Instagrammers and Influencers

[scotx]

New thread to follow on from this one

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/style_and_beauty/3462129-Can-we-chat-about-fashion-Instagrammers-influencers?msgid=84590932

Wouldyoulike, I didn't know there was another thread about Cash, not interested enough to search, she just popped into my head this morning.

Agree with the candle, it's ridiculous how much they're digging their heels in over it!

I’m paraphrasing but I think the “being paid in scented candles” quote from an influencer demonstrates one of the issues with disclosure.

Influencers feel resentful that they have to disclose something as trivial as a scented candle when they aren’t even being paid cash to promote it, but their inadequate payment isn’t the fault of their followers who want more disclosure. They should be getting snarky with the companies who think that it is fair to pay women in “lovely little treats” instead of money.

That's how I see it too, Chiara.

If the candle/lipstick/handbag is indeed a gift, then enjoy it in private and then there's no need to disclose, if not then ask the company to pay you. Getting all arsey with disclosing is neither here nor there.

Agreed, if the complaint is essentially that you can't pay the mortgage with a scented candle, then it's time to change your business model and start being the sort of influencer who brands do actually want to pay real cash to in exchange for professional content. But at the moment, a garbled 15 second instastory is only worth a free candle. Most of them wouldn't last a day if they actually had to work to deadlines and submit content and copy that met any kind of professional standards.

If you think about it, it's actually quite sad that that's the value they put on themselves. Can be bought for a small token gift in the mail.

If you think about it, it's actually quite sad that that's the value they put on themselves. Can be bought for a small token gift in the mail.

Yes and in return they give up their privacy and live in an online fish bowl. It boggles me why anyone would want to do it.

I don't think they are resentful about having to disclose (some of them anyway). I think some of them think that posting about freebies is "organic content". Some of the comments I have read on twitter and instagram makes me realise some of them are too far gone - they are unable to distinguish what an ad is anymore and have no understanding of what the perceptions of their followers could be.

Why would the annnaedit and lily pebbles be limiting comments? This is a bit weird, no?

The RMS comment about being paid in scented candles refers to their freelance writers. Freelancers should be paid properly to produce content; influencers shouldn't conceal or be disingenuous about payment in kind. Both of these things can be true and it's not helpful to conflate them.

Surely that’s the whole point though? Influencers do conflate the two things - adverts have become content on most feeds. The only one I can think of where the ads are fairly separate from the content is mother pukka.

That’s a separate issue to the payment of freelance journalists on online platforms like RMS or The Pool (as was), which is where the ‘payment in scented candles’ came from.

It sounds like the pool was a victim of the influencer industry then perhaps. Brands could more easily/cheaply achieve their aims by selling through influencers that were willing to conflate ads and content rather than via publishing platforms that paid producers of content a fair freelance rate.

You're right, it's not fair to compare a freelance journalist or writer to some of the influencers and I don't think anyone would argue that a free gift is adequate compensation for a properly researched, professionally written and edited article.

But these influencers have moved the goalposts about what constitutes "content". What used to be say an advertorial in a magazine is now a few instastories. Exposure for a small brand now comes from an influencer rather than a press piece written by a journalist. Brands have jumped on this, shrewdly realizing that if they can get some good coverage for the bare minimum of investment, why wouldn't it be good business to engage in influencer marketing rather than paying a freelancer to write editorial copy. And you only have to see the current use of "press sample" instead of #gifted to realize that some of these influencers are actually trying to insert themselves into a position that they're neither qualified for or entitled to but are jumping on this idea that influencers as content producers are the new wave of journalists and writers. (To be clear, I hate this notion.)

Take a brand like Bobbi Brown, a high end brand that's sold at counters, part of Estee Lauder with a marketing budget surely in the millions. Yet they're sending products to instamums who are clearly not the target demographic (nor are their followers), wouldn't part with their own cash for it and don't even do a good job of talking about the products when it's in their hands. Yet it must pay for them else why would they continue to use these influencers as part of their marketing strategy.

