Speaker 1: Hello and welcome to Outspoken, your dose of the hottest
Speaker 1: influencer and pop culture news twice a week. I'm Amy
Speaker 1: Torbert and I'm joined by my sisters and journalist Kate
Speaker 1: and Sophie. On today's show, Addis Paul confirms he and
Speaker 1: his famous family are moving out of the rental he
Speaker 1: shared with his now ex Mikayla Tester, The advertising watchdog stings,
Speaker 1: two controversial mummy bloggers, and the anonymous question app that
Speaker 1: has everyone talking. But first, Jonathan Sour has proven he
Speaker 1: definitely has a type. The former boyfriend of Madison Woolly
Speaker 1: and Shanie Grummond is now dating Instagram model Sky Moody.
Speaker 1: Over the weekend, Instagram account Influence Updates Au Spilt the Tea,
Speaker 1: sharing screenshots of Jonathan and Sky in the same locations. Now, Kate,
Speaker 1: this is a very juicy one. Can you tell us more?
Speaker 2: Well, it's what the influencers like to call a soft launch.
Speaker 2: So both Jonathan and Sky shared inst stories about their
Speaker 2: date on the Gold Cost which they see to have
Speaker 2: quite the day of it. So first they went to
Speaker 2: the gym, of course, and they followed it up by
Speaker 2: going to the Corumban Wildlife Sanctuary where they saw animals
Speaker 2: and they did a tree top challenge. So Jonathan even
Speaker 2: posted a photo of Sky from the back doing the
Speaker 2: tree climb. He of course didn't tag her because that's
Speaker 2: not how soft launchers work. Now the date wrapped up
Speaker 2: in influencer style with a helicopter ride across the coast.
Speaker 1: Now things seem to be quite serious, considering Jonathan flew
Speaker 1: from Sydney to spend the weekend with Sky, who lives
Speaker 1: on the Gold Coast. And it does seem quite ironic
Speaker 1: because Jonathan was originally Brisbane based, but he actually moved
Speaker 1: to Sydney to be with his ex girlfriend Madison Woolly.
Speaker 1: So perhaps we may see another change in location. Oh, definitely,
Speaker 1: Jonathan is just happy to move wherever there is an
Speaker 1: influencer potential influencer girlfriend, I think yeah, And he was
Speaker 1: formerly based in Brisbane, so I think a move is
Speaker 1: definitely on the cards.
Speaker 2: Now, Amy, what do we know so far about Sky, Well,
Speaker 2: it is the.
Speaker 1: First time she's come on to my radar. She has
Speaker 1: one hundred and two thousand followers on Instagram and around
Speaker 1: eight thousand on TikTok, so according to her talent management bio,
Speaker 1: she's twenty four and has lived on the Gold Coast
Speaker 1: her whole life. She says she has a passion for travel, fashion,
Speaker 1: and fitness. It almost sounds like a bratstole, I've got it,
Speaker 1: and she's currently studying a CIRT three and four in fitness.
Speaker 1: They's a quite a good match. Yeah, I think so
Speaker 1: as well. So Sky said she'd like to use her
Speaker 1: platform to educate and motivate her followers on how to
Speaker 1: have a balanced, healthy, happy lifestyle while finding the best
Speaker 1: versions of themselves. She's also modeled for brands including ride
Speaker 1: Aware and Freddie Jean. So maybe these two have met
Speaker 1: each other on a shoot. That's a possibility.
Speaker 2: Well, I do wonder if this is the girl that
Speaker 2: Madison Wooly spotted Jonathan on a date with the night
Speaker 2: before she flew to Europe. The timelines match up because
Speaker 2: Jonathan and Sky started liking each other's posts around April,
Speaker 2: and while Sky does live on the Gold Coast, she
Speaker 2: could have been over on a trip visiting him because
Speaker 2: it would make sense because Madison Wooley got the vibe
Speaker 2: that it wasn't a first date. It looked like a
Speaker 2: bit of a low key kind of takeaway vibe. Or
Speaker 2: if she that could really fit in or if she's.
