Instamums (continued)

[MrBull]

Not a TAAT

Who's that?

If we mention her name the thread will explode.

Not a Tory.

I'm lost

Yet there’s two threads on Mrs Hinch! Mental.

It's fucking ridiculous is what it is but I've had a ban warning so 🤐

A new thread was started in Chat (on ethics) today, it was taken down this morning.

These are not just mums online posting pictures, they are registered companies, what is the problem with discussing ethics & marketing of an online company/business/influencer?

I don't think there would have been this huge interest in the ethics of these accounts if they had been transparent about their stealth marketing. They have been allowed to grow their large following without any regulation & following no advertising laws whatsoever. It has come up many times that people felt duped or just did not know about affiliate links/commission etc.

With the new ASA guidelines in place, people wish to discuss this further, especially the continued duping of their customers.

What was the rationale for taking down the thread?

@idontneednopyjamas

It had two or three consecutive mentions of SWMNBN after said person put up several stories that were horrific bullying of another person.

The OP self reported it to not get in trouble and also because clearly said person isn’t well.

Surfinbird - I think that was the first thread. There was another one this morning discussing other accounts and ethics. As I remember there was a discussion on 'pay day loans' that had been advertised on Instagram.

Mumsnet appeared and said they were deleting because the business people on these accounts couldn't be discussed, they were different to famous people. Bizarre.

Should it be #AD or just AD?

Very blurred lines

That’s a bizarre reason for shutting down discussion. They are businesses. The ethics of promoting pay day loans on instagram as a way to treat yourself to a fashion item is exactly the kind of topic that should be discussed.

I have asked mumsnet to clarify in site stuff.

It’s disingenuous to claim they are just businesses when the reality is the business is indistinguishable from the individual. It should be fine to talk about the industry generally but there have been very attacking posts about individuals which aren’t really on.

It’s disingenuous to claim they are just businesses when the reality is the business is indistinguishable from the individual

That could equally apply to Katie Price or Jamie Oliver - their businesses are instrictively linked to them as personalities but they are allowed to be discussed. Very rarely are posts about them are taken down.

Exactly. I don't know why these businesses are viewed differently by MN than others.

Ahh I didn’t see that one peaches !

Very very off to get rid of any conversation ? What is it against the law now to discuss ? Who’s pulling the strings

It was a thread that I started that was taken down. MN emailed me to say that a comment I made ‘didn’t set a civil tone for a debate’. This was following my comments about an instamum advertising payday loans

MN haven't responded to my question yet. But that sounds like we can debate stuff as long as it is kept civil? That sounds fair enough, and most of the time it is. Spiky comments do sometimes attract other spiky comments and I guess can lead to the infamous 'pile on' situation. I haven't read through the MrsHinch thread though but surprised that one isn't considered a pile on as it is all about one person! The ethics of advertising stuff like payday loans sounds totally suitable for debate.

I won’t repost my comment but essentially it made reference to my feelings that advertising a pay day loan to encourage buying ‘treats before pay day’ suggested that there is a willingness to sell practically anything

Advertising payday loans to buy fashion "treats" is unethical and against ASA rules, as far as I can tell. ASA are all about making a success of advertising so if their moral compass says it is wrong, I can't see how anyone else could sensibly argue otherwise. I don't see why MN couldn't have issued a warning to say please keep the tone of the thread polite rather than shut down the whole thing, which seems very heavy handed and a bit dictatorial.

@AnonaMouse1

If I may, as an influencer, this comes up every so often in the private discussion groups of which I'm a member. We've concluded that whilst either AD or #AD is fine to use, so long as it's right at the beginning of the text so readers can choose whether to invest their time and energy on a paid advertorial from the get-go, there's no real point in 'wasting' a hashtag on it - nobody clicks through hashtags looking for advertisements, after all. Consequently it makes more sense for us to use AD.

I agree either AD or #AD (or [AD] or {AD}) are fine, but wish some more of your peers were on your private group because plenty are putting it at the end of the caption rather than at the beginning of the text (which is what ASA require, as far as I understand it, to ensure it is prominent enough). Funny that you said it is a "waste" of a hashtag though, I saw an instagrammer use the hashtag #table the other day which for some reason made me properly LOL.