Anneli Bush has featured nine gifted items on her stories today, with affiliated links on most to encourage us all to buy. Probably we’ll see the majority of these ‘dreamy’ pieces on her online shop in a month or so, along with a ‘new with tags, never worn’ tag.

It sounds like the pool was a victim of the influencer industry then perhaps.

I think you’re probably right, although consumers also need to shoulder some of the blame as fewer and fewer are willing to pay for content. The Pool theoretically had a dream readership of affluent, professional women, but they could not find a way to monetise them and make the business viable. Influencers have filled a vacuum by providing content which is free at the point of access, and it is only now becoming apparent how extensively their readers have ending up ‘paying’ for it.

I will definitely be clicking on Anneli Bush to see just how many of the perfect and favourite pieces she featured today will actually get worn over the next couple of weeks or so.

Also, Bobbi Brown, sending all the lipsticks? Bloody hell.

And to add, that Amazon trench coat that AB describes as the ‘perfect transitional piece’ isn’t something that’s really her style at all.

And who needs 12 new BB lipsticks, it’s obscene. At least Chloelovestoshop is giving three or four away.

We’ve all become used to “free” content without questioning why it’s free I guess. If something looks too good to be true, it generally is, which as you said we are only finding out now. The Pool seem to have burned through over £4m in 4 years, which is an astonishing amount of money really but competition is fierce and if you are trying to monetise through affiliate links, then with so many links being flung out for the same shops by bloggers it must be easy for your revenues to get cannibalised. Hard also to compete with influencers and other online magazine formats or blogs that aren’t as upfront about their advertising. It’s not a level playing field for publications that are genuinely interested in providing a better balance of ad v content.

AB will literally flog anything.

Pretty much everything on her instashop has hardly been worn (her words). Lots of 'blogger brands' on her shop - next, & Other stores, 7 boot lane.

I really began to distrust AB about a year ago when she did a post where she had a little LK Bennett bag and a few weeks later was flogging it on get instashop.

Bobbi Brown is terrible with the amount of stuff it sends to influencers - all shades of foundation etc plus endlessly doing free make up. As someone who has bought their products for many many years it does irk me somewhat.

AB I unfollowed a while back for precisely the reasons above. I see Alexis Foreman (whose feed I do like) has finally started marking gifts.

If Alexis Foreman is marking gifts, it is only in the last day or so. Her feed is pretty awesome, but absolutely terrible when it comes to transparency. I think she is totally wasted on instagram, her feed looks far too high-end for flogging andotherstories coats and free shoelaces. She's clearly on another creative level compared to other people selling the same stuff. Her engagement rates are crap too, which is odd, but she doesn't really invite engagement I suppose.

It’s literally the last couple of days.

Agree she’s wasted on Instagram. She’s only got 46k followers so tiny compared with many of them. Have always assumed all her feed was gifted (all the Acne, Arkett, Mulberry etc).

That AB post was mad. I was going to message and ask if she actually bought anything ever! She was flogging about five pair of sunglasses recently!! Plus all the free beauty treatments!

AB blogged about Wedgewood (which according to Google was 2016) and the china just wasn't her style at allI which made me decide it was a gift/advert and never looked at her blog or IG after that.

I'm really not surprised to read she sells pretty much everything she features. Maybe someone who is still following her needs to call her out.

I've followed Alexis Foreman since she blogged as Brighton Style Memos. She's never really engaged from the outset and continued to remain true to herself in this respect. I don't think she's wasted on IG at all, if anything, I find her style/content a little contrived at times.

What do you think is considered when a brand is looking to work with someone??

I'm guessing number of followers, engagement rates, translation to sales.

How many people do you think have booked a beauty treatment at one of the places AB uses because they saw it in her feed?

I think a lot of brands look at follower numbers and that’s it.

It will be cheaper for the (large) brands to just chuck products at any old influencer based purely on (potentially bought) followers, than to spend time carrying out due diligence on engagement rates and calculating the success of past gifts in translating to sales. Which could also explain why some of the smaller brands who attempt to do this fail (e.g. Seven Boot Lane).