Speaker 1: A model, she also probably does travel for work, so
Speaker 1: it does all make sense now. As for Madison, she
Speaker 1: is now back from her euro summer, and prior to leaving,
Speaker 1: she did tease on her podcast that she would be
Speaker 1: having a hot girls summer and hooking up with lots
Speaker 1: of guys in Europe. Now, Kate, how did things go
Speaker 1: for her? Well, it appears the trip wasn't ultra successful
Speaker 1: from a holiday romance perspective. Madison said she wasn't blown
Speaker 1: away by the men in Europe and the talent was lacking.
Speaker 1: She then shared this video of her drunk in a
Speaker 1: day club in santro Pei, complaining that there were no
Speaker 1: hot guys.
Speaker 3: Now, I think this would be a good time actually
Speaker 3: to maybe perhaps play them a lovely audio. Oh my god. Okay, wait,
Speaker 3: I'll get this up. We actually need to post this
Speaker 3: somewhere because this video is too funny to not be
Speaker 3: shared with the world. Okay, so this is a clip
Speaker 3: that I'm going to play guys from when I was
Speaker 3: really really drunk in Saint Tape at a day club
Speaker 3: and there was just no hot guys and I started
Speaker 3: crying uncontrollably because there was no hot guys. It was
Speaker 3: like a hot guy that video, like is basically accurate
Speaker 3: representation of my experience.
Speaker 2: You're gonna cry again.
Speaker 3: I was just so drunk at this day club and
Speaker 3: there was just no hot guy.
Speaker 2: So I started, now, what did everyone think of the video?
Speaker 1: I actually could relate to this when I was in
Speaker 1: my early twenties. It was nothing worse than when you
Speaker 1: bothered to do yourself up go out in the freezing
Speaker 1: cold to a nightclub and there were no hot guys
Speaker 1: in the nightclub.
Speaker 2: I actually think it was brave of her to share,
Speaker 2: because normally she shares such a curated feed. It was
Speaker 2: on TikTok though.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Well, she said on her podcast that she was hoping
Speaker 2: to get one hundred thousand likes because she said it
Speaker 2: was so humiliating that at least if it went off
Speaker 2: it would be worth it. But it's only sitting around
Speaker 2: just under the six thousand. Like Mark, I think she needs.
Speaker 1: To move into this sort of direction, because I do
Speaker 1: find her a lot more relatable and likable on her
Speaker 1: podcast because I think she's just being herself.
Speaker 2: I think when she puts on the.
Speaker 1: Persona of being this rich, perfect it girl on her YouTube,
Speaker 1: I don't think it's as likable, but you.
Speaker 2: Can't say she doesn't do that on her podcast.
Speaker 1: But she seems to own it more. She seems to
Speaker 1: own I feel like I kind of agree with what
Speaker 1: Sophie is saying in terms of you see more into
Speaker 1: her real life, you see her talking with her friends.
Speaker 1: I actually think that it's a really good move for
Speaker 1: her to have this podcast because you see a totally
Speaker 1: different side to her than you do on her YouTube.
Speaker 2: She's just unashamable.
Speaker 1: I hate the word sassy, but she's kind of sassy
Speaker 1: on there, and you kind of like, for along at
Speaker 1: some of her stories. She's literally Jamaici. She was last
Speaker 1: time she was talking a podcasts, and I know they
Speaker 1: said months ago on their podcast that they almost felt
Speaker 1: like the Jamaican podcast had targeted them. But she is hers,
Speaker 1: she is, and I do love jamaking.
Speaker 2: That's the thing I actually have been enjoying listening to
Speaker 2: her escapades. But I think it can come across as
Speaker 2: you're listening to the popular girls at high school talk,
Speaker 2: and I think that's why it can actually be quite entertaining. Now,
Speaker 2: while Madison was playing down the lack of male talent.
Speaker 2: On her trip, she did say that she met up
Speaker 2: with a group of well known English soccer players and
Speaker 2: I would absolutely love to know who they were. I
Speaker 2: did do a bit of a stalk of who she's
Speaker 2: following and could not find any soccer players in there.
Speaker 2: That she did mention that he was following her though,
Speaker 2: and I didn't have time to look through eight hundred
Speaker 2: and twenty thousand followers.
