Sali Hughes #7 Yes I threatened and yes I lie, but can I interest you in beauty pie?

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
Possibly the period book she was referring scathingly to was by that woo-merchant Maisie Hill. In which case I agree that the world doesn't need it!
 
Handmaid said:
But at least the world is waking up to the fact that influencers are just another form of advertising? That’s a good thing imo.

And I think we can place journalists in the ‘influencer’ category. Influencers take many forms.
Click to expand...

Agreed. And I think people only describe themselves as an influencer if they can’t legitimately latch on to anything else.
 
PineappleQueen19 said:
Wow - ELC now spends 75% of its marketing budget on influencers.

And the influencing industry (industry!) set to be worth £8 billion next year.

https://www.12ft.io/https://www.dai...The-influential-mothers-Britain-guess-do.html
Click to expand...
I cant be the only one that wondered why the early learning centre was spending so much on infuencers. Oh the Estee Lauder company 😅

Infuencers are in a bubble, more and more are waking up to the fact they aren't these relatable people and are easily bought by anyone.

The markup on beauty products is huge so they have so much money sploshing around at the moment. But trends change, especially during recessions / depressions. It won't continue on its current trajectory for much longer.
 
I’ve just commented on this article — my god I’ve turned into a Mail Online commenter 😳 — but it’s stuck in moderation hell. Maybe the Mumsnet Mods are moonlighting over at the Mail today...

But basically I lamented the way the more serious points that are being made (flexible working, lack of diversity) are just lost in a sea of vapid, narcissistic, money grabbing, planet destroying push for more, more, more materialist drivel, at the cost of their, and their children’s privacy.

I am ASTOUNDED at the ELC 75% figure. Even given a bit of bias correction for appearing in the Mail, that is a lot of money being thrown at a very shaky, unsustainable foundation, where the “look into my eyes, not around my eyes” veil is inching down further all the time, leaving the great unwashed public ever more aware of how the wool is being pulled over their eyes.

Why are we (the public, not the Tattle cave dwellers) standing for this?
 
One aspect of the beauty industry I find particularly distasteful is the extravagant product launch events. The most recent one I noticed was for the launch of the Chapmans’ little beauty box.

From IG it looked like a drinks reception and formal dinner (for 30?) at a smart London hotel/restaurant private room. Guests appeared to be mainly other influencers plus a couple of make-up artists and journalists.

Why? Would the event have generated enough publicity/good will to be worth the several thousand pounds it would have cost? It didn't generate any good will in me - I find the wastefulness a complete turn-off.

And this particular event looked modest as these things go. On Lisa Eldridge’s IG in the past there have been pictures of extraordinarily extravagant Lancome launch events – the best hotel in the South of France, glittering silver and crystal table settings, breathtaking floral displays, celebrity guests.
 
Yel said:
I cant be the only one that wondered why the early learning centre was spending so much on infuencers. Oh the Estee Lauder company 😅

Infuencers are in a bubble, more and more are waking up to the fact they aren't these relatable people and are easily bought by anyone.

The markup on beauty products is huge so they have so much money sploshing around at the moment. But trends change, especially during recessions / depressions. It won't continue on its current trajectory for much longer.
Click to expand...
I really hope not. The whole influencer culture is so damaging. I still follow a lot of them on IG but mainly to side eye the whole thing from a distance. Rather than being influenced they now have the opposite effect on me. Whenever I see them being paid to shill something or even just when they’re gifted the same thing en masse I immediately know I will never want or buy it.
 
She’s back.
 

Attachments

  • 44E961B8-BEA5-460C-B4D4-7597A3F9DF51.jpeg
    44E961B8-BEA5-460C-B4D4-7597A3F9DF51.jpeg
    61.2 KB · Views: 660
It’s eye-opening the treatments you can have (if you have money and/or connections) and truthfully claim you’ve not had surgery - this is what Lorraine Kelly has done.

Why don’t we hear more about this stuff? Because it’s not going to help sell stacks of beauty pie and Emma Hardie stuff, probably.

Edited to add I have no issue with anyone getting these treatments - it’s the getting them, keeping quiet and then claiming No surgery! No filters! that is the rub.
 

Attachments

  • E2E99D5F-4284-4F33-970C-B5DA109CE5D3.jpeg
    E2E99D5F-4284-4F33-970C-B5DA109CE5D3.jpeg
    70.3 KB · Views: 439
  • 342DA2B3-B460-48BC-BA05-20CA1309322C.png
    342DA2B3-B460-48BC-BA05-20CA1309322C.png
    124.9 KB · Views: 451
  • 89BDF50E-634E-4F8C-8285-9B4191A2FB19.jpeg
    89BDF50E-634E-4F8C-8285-9B4191A2FB19.jpeg
    113.9 KB · Views: 439
Last edited:
GTL Old-Timer said:
She’s back.
Click to expand...

I once worked for a v brittle headteacher like this, who would come into staff briefing every Monday, exaggerating a cough, theatrical nose blowing etc. Eventually, our degrees in pop psychology led us to the diagnosis that because she wasn't well liked or respected, and she knew the governors were onto her ( the tales I could tell), her many and varied exaggerated and fabricated physical symptoms were both a weird mix of attention seeking and a plea to be left alone, for staff to 'go easy' and feel sorry for her.

Didnae work. Governors got rid due to v dodgy working practices.

Quote
Report Edit Delete
 
Last edited:
PineappleQueen19 said:
It’s eye-opening the treatments you can have (if you have money and/or connections) and truthfully claim you’ve not had surgery - this is what Lorraine Kelly has done.

Why don’t we hear more about this stuff? Because it’s not going to help sell stacks of beauty pie and Emma Hardie stuff, probably.

Edited to add I have no issue with anyone getting these treatments - it’s the getting them, keeping quiet and then claiming No surgery! No filters! that is the rub.
Click to expand...
I’m really interested in this stuff. I probably wouldn’t partake yet but in the future I probably would look into it rather than put the same amount of money into serums and creams which we all know have a very limited power
 
Everyoldsock said:
Sorry if this has already been posted but how the hell can editors not have any idea that their publication is going through a shitstorm like what happened to the Pool?
Click to expand...


LL's name is Sharon Gofton - LL was her stage name in Kenickie, and she kept it. Maybe she changed it officially.

PineappleQueen19 said:
Jfc if this is a trolling site then what do you call Facebook and twitter? I know I’ve said it before but the platform snobbery is out of control.

I remember on That Friday one of SH’s misguided supporters said they briefly ventured into this ‘cesspit’. And they said that ON TWITTER. Are you joking mate.
Click to expand...


I mean, bleeping Mumsnet. Even on the support thread for SH, someone said they didn't like her because she was once nice to a trans woman or something. And yet that site is seen by those who haven't been to AIBU or any of the trans related threads as a bunch of naice middle-class mums.
 
Last edited:
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