nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Bloggers and #ad #spon

retro:electro

Right so let's pick up where we left off!
Lately I've noticed Chloe Boucher is being let absolutely raid Penneys and take anything she wants. She seems to only be using the hashtag #iworkwithpenneys and not #ad which it should be. Literally once a month she does the biggest hauls and it's all for free, but no mention of it being an ad or sponsored. I think Penneys think they can get around that by asking them to use #iworkwithpenneys as I've seen a few influencers use the same.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Lindy97

GingerLily wrote: »

She gives good reviews so they keep giving her free things, it's not an #ad but it's unethical IMO!
Very shady business practices, definitely agree I'll boycott all companies that abuse the grey areas.

This is the grey area really. ASAI say unless the company gets a say in your review or directs you what to say then its not #ad but, for the ones that work repeatedly with same company, they clearly have an unwritten agreement and the blogger will never give a bad review. Theyre not paid in cash but get tonnes of freebies from same company over and over. If nothings written, how do ASAI prove an agreement

GingerLily

wolfmoon87 wrote: »

She doesn't need to #ad that. She was under no obligation to show it on her Snapchat, she just decided to because she liked the item. They don't have to #ad the freebies they are sent.

She gives good reviews so they keep giving her free things, it's not an #ad but it's unethical IMO!
Very shady business practices, definitely agree I'll boycott all companies that abuse the grey areas.

GoldFour4

wolfmoon87 wrote: »

She doesn't need to #ad that. She was under no obligation to show it on her Snapchat, she just decided to because she liked the item. They don't have to #ad the freebies they are sent.

I find that bizarre tbh, should be the same rule across the board for things like that. It's an exchange of something in return for publicity, regardless of whether there is a contract or not.

wolfmoon87

malistheman wrote: »

Followed that grace one last night to see how bad she is. She's put something up in the last few mins about clothes she's been given for the child. This has clearly been done in return for promoting the clothes on her social media. There is no #ad but merely a few second long video of the instructions given to her by that company's marketing department. She's even waving the thing about to make it almost impossible to read.

I hope that the authorities make an example out of one of these people someday soon. Do they have the power to impose a monetary fine?

She doesn't need to #ad that. She was under no obligation to show it on her Snapchat, she just decided to because she liked the item. They don't have to #ad the freebies they are sent.

GoldFour4

Followed that grace one last night to see how bad she is. She's put something up in the last few mins about clothes she's been given for the child. This has clearly been done in return for promoting the clothes on her social media. There is no #ad but merely a few second long video of the instructions given to her by that company's marketing department. She's even waving the thing about to make it almost impossible to read.

I hope that the authorities make an example out of one of these people someday soon. Do they have the power to impose a monetary fine?

retro:electro

idunno78 wrote: »

That blog post was made (funnily enough) this day last year!!

And seeing as blogging is their profession they should take it upon themselves to be up to date with any changes to existing standards. There is no excusing their ignorance.

idunno78

That blog post was made (funnily enough) this day last year!!

SB_Part2

idunno78 wrote: »

I don't think it's new? I remember it being posted months ago in one of the older thread on other forum!

I meant regarding affiliate links. It's relatively new that they need to be disclosed.

idunno78

SB_Part2 wrote: »

Considering this is a new addition I'd say beautynook was just unaware of it rather than trying to deceive anyone. She's very transparent.

I don't think it's new? I remember it being posted months ago in one of the older thread on other forum!

Lindy97

BPerfect is the latest tan to get a push it seems, €25 for an average sized bottle

SB_Part2

wolfmoon87 wrote: »

I just started following beautynook on snapchat and she's talking about her disclaimer section on her website and she's adding in that she's a member of Reward Style. Then she talks about the wishlist section of her site where some items are affiliate links. I don't think she's aware that you're supposed to declare in the same area as the links, and it's not enough to say it in the about/desclaimer section.

(ASAI link)

Considering this is a new addition I'd say beautynook was just unaware of it rather than trying to deceive anyone. She's very transparent.

wolfmoon87

I just started following beautynook on snapchat and she's talking about her disclaimer section on her website and she's adding in that she's a member of Reward Style. Then she talks about the wishlist section of her site where some items are affiliate links. I don't think she's aware that you're supposed to declare in the same area as the links, and it's not enough to say it in the about/desclaimer section.

14. Would a single disclosure about products on a blogger’s website (say in the “about” page), about disclosure be enough?

No, not at all! Not all followers would read the “About”, or disclaimers. Each time a marketing communication is involved it should be clear from the beginning that it is one.

(ASAI link)

SB_Part2

will56 wrote: »

Are Clear Braces and spray tans the new blogger must have? Wife pointed out at least two two to me last night that were off to get their braces fitted. No mention of Spon or ad but I would assume they're getting some discount ??

Probably getting them for free. There was a huge push for this about a year or so ago IIRC.

will56

Are Clear Braces and spray tans the new blogger must have? Wife pointed out at least two two to me last night that were off to get their braces fitted. No mention of Spon or ad but I would assume they're getting some discount ??

Wexy86

fussyonion wrote: »

Tignam has been posting loads of Moss Cottage stuff too but no mention of #ad or #spon.
Does she usually get sponsored?