Speaker 1: I got the vibe that maybe these soccer players were married.
Speaker 1: I'm not one hundred percent sure, but it almost sounded
Speaker 1: like there was something a bit dodgy going on. Well,
Speaker 1: I did enjoy the fact that Madison said she got
Speaker 1: the ick from one of the soccer players because he
Speaker 1: got the hiccups midway through talking to her. That's a newyck.
Speaker 1: I haven't heard of that one before. I can kind
Speaker 1: of see where she's coming from, though.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because obviously they were drunk, I didn't even speak apparently.
Speaker 2: Also on her European holiday, she was she met up
Speaker 2: with a group and they racked up one hundred thousand
Speaker 2: euro bill on a table.
Speaker 1: So that's almost two hundred Australian dollars on food at
Speaker 1: a day club.
Speaker 2: And drinks.
Speaker 1: Now, how do we reckon that Madison is feeling now
Speaker 1: that Jonathan has soft launched his relationship and she has
Speaker 1: come back from this pretty disappointing European trip.
Speaker 2: Well, she has been playing it up on her podcast
Speaker 2: that she's putting together a roster and she's having this
Speaker 2: hot girl summer, and she's dating a lot, and she
Speaker 2: has been talking a lot about casual dating and hooking
Speaker 2: up with guys, which is really interesting to listen to.
Speaker 2: I did pick up that on the podcast on her
Speaker 2: most recent episode that she said that she wasn't in
Speaker 2: the right head space to pursue guys while she was
Speaker 2: on holiday.
Speaker 1: She is going to go out with mister Bodels or
Speaker 1: whatever his name is though, or mister Worldwide.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Well see, that's the thing. I don't know if
Speaker 2: it's just an excuse because she couldn't find anyone good
Speaker 2: enough to hook up with on the trip, or if
Speaker 2: she saw Jonathan on his date the day before she
Speaker 2: went to Europe and that put her off, because I
Speaker 2: think that's it seems like she was the one that
Speaker 2: dumped him. But it's always different if you've dumped someone
Speaker 2: and then see them with someone else. You kind of
Speaker 2: always want what you don't have.
Speaker 1: It is quite refreshing, though, to hear that there weren't
Speaker 1: heaps of hot guys on the trip, because I feel
Speaker 1: like I have been on countless overseas trips where you
Speaker 1: sit on your son bed, you take a look around
Speaker 1: and you're like, oh, fuck sake, there's no one good here.
Speaker 1: It's always like you get stuck in that result and
Speaker 1: there's just older people or kids, and you're like, what.
Speaker 2: Well, I am interested to see if this means we're
Speaker 2: finally going to get some more tidbits about Madison and
Speaker 2: Jonathan's breakout, because I feel like once someone moves on
Speaker 2: and that there's no chance of them getting back together,
Speaker 2: that's when some of the truth starts coming out of open.
Speaker 1: Slather, isn't it.
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 1: Well?
Speaker 2: I also noticed on Madison cryptically shared a bunch of
Speaker 2: flowers on her Instagram story with the caption you know
Speaker 2: those like love hear hands and a bit of a
Speaker 2: giggling like secret emoji. So I wonder if this is
Speaker 2: in response to Jonathan soft launching his relationship with Sky Moody.
Speaker 1: They're from her parents. I feel like every time she
Speaker 1: gets really nice flowers they seem to be from her parents.
Speaker 2: I did laugh watching.
Speaker 1: Some of her videos, her European trip videos, because the
Speaker 1: first leg of the trip, the parents seem to be
Speaker 1: staying around like a bad smell, and you can see
Speaker 1: the oh no. But I actually think, you know, it
Speaker 1: is actually so fun to go on holiday with your parents.
Speaker 1: I actually feel like those girls would have had the
Speaker 1: best time when the parents are paying for everything. It's
Speaker 1: only fun when you're in your thirties and you've got someone.
Speaker 1: I suppose you just enjoy their company. You're not aggravated
Speaker 1: by their company.
Speaker 2: We have had two hours of sleep and we have
Speaker 2: seven hours of a stopover in Dubai, and we're not
Speaker 2: going to stay in the airport.
