms work and the more targeted the ads get so the better the return for the brands. I guess the influencer market (generates no revenue for Insta as such) is a by-product of all this. Lucky for us it means even more ads on our feeds!

**CadyHeron

In fact why doesn’t Instagram charge them? Like eBay? How come it’s free to use for those making thousands of £ out of it?

You seriously want people to start paying to use social media? Where does that line stop, then?
Your bitterness is showing in that comment.**

I’ve just seen this. You make me laugh. I wasn’t bitter at all! Why would I be? It’s a genuine question, it’s not really social media any more, it’s a flogging site. Interspersed with nice photos. I really like my feed now and just unfollow any that I don’t like or advertise things I don’t want to see. So no no bitterness, but do you not think it’s odd that there’s this thing and people use it for free and make loads of money.

Name change fail!

And I’m sorry I think you are ludicrously naive, many accounts are making lots of money, at least the ones I follow or have followed.

I know lots of accounts do make money, I never said otherwise. I did say though that it certainly isn't the norm,for every one person that commands high fees per ad there'll be thousands upon thousand more who'd be lucky to get a meagre 50 quid for one.
If you follow and watch big designer type names IG's algorithm will show you more of the same stuff as it knows you "like" it, so it's not surprising you're only seeing the "rich" type ones.
Although we have no way of knowing they are "rich" - is everyone with a big house swimming in money? Hardly likely really.