Sali Hughes #12 This is not a thread. It is not paid for, not sponsored, nor required by Sali

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1
PineappleQueen19 said:
The ASA have ‘clarified’ their ad declaration requirements. It’s like it’s been done specifically to convey how slippery influencers like SH have been behaving. She will be raging 😂

Can’t wait to read her updated disclaimer... it will be Sali word salad at its finest.
Click to expand...

This makes me so happy. So sick of seeing press trip, pr sample and all that bullshit.

It's actually hilarious the lengths they will go to as they're too afraid and embarrassed to use ad.

Im gonna start reporting every post I see, by any influencer, that isnt disclosing properly. Petty maybe, but im so sick of them. *piss boils*
 
Really great news but are they saying that #presssamples should be labelled an #ad? I hope so as it absolutely is - these posts are a digital billboard that is being broadcast to over 150,000 people and the result of which will mean a % of those people will Influenced to buy it.
 

Remit: Social media

www.asa.org.uk www.asa.org.uk

When it comes to ‘advertorial’ content, if a brand gives an influencer a payment, free item, or other ‘perk’, any resulting posts referencing the brand or their products become subject to consumer protection law, enforced by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and others, such as Trading Standards.

This covers #presssample and #gifted, doesn't it?

Happy days!
 
MakkaPakka said:

Remit: Social media

www.asa.org.uk www.asa.org.uk

When it comes to ‘advertorial’ content, if a brand gives an influencer a payment, free item, or other ‘perk’, any resulting posts referencing the brand or their products become subject to consumer protection law, enforced by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and others, such as Trading Standards.

This covers #presssample and #gifted, doesn't it?

Happy days!
Click to expand...
Yes! So we should never see those again as they are bleeping meaningless. It basically boils down to either you bought something from a brand or you didn't in which case it is an #AD. No other # are allowed.
SH keeps saying she wasn't paid for things so it isn't an #ad. CLEARLY that is not the rules.

Others have said here too the Bobbi Brown ongoing campaign seems murky. She is actively involved in it - mentions BB all the time - yet says she was not paid to. Yes maybe not for that exact specific mention, but surely there is an understanding that as part of the 'Can't live without' campaign she will mention products regularly. This is the soft sell which is still an #AD. And actually she was given the products and mentions them so it is an #AD anyway according to the incredibly clear and simple rules.
 
I think SH has been relatively quiet and very pinched since That Friday. Understandable perhaps as it was evidently deeply traumatising and upsetting for her. They need to knock off stalking “dissenters” though right? Or is it simply the association/ root being here, Tattle? It is very, very *put your tin hat on* outside this thread and a few others. So irrespective of the reasonable push for transparency around Botox and advertising etc, to be here is to mark you as an antisocial, hate monger with a tentative grip on the woke world of 2020?

i really, really like Hannah Martin - she is brilliant at her trade, kind, positive and fun but she seems to be terrible, or at least inconsistent, at the transparency side of Instagram.
 
rosemarina said:
Agreed, @Jelly Bean .

I bet Sali’s going to maintain that “as a member of the press” these rules don’t apply to her.
Click to expand...


I was thinking this... The old school way PR works is that a brand would send samples, press releases, have press days, meetings etc with the ‘press’ and they would write about it in their columns etc. The way the game has changed has not been ‘kind’ to these journalists who were once paid a salary or for word count ... in a way they have had to move with the times in terms of the content output to stay relevant because print media has slowed down so much. I do think this is a big adjustment to make, however just as the industry has changed the rules have also changed which is what they (influencers with a journalism background) are not playing fair with. They are constantly masquerading...
 
SequinnedElephant said:
Did she not refer to herself as an influencer recently? I may have got that wrong.
Click to expand...

oh did she? Honestly thought the word stuck in her throat.

rosemarina said:
Agreed, @Jelly Bean .

I bet Sali’s going to maintain that “as a member of the press” these rules don’t apply to her.
Click to expand...

she best hang on to that Graun column then, it’s beyond dull and I don’t see her writing much else

funny, when The Pool was around and she was writing all those vanity pieces (that were generally piss poor) I honestly think she thought that was her gateway to being an actual writer. She dropped the ‘Beauty’ description from some of her profiles. Since it closed and nobody was hammering on her door for writing action, she dug out the ’Beauty’ label again. Bit of a one trick pony after all. If she hadn’t diverted herself to The Pool for so long she might not have become so irrelevant in beauty.
 
Last edited:
Jade Mitzi said:
oh did she? Honestly thought the word stuck in her throat.



she best hang on to that Graun column then, it’s beyond dull and I don’t see her writing much else

funny, when The Pool was around and she was writing all those vanity pieces (that were generally piss poor) I honestly think she thought that was her gateway to being an actual writer. She dropped the ‘Beauty’ description from some of her profiles. Since it closed and nobody was hammering on her door for writing action, she dug out the ’Beauty’ label again. Bit of a one trick pony after all. If she hadn’t diverted herself to The Pool for so long she might not have become so irrelevant in beauty.
Click to expand...
That is true - does she regularly write for anything else? I know she wrote a couple of things for The Telegraph (which didn't seem to come to anything more). Does she write for Red any more? I think she missed a huge trick not writing about behind the scenes beauty rather than just product recommendations. Or beauty round the world or just any other aspect than just BUY MORE STUFF. Even her slight look at beauty for the older person last week seemed to amount to 'well there is no difference'.
 
notbuyingit said:
Also l think the idea that if you aren’t a #fangirl you’re a #troll is purile BS that is detracting from the actual issue that we value transparency and want to know when we are being advertised to/ influenced/ persuaded to buy.
Click to expand...
But everything is black and white in Sali land. She's not good with nuance

Magazine beauty editors were flooded with freebies and trips and fancy meals and treatments. And decisions about editorial product mentions were based on appeasing the regular, front-of-book advertisers. "Make sure you include Chanel," "Have we covered L'Oreal this month?" and so on. If you came up through that, the transition to influencer would not only be an affront to the ego, but have you bristling at the need to openly declare all this stuff that were once just givens. Not defending her, just giving some context
 
Last edited:
melfish said:
But everything is black and white in Sali land. She's not good with nuance

Magazine beauty editors were flooded with freebies and trips and fancy meals and treatments. And decisions about editorial product mentions were based on appeasing the regular, front-of-book advertisers. "Make sure you include Chanel," "Have we covered L'Oreal this month?" and so on. If you came up through that, the transition to influencer would not only be an affront to the ego, but have you bristling at the need to openly declare all this stuff that were once just givens. Not defending her, just giving some context
Click to expand...
Yes good point. Back then it wasn't really seen as compromising your integrity I suppose - but now it really is. Must be a bitter pill to swallow.
It is like MPs expenses - seen as a justifiable perk and part of the job until someone says but hang on a minute - is it really ethical? My ex in his line of work could claim all sorts of daft stuff back - meals, trips etc - and it just isn't done so much now as far as I know. People and work practices are subject to more scrutiny.
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top