Sali Hughes - Caroline hirons, in the bathroom

[bettybigballs]

Just spent an enjoyable hour watching sali's in the bathroom with Caroline hirons any wondered if anyone knows where sali's dress in from? Really like the colourful buttons: m.youtube.com/watch?v=YucPnS4j4kQ

Agree Squeezy - I was thinking more around people like Sam Bunting who as far as I know don't promote single brand - just some basic skin care routines based on a range of products across brands and prices.. dont get me on Sebagh, Periconne, etc etc..

Am pleased that people are realising how much money is paid to bloggers/vloggers to promote stuff. Tanya Burr has just bought a house for over £2m apparently so she is certainly getting paid £££ to promote stuff.

I quite like Caroline when she does videos with Ruth but had to stop the LA ones as just too dull.

The problem is when blogs/vlogs were just a bit of fun then you could trust recommendations but now they're no different to what is promoted in a magazine.

Evidence of iffy ethics in the medical field can be seen in cosmetic surgery - botched procedures, agreement to procedures which are unsuitable (overlarge breast implants for instance). For some, it it is all about the cash and they are just as easily bought as the bloggers & facialists are. Only they can charge twice as much because it is medical. No it isn't. If I don't need a prescription or to buy it OTC, it is just a cosmetic like any other.

It's all balls, really.

I did think Sali pointed out a few things in the video though (tata harder too expensive) and did disagree with a few if CH's choices (hylamide did nothing and she prefers Vichy, for e.g.). I think overall, SH was a bit quiet but I think that's probably because CH has a stronger personality and just talks over SH/changes the subject (which she did a couple of times, especially during the Gabi Roslin bit - just cutting Sali dead with two lots of "How rude!").

My favourite of the Sali vids has been the Marian Keyes ones. Oh and I really liked the early one with Gizzi Erskine.

HarPer - thank you Apple

As for Sam Bunting, I don't know if she's also in the payment of someone. Seems likely though. Everyone has an agenda. Sadly.

I do have a degree of sympathy. If this is what bloggers/vloggers do for a living then it has to pay. If viewers don't pay for content then they have to pay their bills in other ways, hence advertising & sponsorship. It just needs to be clearer, I think.

I think the management company is also something to keep in mind if you have young children/teenagers that like to watch these people on youtube. It sits badly with me that these kids are being sold to in an often very sneaky way. I do think it's worth making sure that children know that it's possible that the brand of ice cream Zoella mentions for example probably isn't actually her favourite, but she's been paid to mention it and asked by the company not to disclose that fact.

Recent rules by the asa mean that specific paid for adverts should be declared, however there are many loopholes that the bloggers are using to get around this. It's also had the effect that because they do occasionally declare something to be an advert, people assume everything else they mention is truly something the blogger loves.

These people aren't making a small amount of pocket money from this either. We are talking thousands for simply a mention of a product. Put it this way, Tanya Burr on that list has just bought a £2 million house from sitting in her bedroom talking about products. That's the kind of money we are talking about.

At the end of the day, this has become their job,(being sales people) and I don't have a problem with that at all. I do have a problem though with the dishonesty and lack of disclosure that is going on in the blogger and youtube world right now. It's made it very difficult to find good honest reviews of products.
I accept that as promoting all these products is their job and therefore they get oodles of them for free. I do sometimes think though that it's very easy to be telling someone that a £100 cleanser is fantastic and worth buying when they don't actually have to shell out that kind of money for the product themselves and have a lifetimes supply.
Sali is someone who I actually think still has a very good grip on this and will often mention when something is just not worth the money in reality.

Cross posted with you MrsCampbellBlack about Tanya Burr. You are spot on with your comparison about bloggers having become the new "magazine" when it comes to advertising.

Squeezy - I agree with what you are saying about them needing to pay the bills. It's such a shame though that many of them have sold their integrity to do so. Also worth mentioning that they don't have to do quite so many adverts. They are paid for their youtube videos that they upload depending on how many views they get. The more views = more money. Many have also joined other video networks such as vessel, where you see their normal youtube videos 72 hours earlier. £500,000 was the number going around that smaller youtubers were given for signing up to that service, so I dread to think what the popular ones were offered!

Thanks for posting the link jasmine, not sure why I'm surprised by this but I am. Agree totally with your comments about lack of disclosure.

I agree, jasmine and yy to Vessel (the early sub service). I think they all know that their careers are short lived and so are determined to make as much hay whilst the sun shines, tbh. Milk their 15 mins of fame and sod the people and reasons that got them there (integrity & honest opinions).

As Caroline herself was on the Amazing Faces quiche thread a couple of weeks ago, I'd love her to come and answer back on this thread! (anyone fancy PMing her and asking her? ) I just looked through her FAQs and legal stuff and she seems extremely upfront about what she promotes and the fact that her reviews are honest and not ones she has been asked to do.....I dunno, maybe I am too naïve but I luffs her.