Speaker 1: We're gonna walk around.
Speaker 2: So I'm gonna show you. Adams Paul has confirmed he
Speaker 2: and his family are moving out of the rental he
Speaker 2: shared with former girlfriend Mikayla Tester. Adis has been traveling
Speaker 2: around Europe with his family since announcing the split from
Speaker 2: his long term girlfriend in early June. The Paul family
Speaker 2: returned home on Sunday, but it seems like there's no
Speaker 2: need to unpack because Adis revealed their moving very soon.
Speaker 1: I feel like Adis and MICHAELA must coordinate their Q
Speaker 1: and a's that they do because they always seem to
Speaker 1: drop juicy details at the same time of each other.
Speaker 1: So Michayla originally answered a question where a follower asked
Speaker 1: what her living situation was, She replied, now, I live
Speaker 1: alone in that big ass house. It's just me and mckel.
Speaker 1: I'm definitely going to get Michel a brother so he's
Speaker 1: not lonely now for those wondering, michel is a cat now.
Speaker 1: Adams followed up by responding to a follower who asked
Speaker 1: if they'll be living in the same house. He said,
Speaker 1: we actually got a new house. We're moving in very soon.
Speaker 2: I feel sorry for Paul mcel He's going to really
Speaker 2: miss Nutsack when Adams take that. Of course, is his
Speaker 2: cat clarified? Ky, because I feel like a lot of
Speaker 2: people would not.
Speaker 1: Know that his feel my mom might have spat out
Speaker 1: her tea at this point.
Speaker 2: What Is the Other? Podcast has always good at providing
Speaker 2: clarification of what's going on in the influencer world.
Speaker 1: Why is the other cat? Gold?
Speaker 2: That's another crude name.
Speaker 1: Isn't it something to do with like Ahmi wanted to
Speaker 1: give you I do wonder if Mikayla is sort of
Speaker 1: cheering a little bit, Like I know, it seems like
Speaker 1: she's very down about the breakup, but it seems like
Speaker 1: she's going up in the world considering she's now having
Speaker 1: her in.
Speaker 2: Laws move out. Because as much as I love my
Speaker 2: in laws, I don't think anyone wants to actually live
Speaker 2: twenty four to seven with their in laws.
Speaker 1: I think you'd have to have really really amazing in
Speaker 1: laws to make it work in terms of, you know,
Speaker 1: a mum and dad who are willing to stay out
Speaker 1: of your business, know their boundaries, or like a really
Speaker 1: big house.
Speaker 2: Staying out of you know, how do you feel your
Speaker 2: only fans content when you've got your in laws around you?
Speaker 1: Well? Also, it's pretty strange because their parents are divorced,
Speaker 1: so you've also got that awkward factor in there well,
Speaker 1: and they lived together. Yeah. In conclusion, what did you
Speaker 1: think about having people insult you anonymously on the internet?
Speaker 2: Genuinely funner than I thought.
Speaker 3: Agree.
Speaker 2: A new Instagram story trend allowing users to ask anonymous
Speaker 2: questions has been dominating our feeds. And if the premise
Speaker 2: sounds familiar, that's because it is. Amy. Can you tell
Speaker 2: us more yakay.
Speaker 1: So the app is called NGL, which stands for not
Speaker 1: Gonna Lie, and it's been all over my Instagram feed
Speaker 1: this week. So some of Australia's most well known influencers
Speaker 1: have been embracing NGL, which is used in conjunction with
Speaker 1: Instagram and it allows users to ask anonymous questions. So
Speaker 1: millennials will remember a number of similar concepts in the
Speaker 1: early two thousands, including ASKfm, live Journal, and Tumblr, which
Speaker 1: all featured the ability for users to ask one another
Speaker 1: anonymous questions, and these sites were a breeding ground for bullying,
Speaker 1: which is why so many people are concerned about the
Speaker 1: emergence of NNGL. Even when I worked at Today Tonight,
Speaker 1: I remember doing a story on the dangers of OURSKFM,
Speaker 1: as did so many other media publications, and it was
Speaker 1: such a hot topic at the time, and all of
Speaker 1: this backlash actually led to a number of the sites
Speaker 1: being shut down. The scary thing about these apps are
Speaker 1: just how addictive they are, because as soon as I
Speaker 1: saw everyone else putting out their anonymous questions, I really
Speaker 1: wanted to do it. So we have actually put one
Speaker 1: up on our Instagram page and I know you guys
Speaker 1: actually haven't seen the app for itself, but you keep
Speaker 1: having these little message boxes pop up, these little envelopes,
Speaker 1: and you're like, ooh, what's this and you click on
Speaker 1: it and it goes from orange to.