As has Sabrina Hill, she even has a discount code. Think I recall Waxperts Ellen mentioning them the same time Pippa first did.

Fair enough Grace was sneaky with the # but at least there was some # unlike the others.

fussyonion

Tignam has been posting loads of Moss Cottage stuff too but no mention of #ad or #spon.
Does she usually get sponsored?

heyjude88

Pippa shows a lot of moss cottage stuff. I always presumed it was free stuff she got sent. Now the more I think about it, I'd say it's defo a paid collaboration . Interesting. There's no way they would pay grace, and not pay Pippa.

Also did anyone notice last week Grace was saying she wanted to try different places and was heading to the Botanical gardens? She said this morning she was doing a collaboration with some necklace brand and shot it in the botanical gardens last week?

Maybe I genuinely missed her saying she was going to do some work last week, but honestly thought she was just haveing a nice day out in the botanical gardens!

Toastytoes

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

I don't know why she feels she has to hide her collabs. I have no problem with influencers doing collabs, it's part of the business and at this point I presume that's what any name check is anyway, I just have a problem with them lying about it.

Same as the that. There are plenty of people I follow who do collabs and I'll happily watch that content once it's disclosed and it doesn't feel like they are rhyming off a script. For example Sharon Farrell post a collab with Pantene on YouTube yesterday but it was still similar to her unsponsored content and wasn't chockablock full of Pantene products. It was a mixture which was much more interesting and watchable.

Toastytoes

Ray37 wrote: »

I could not believe the gall she had to claim she didn't know the SP would be covered, sure she lives on Snap! She snaps every minute of her day.... And to say she is always transparent, oh that gave me such a chuckle. Grace is the WORST offender for trying to hide collabs, or downright ignoring the rules about them. I was genuinely shocked she wasn't on crying today that people were 'bullying' her....

If she genuinely thinks she is being transparent, then I'd question her Intellectual capacity because it's plain as day that she isn't.

The mind boggles at how she can appear on radio shows etc. talking about how she's always transparent when she's regularly pulling these kind of strokes. currysgate still gives me mild amusement!

XxMCRxBabyxX

I don't know why she feels she has to hide her collabs. I have no problem with influencers doing collabs, it's part of the business and at this point I presume that's what any name check is anyway, I just have a problem with them lying about it.

Ray37

I could not believe the gall she had to claim she didn't know the SP would be covered, sure she lives on Snap! She snaps every minute of her day.... And to say she is always transparent, oh that gave me such a chuckle. Grace is the WORST offender for trying to hide collabs, or downright ignoring the rules about them. I was genuinely shocked she wasn't on crying today that people were 'bullying' her....

Toastytoes

"I didn't know it said Faces By Grace up in the corner" ?!

Eh have you never watched someone else's story??! I can't see my name when I'm recording a snap but I know it'll be there. Just like other people's is there when I watch their's.

And "I'm always transparent".

I actually can't decide which one of those statements is more ridiculous.

I wish there was a crying laughing emoji on Boards.

Also I won't put it there anymore, I'll put it where you can see it. Eh sound, thanks for that Grace :rolleyes:

Lindy97

Not shocked, Im guessing any of the suppliers she's gone public with so far, have given their services for free in exchange for publicity

MuffinTop86

Raging I forgot to read the boards after the post on the galz page. Somebody said today in a post about SoSueMe that she asked the K Club for a free wedding venue and would only pay for the rooms but they refused. Love this kind of stuff!

Lindy97

lip fillers, boob jobs, botox...

If you have a public profile and are selling a certain look/image, people will notice when these things change from time to time. Be proud of it, don't lie and/or block people for asking. It looks dishonest, especially if you're going to promote or sell products that you're claiming give you the enhancements

I call it, doing a Kylie Jenner:D

retro:electro

SB_Part2 wrote: »

I don't think they have to state it was gifted but given the fact so many people are up in arms about this kind of thing they should say that.

I guess it's the same as others being up in arms about another bloggers' very obvious lip fillers.
When it looks like they're being shady, some people just have to know the truth.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

guideanna wrote: »

My understanding in that case would be that they don't need to #sp or #ad but anytime they mention the car they should be saying something like "that was gifted to me by Renault" at the START of the post/snap etc.

Please correct me if i'm wrong there.

She's clearly advertising them then, no? You're in possession of an item worth in excess of 20k and speaking about it on a public platform, surely that's the definition of what an ad is

SB_Part2

guideanna wrote: »

My understanding in that case would be that they don't need to #sp or #ad but anytime they mention the car they should be saying something like "that was gifted to me by Renault" at the START of the post/snap etc.

Please correct me if i'm wrong there.

I don't think they have to state it was gifted but given the fact so many people are up in arms about this kind of thing they should say that.

groovyg

She's brand ambassador for Michael Grant Renault dealers -
Not sure what that means - she drives it for a week/ month and gives it a review in response for use of a free car?

guideanna

My understanding in that case would be that they don't need to #sp or #ad but anytime they mention the car they should be saying something like "that was gifted to me by Renault" at the START of the post/snap etc.

Please correct me if i'm wrong there.