Bloggers and #ad (Naming bloggers means a ban!)

Dolbert

Hopeful2016 wrote: »

Hun xoxo, I don't consider anyone a "hater" or have never referred to anyone as one, that's normally the retort of the Facebook crowd and the bloggers themselves. TBH, from your posts, I'd put you in one of those two categories, that's how you come across.

Cant wait to see what wonderful debate you bring to this thread, you've started on such a promising foot....

If you have a problem with any of my posts, please feel free to report them hun. I won't tell you how you're coming across, as I don't want to get banned xoxoxo

Hopeful2016

Dolbert wrote: »

If you have a problem with any of my posts, please feel free to report them hun. I won't tell you how you're coming across, as I don't want to get banned xoxoxo

Oh no, I'm really bothered, how will I cope.....

JellieBabie

What has this thread become? Rants about hiring cleaning ladies? I don't even know what blogger is being talked about but tbh it has nothing to do with not declaring income streams to revenue or being transparent with followers.

And tbh how on earth does hiring someone to clean smack of sexism? It's bizarre.

Lux23

dudara wrote: »

It could well be done for a free brunch. In order to continue to receive invites, press releases, samples etc, bloggers have to to keep themselves in the forefront of the PR agencies. I'm not condoning it in any way (in fact, I get very tired of repetitive tweets from the same group of people), but I can believe it.

There are a couple of scenarios I can think of... and only one scenario is covered under current guidelines.

(1) Blogger is paid directly (i.e. cash changes hands) for blog post or social media content
This is the case that this covered by guidelines, and must be clearly labelled #ad or #spon. Any case where money has changed hands and is not labelled is in clear violation.

(2) Blogger does not receive financial payment but has agreed to produce social media or blog content in return for goods/services.
This is not covered by the guidelines. For me, it's a grey area as the blogger has received "payment in kind" for producing content and I believe it should be labelled clearly. I don't accept any offers of this kind ever, as I have always wanted to keep my blog free of commercial influence.

(3) Blogger simply receives products / services with no expectation of content in return
In this scenario, the blogger is free to do as they choose. However, it's also a potential minefield. Do too much of this and you look like you're promoting. This is the only scenario I will engage in, and even then I'm very conscious of how much content I produce. I want the audience to be clear that I received the item/service for free and I don't want to overwhelm them with it.

There's a lot more information here.

Bloggers and marketers should also read the ICPEN guidelines too. Really I think a blogger/traditional should disclose whether they received product or not in their piece. Literally saying "xxxx sent me this..." and you should be covered.

http://ccpc.ie/news/2016-07-04-guidelines-issued-those-involved-online-reviews

retro:electro

Dolbert wrote: »

I'm still thoroughly confused by this. Do you have a problem with people hiring cleaners in general? Or just female cleaners? Or just female cleaners if they're self-employed? You're not making any sense.



I didn't comment on it on Facebook at all, but feel free to consider me one of those haters if it makes you feel any better hun xoxo

Again, this is not about what *I* personally have a problem with, rather it's about the hypocritical stance of someone who is a self proclaimed progressive feminist whose dogma is underpinned by the necessity for society to treat men and woman equally and respectfully and who is all about the advancement of women in society. Correct me if I'm wrong? It is hypocritical, thus, in my eyes, to hire a cleaner (predominantly female role) to clean up your sh1t for you, while you sit and watch her and snapchat her. We all know cleaning jobs are underpaid, insecure, and isolating. It's low skilled work, thus it pays poorly. But it's society's fault right? It's society that has caused this. When is she going to realise that she is society, she is the one contributing to this.
In an ideal world there would be no such thing as feminised labour, but there is. And onthemitch contributes to this, despite what she'd have you think. It smacks of privilege. Maybe having a clean house is more important to her than having a clean conscience.
Anyway, that is all I will say on the matter as this is seriously off topic.

retro:electro

JellieBabie wrote: »

What has this thread become? Rants about hiring cleaning ladies? I don't even know what blogger is being talked about but tbh it has nothing to do with not declaring income streams to revenue or being transparent with followers.