Speaker 2: Gray and I don't know.
Speaker 1: Something exciting about these new messages popping up? Who is it?
Speaker 1: What could it be? And even though you're almost waiting
Speaker 1: for someone to say something offensive to you, it's almost
Speaker 1: a sigh of relief when a positive message comes through. Well,
Speaker 1: that's actually what the allure of these apps are is that,
Speaker 1: even though you know it could be a bad question
Speaker 1: coming your way, this is hit of dopamine that you
Speaker 1: get if the comments or questions are actually nice. Because
Speaker 1: it seems like we all have this innate desire to
Speaker 1: be liked by strangers. I think it's also the curiosity
Speaker 1: of what do people want to know about me but
Speaker 1: they're too scared to ask. And I think it's also
Speaker 1: that often our family and friends will say nice stuff
Speaker 1: to us.
Speaker 2: If we're like, oh, do we look nice?
Speaker 1: You know, they'll of course say yes because they know us,
Speaker 1: whereas a stranger is always going to be honest or
Speaker 1: perceived as being more honest. I think what's worrying a
Speaker 1: lot of people is the mounting concerns over the impact
Speaker 1: social media has on the mental health of young people.
Speaker 1: So last year, it was suggested in leaked documents published
Speaker 1: by The Wall Street Journal that Instagram was harmful for
Speaker 1: a significant percentage of its young users. And it does
Speaker 1: come after Snapchat suspended rival apps Yolo and YMK, which
Speaker 1: also allowed users to send anonymous questions, and these apps
Speaker 1: were integrated with Snapchat's messaging service. So Snapchat pulled the
Speaker 1: pin on the apps last year after a lawsuit was
Speaker 1: filed by a US mother whose teen sadly took their
Speaker 1: own life after allegedly receiving bulling messages for months on
Speaker 1: the app. So the case alleges that Yolo and YMK
Speaker 1: violated consumer protection law by failing to live up to
Speaker 1: their own terms of service and policies. So the lawsuit
Speaker 1: stated anonymous messaging apps facilitate bulling to such a degree
Speaker 1: that they should be considered a dangerous product, and this
Speaker 1: case is still being heard in court now. Interestingly, late
Speaker 1: last month, Instagram briefly blocked links to the NGL app. However,
Speaker 1: they're now back up and running, so it will be
Speaker 1: really interesting to see whether Instagram chooses to block the links.
Speaker 1: After the findings from the court case, there definitely should
Speaker 1: be age parameters put on the app in my opinion. Well,
Speaker 1: it is clear that NGL has seen what's going on
Speaker 1: in court because they've been quick to market their safety features.
Speaker 1: So according to NGL's website, they're tackling the issue of
Speaker 1: blood by using world class automated intelligence content moderation technology
Speaker 1: to keep users safe. So it's using character pattern matching
Speaker 1: algorithms to filter out bad language and bullying, and it
Speaker 1: can apparently even pick up the meanings of different emojis.
Speaker 1: I don't know how well that's working considering some of
Speaker 1: the messages we've been sent through. I mean, they haven't
Speaker 1: been terrible. No one said go kill yourself or you're
Speaker 1: ugly or anything like that, but they have not yet
Speaker 1: well not yet, I haven't.
Speaker 2: Checked it for a while.