Mind you, I only read her blog, I don't look at the youtube stuff and have no idea (beyond it's something to do with photos?) what the feckery instagram is!

and yes, the ASA law changes aren't enough. They require that paid for ads are disclosed (e.g. Where company X explicitly pays blogger Y to promote the product in a blog/video) but disclosure can be very, very vague (but still legal) if that promotion isn't paid via a specific agreement but is perhaps the result of a PR relationship and lots of samples being sent (not all bloggers disclose what is a PR sample and what has been bought by their own cash).

Or of course, these 'hauls' where they are given a gift card by the PR for a certain store or website (Selfridges, Cult Beauty, etc) and buy a range of brands but are sure to show the bag and mention the source of the product plenty of times but alas, no mention of how the products were funded. Often it's "I picked up", very ambiguous phraseology there. The legal team at Gleam will be all over that shit, telling them exactly where the line is what they can/can't get away with. These bloggers/vloggers are making a packet but it is nothing compared to the money made by Gleam and the PR companies who are the puppet masters, raking it in.

I've just looked at Gleam's website. I don't know who Thatcher Joe is but my God that's an irritating face!

Drank, most of my posts are about the wider you tube / beauty blogging world, tbh. Though yes, like I said on another thread, CH was singing the praises of the body shop's bouncy sleeping mask on her blog and then, a month or so later, I saw an ad feature in Tatler for the BS using CH's image to endorse their products (the bouncy sleeping mask).

Was she contacted by the BS because they'd seen that she liked it and asked her to endorse? Unlikely as the mag would have already been in production by the time the blog post went live.

Is she plugging it as part of the contract with BS?

Or did she try the product as part of working with BS on the campaign and love it and write about it on the blog as a result? Possibly, but she didn't say so and so when I (a reader of her blog) see the post and then a month later the ad crops up, I'm joking the dots and thinking

JOINING the dots.

Ffs

.

You'll have to change your name to JessiaFletcher Squeezy. LOVE her BTB.

Jessica always had a lovely complexion. Crime is so rejuvenating.

I also thought that the part in the interview when she talked about being paid to promote products was a bit ott. She kept banging on about how impartial she is to the point where I started to doubt her.

Oh yes - we should absolutely ask CH on to this thread.

Have a sneaky feeling she'll say no though

Sangria MN is a good place for reaching a certain demography - I saw CH's coming here is a bit like doing an instore meet&greet, probably prompted by a software that tracks her social media mentions. It's purpose was to strengthen her personal brand and name recognition. A stronger personal brand and a bigger number of followers gets you lots of things, including paid contracts. What trades hands is our trust in her. If she recommends something, a certain percentage of her followers will buy that blind, and that has definite monetary value. Very few people do publicity without a specific agenda.

I find it easier to read blogs that have a clear agenda. Pocket Derm promotes teledermatology and their subscription cosmetic retinoid etc products - fair enough, they are never going to say that isotretinoin is bad for you. Paula promotes her products and dismisses many others - she could be better about disclosure though, Beautypedia is made to look impartial but of course it is not, they will never say that Paula's Choice products are total rubbish, and they have chose the product evaluation criteria specifically to make their offerings look good. Beauty Brains people formulate hair products for their living, it is not in their interest to make Unilever go bankrupt but as they have lots of potential employers, they can freely say that salon products are a bit of a con. However, they are unlikely to become no-poo campaigners or natural skincare advocates and won't organize an anti-globalization riot

It's the undisclosed stuff makes me uncomfortable - it's money under the table, and I might be footing the bill. I think the key question is to ask, who will benefit and in what way if I read this, buy this, or click this link?

I think there is some research that says that people are not particularly good at seeing their personal conflicts of interest. That means that CH might see her trip to LA as a fair exchange of services (a small compensation for years of unpaid collaboration with Pixi). Someone else might see her as a paid consultant who was hired to generate positive publicity for the brand and to strengthen its social media presence. So people may genuinely believe that they remain impartial despite financial or other ties...

Nothing to add but wanted to applaud frugalfashionistas post. Really informative and you make some good points. I wish I could translate my thoughts onto a page so well.

Hmm, I've been reading CH's blog to try to find a way to improve my blotchy middle-aged skin.

I like her suggestions and I like the fact I am learning about ingredients, what works etc.

But that video......they two of them are just really show-offy. Showing off all their fabulous freebies (and complaining about how many they get!), and the fact they work for themselves, only just stopping short of saying how much they earn. Very unBritish!

I agree with a pp who said she can't possibly properly review all those products, she must simply work on smell, ingredients, immediate feel.

CH writes for the Body Shop blog. beautyblog.thebodyshop.co.uk/tag/caroline-hirons/