And tbh how on earth does hiring someone to clean smack of sexism? It's bizarre.

When did I say hiring a cleaner is sexist? My whole point so far is that she is a hypocrite.

biko

Drop the cleaner discussion.

As I have said before, this thread is exclusively on the topic of #ad

SB_Part2

anna080 wrote: »

When did I say hiring a cleaner is sexist? My whole point so far is that she is a hypocrite.

Anna, just because she has a cleaner and is a feminist doesn't make her a hypocrite. I really don't think you understand the meaning of the word.

She is employing someone to do a job. Would you prefer that people didn't employ cleaners and they went on the dole? My cleaner, btw, is 20e an hour and is constantly booked out so saying they are low paid isn't accurate anymore.

And *you* brought the sexist argument into it by saying "She hired a female cleaner".

ratmouse

It would seem that, apart from journalist blogger who has at least made some comments regarding the MoS article, the other mentioned bloggers are not going to give a damn about it. Will it even encourage them to be more transparent and use #ad #sponsored going forward? Also think it very strange that if the blogger with the new bed and new carpet did in fact buy and pay for them herself, why not say so. Why decline to comment? Of course she doesn't have to comment but for the sake of ensuring her fans know she can be trusted in terms of transparency,why not just comment and state again that she did pay for said items herself?

Sunny Dayz

ratmouse wrote: »

Also think it very strange that if the blogger with the new bed and new carpet did in fact buy and pay for them herself, why not say so. Why decline to comment? Of course she doesn't have to comment but for the sake of ensuring her fans know she can be trusted in terms of transparency,why not just comment and state again that she did pay for said items herself?

I think she did say that she paid for the bed herself (I'm only going by third hand info, I don't follow her social media). However I do know from following her previously and dipping in and out the odd time is that she generally isn't a homewares blogger. So I don't understand why she felt the need to share her new bed and carpet on social media unless there was something in it for her, ( I don't know, a heavy discount I suspect). Christ when we bought our bed for our house I think I might have mentioned it to my mam, and that was it.

ratmouse

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

I think she did say that she paid for the bed herself (I'm only going by third hand info, I don't follow her social media). However I do know from following her previously and dipping in and out the odd time is that she generally isn't a homewares blogger. So I don't understand why she felt the need to share her new bed and carpet on social media unless there was something in it for her, ( I don't know, a heavy discount I suspect). Christ when we bought our bed for our house I think I might have mentioned it to my mam, and that was it.

I know, it's a bit strange. The carpet mention in particular,even more than the bed, seemed a tad odd.

Cria

ratmouse wrote: »

I know, it's a bit strange. The carpet mention in particular,even more than the bed, seemed a tad odd.

She is actually heavily sponsored by a lot of companies.
I know a couple of people in the business that are supplying for a very personal 'big event ' coming up in turn they will receive promotion.
It's gone to a stage where some bloggers don't even have to pay for their own engagement rings in return for a little promotion.
The ones who have stayed silent about being named in the article are actually speaking volumes.

ratmouse

Cria wrote: »

She is actually heavily sponsored by a lot of companies.
I know a couple of people in the business that are supplying for a very personal 'big event ' coming up in turn they will receive promotion.
It's gone to a stage where some bloggers don't even have to pay for their own engagement rings in return for a little promotion.
The ones who have stayed silent about being named in the article are actually speaking volumes.

I agree. Says loads in some ways.

ilovetorun

heretogetreal wrote: »

Can someone DM me who the teacher blogger is? Thanks

Me too if possible!!

jockeyboard

Did they not pay for engagment ring?? If not the wedding is defo going to be a collection of freebies for advertising. Puke.

ratmouse

jockeyboard wrote: »

Did they not pay for engagment ring?? If not the wedding is defo going to be a collection of freebies for advertising. Puke.

