MN have used my quote to promote a product I’ve never bought 🤔

[Wondermoomin]

AIBU to expect MN recommendations, where they quote a poster/member, to be genuine?

I like being able to rely on recommendations in MN swears by and other emails. I excitedly opened an email with the subject “Big bargains for our most loyal Mumsnetters” wondering what MN could make me buy this time (I should probably get other hobbies).

Imagine my surprise to see my own username quoted there with a recommendation! Imagine my further surprise when I realised it was a post I wrote almost 8 years ago, and it was being used directly under a specific product to give the impression I was recommending it - and I’ve never even owned that particular thing mine was more expensive.

I don’t like posts being misrepresented as a recommendation for a specific product. It makes me question the credibility of other MN recommendations.

Hoping I’ll manage to attach screenshots.

PS my gazebo broke but I’ve replaced it. Still not with the brand I supposedly recommended according to the MN email.

On the Swears By page on the website I counted:

64 articles that have been edited on May 1 or May 2, 2025.

11 articles that have not been edited on May 1 or May 2, 2025.

The Swears By articles edited on 2 May 2025 included one about best Black Friday deals of 2024 for electric blankets and heated throws.

I wonder what prompted that article to have been updated yesterday, on one of the hottest days of the year, long after Black Friday 24 was over?

That is shocking!! (In reality not after what we've seen so far) Gosh, I wonder what on earth is being covered up.

It's handy though that plenty of marketing tools can highlight very specific edits that have been made to web pages. I might take a look when back at work.

I'm too busy chilling under my pop up gazebo with rosemary oil in my hair whilst my kids run around with their new camera and the hamster is getting toasty upstairs with my new plug in heater. All came highly recommended 🙄

This image is recommended by Mumsnetters!

😉

That's Justine - chilling under the gazebo, after a long half hour toiling away at the kitchen table, confident in her tried and tested technique of ignoring 'these people' til the shit gets forgotten about.

Not a plan I'd be recommending, and you can quote me on that

This is amazing! Really made me laugh 😃 x

64 out of 75 = 1% (give or take)

Mumsnet Maths

So what you're saying is you recommend the gazebo then.

@Shynapple I meant to quote your post but got sidetracked by a cat, sorry!

I did feed the AI your "I'm too busy chilling under my pop up gazebo with rosemary oil in my hair whilst my kids run around with their new camera and the hamster is getting toasty upstairs with my new plug in heater." To create it!

got sidetracked by a cat, sorry!

"I would recommend every household own a dog" - @Boiledbeetle , May 2025

We have a cat who often interrupts us too so no worries there!

I've heard of the AI images but am yet to try it. Yours made me laugh so much! I love the detail, the cosy hamster and the rosemary leaves on my head 🤣 Thank you!

😂

And “hastily amending a post about electric blankets in May to remove the dodgy quotes we used” = “we occasionally might focus on a seasonal category”.

Trying to pass it off as a one-off/mistake/human error/whatever was very short sighted. Once it's made blatantly obvious that this was in fact commercial strategy and not a 'oops, look what we silly ol' things did!,' but you've already claimed otherwise, you've painted yourself into a corner.

I guess the plan now is to either admit that the explanation was disingenuous, or wait for the whole thing to blow over.

It's all bit Boris Johnson circa 2020/21.

No, nobody from MN has been in touch directly. And I’ll do my best to update here if that changes.

so now we’ve had:

Act in breach of ASA guidelines
Get caught
Take the thread down to “have a look at it”
Provide crap explanation saying it was a one off
Try to make sure nobody notices thread by not mentioning it’s trending
Go on massive editing spree which given what you’re “updating” can only be to remove lots and lots more instances of the same thing
Hide head in sand

Mostly I just resent being taken for a fool. And the women on here are definitely not fools. They’re an intelligent, witty and (mostly!) supportive bunch who deserve better than this.

I’ll certainly swear by Mumsnet recommendations in the future, but not in the way you think.

I was thinking about this thread today, I saw an old clip of Britain’s got Talent and was remembering how the crowd reactions shown aren’t real, but they take the clips from a bank of crowd footage depending on how they want the performance to be judged.

I guess words have more rules and regulations than random footage of someone pulling a face, but kind of similar!

It's standard Mumsnet "oh we're silly aren't we?" pretending they're running the site from their laptop after putting the kids to bed or something...

Whilst I'm reality they're a profitable company making MILLIONS...

It's baffling that a forum which is so important to so many women is run so amateurishly and with so little respect for its members.

Immediately check in Active, and apparently "Tumble dryer fog" is the latest updated thread. Minutes later this thread still not in Active.

Suppressing this thread is absolutely craven, @JustineMumsnet.

@financialmuddle I asked that question of Becky @mn on my thread I started when this one disappeared. You can see her response down at the end. Make of it what you will.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/site_stuff/5326834-why-was-this-thread-hidden?reply=144018153

I don't think MN is run amateurishly at all, tbh. I think sometimes MN don't mind that being the impression though.

The second bit of your post is correct imo - this ball dropped because of a failure to respect its members. The follow-up explanation is problematic because it's demonstrably not borne out by the evidence swiftly and easily dug up by posters.

Damage limitation can be tricky to get right. It would have been very wise to be completely honest once this was unearthed. It was stunningly short sighted to risk reputation/integrity/etc with the half-baked explanation that was - apparently - not the real picture at all.

The radio silence since, the 'hiding' of this thread, and the lack of respect you mention for all the smart, intelligent women on these pages has shifted my view of MN after 17 years on board.

Similar to the FU Daily mail precursor a lot of posts use - I wonder if we’ll all now have to tag ‘FU MN recommends’ whenever we respond to any fellow MN asking for advice on purchases?

Style & beauty board will be fulla effs and jeffs 🤭