Genuinely no idea. The jewellery store got a good auld mention several times though, I do remember that.

Lunaarli

ratmouse wrote: »

Genuinely no idea. The jewellery store got a good auld mention several times though, I do remember that.

Of course it was comped!!
In return for social media posts!!

SB_Part2

Lunaarli wrote: »

Of course it was comped!!
In return for social media posts!!

How do you know this?

hearmehearye

SB_Part2 wrote: »

How do you know this?

While it hasn't been said that it was comped there's no way one ring should require countless mentions. I'm not big bloggers biggest fan, I generally have her unfollowed after a very stupid geographical rant a few months back, but even I know where the ring is from! Plenty of engaged/wedded bloggers havent mentioned it (nor do I see the reason to).


Hubby to be is a massive part of her "business" so I can't imagine it was too difficult for him to strike a deal.

ratmouse

hearmehearye wrote: »

While it hasn't been said that it was comped there's no way one ring should require countless mentions. I'm not big bloggers biggest fan, I generally have her unfollowed after a very stupid geographical rant a few months back, but even I know where the ring is from! Plenty of engaged/wedded bloggers havent mentioned it (nor do I see the reason to).


Hubby to be is a massive part of her "business" so I can't imagine it was too difficult for him to strike a deal.

Yes, other bloggers who are/have been engaged have not seemed to feel the need to mention the engagement ring supplier so much, if at all even.
Sometimes, you don't even have to read between the lines to have a guess at what's going on with some bloggers . Some things are beyond obvious.

SB_Part2

Or else sometimes you add 2+2 and get 10.

MuffinTop86

I remember hearing where the ring was got also, even though it's the worst looking thing I've ever seen.
But if it was comped, does that require her to #ad?

They clearly do it all the time though. If they are going away to a hotel they have cakes or things in the room with their names on it. He obviously rings hotels and says guess who's coming to town or something along those lines.

I understand people saying it speaks volumes that the bloggers declined to comment. But also the article was so poorly written it was embarrassing. And rather than speaking volumes, I don't think the bloggers care whether you think it's an ad or not.

There was a good while there where the above mentioned blogger would speak in a bored tone about how something was not an ad, "before you all ask." They genuinely believe that anyone interested in what constitutes an ad is jealous and shouldn't even be addressed.

hearmehearye

Has anyone actually figured out why brand ambassadors don't have to #ad? Miss Free Car has the longest rambling story up about how amazing the tea is and why everyone should do the social media challenge (that Curry's discussed this morning and did #ad at the last snap) and not one #ad in sight

ratmouse

SB_Part2 wrote: »

Or else sometimes you add 2+2 and get 10.

Yes, of course people can get things wrong but the M.O. of some bloggers is transparent as glass. Sparkling clean glass at that!

ratmouse

hearmehearye wrote: »

Has anyone actually figured out why brand ambassadors don't have to #ad? Miss Free Car has the longest rambling story up about how amazing the tea is and why everyone should do the social media challenge (that Curry's discussed this morning and did #ad at the last snap) and not one #ad in sight

You can now add meat store ambassador to her CV as of today!

DMarie1210

Meat store ambassador 😂😂
Another one I have always wondered about do all those giving the 10% discount code get a fee or free meat ? Surly if so then it would be #ad ? Can't say I have seem one by any of Snapchat terse who regularly post about these turkey burgers use one.
I actually have some respect for the mu fairy sticking up for the tea tox she clearly isn't the only paid "brand ambassador" but the only one who seems to have bothered defend it today

Cria

ratmouse wrote: »

Genuinely no idea. The jewellery store got a good auld mention several times though, I do remember that.

100% advertisement

SB_Part2

Cria wrote: »

100% advertisement

Do you work for the jewellers?

Cria

SB_Part2 wrote: »

Or else sometimes you add 2+2 and get 10.

It's a small country someone always knows someone who's in the know

SB_Part2

Cria wrote: »

It's a small country someone always knows someone who's in the know

Chinese whispers.