Speaker 1: But in saying that, there are still comments that could
Speaker 1: be badly offensively just taking out swear withs like, you
Speaker 1: can say really offensive things without swearing, Well, you do
Speaker 1: have to put in your Instagram handle, So I'm assuming
Speaker 1: that there would be a particular age they could somehow
Speaker 1: judge by your profile how old you want? Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: but most people they put a fake age in order
Speaker 1: to get on Instagram. How's this though, because on their
Speaker 1: website it actually says we have designed NNGL to be
Speaker 1: a safe place for young people because they don't have
Speaker 1: the space to share their feelings without judgments from friends
Speaker 1: or societal pressures. And NGL has provided this safe place.
Speaker 1: How laughable is this? Oh? A safe place to ask
Speaker 1: awful questions for each I feel like just owner. It
Speaker 1: clearly is not providing a safe space. It's providing a
Speaker 1: space for gossip to run. Wow.
Speaker 2: Of course. Now, Forbes actually did a bit of an
Speaker 2: investigation into the app and they found that the messages
Speaker 2: containing profanity in English were blocked. However, explicit slang terms
Speaker 2: along with French, Spanish and German profanities were not blocked.
Speaker 2: It also found that the knife and dagger icons were
Speaker 2: not blocked. And it's pretty scary to think about it,
Speaker 2: because I feel like the Internet is already quite a
Speaker 2: dangerous place. People troll others, even in their own name.
Speaker 2: So what is this veil of anonymity going to be doing? Like,
Speaker 2: what are people going to be saying? Now?
Speaker 1: Well, there has been a lot of discussion about whether
Speaker 1: the app is actually as anonymous as it suggests, and
Speaker 1: this is because NGL has managed to monetize the app,
Speaker 1: unlike its competitors who failed to do so. So for
Speaker 1: a fee of nine dollars ninety nine per week, you
Speaker 1: can become a pro member of NGL. This sounds like
Speaker 1: an AD, it is not.
Speaker 2: An AD, which means you're able.
Speaker 1: To receive hints about who has anonymously messaged you, and
Speaker 1: these hints are limited to broad locations, so a hint
Speaker 1: may be oh, the person lives in Adelaide or the
Speaker 1: type of device they used to send the message. However,
Speaker 1: it is believed that these type of hints will increase
Speaker 1: over time. It is pretty disgusting though, that they are
Speaker 1: trying to make money from consumers, because hearing that, it
Speaker 1: makes it evident that they are actually aiming for that
Speaker 1: teen demographic that really does care what people think. Because
Speaker 1: if you're a huge influencer that's getting these questions sent in,
Speaker 1: you're hardly going to be paying and being like, oh,
Speaker 1: I know who that is.
Speaker 2: That's you know it's going to be You're going to
Speaker 2: use her to do it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, But it's more if you're a teenager and you're
Speaker 1: trying to track down whether your friends has been sending
Speaker 1: you in comments. That's literally the only you. The thing is,
Speaker 1: if you're an influencer and you're receiving thousands of comments,
Speaker 1: it's hardly going to whittle it down saying oh, this
Speaker 1: person's in Adelaide. However, if you're a teenager and you've
Speaker 1: only received five messages and you've only got twenty friends,
Speaker 1: you're gonna know, Oh, that's so and so as my
Speaker 1: asshole friend with the Samsung Galaxy that's trolling me. Okay,
Speaker 1: so part of my collab was staying at Paradise Resort
Speaker 1: is that I would talk to you about some of
Speaker 1: their activities and features.
Speaker 2: Influencers have been put on notice as the Advertising Watchdog
Speaker 2: finally stings two high profile mummy bloggers for breaching standards.
Speaker 2: So what has gone down?
Speaker 1: Well, controversial mummy blogger Sophie Kesia has landed herself in
Speaker 1: hot water with not only ad standards, but also the
Speaker 1: brand she was working with, after she failed to make
Speaker 1: it clear her Instagram post was a paid advert. Now,
Speaker 1: the adding question was for tech accessory brand Signet, and
Speaker 1: Sophie was promoting one of their phone charging cables, which
Speaker 1: she described as life changing. The Instagram post featured Sophie
Speaker 1: holding up a charging cable with the caption found my
Speaker 1: baby and tagged Signet. She continued, nobody charges my phone
Speaker 1: like this cord here. Whenever I lose it, it's devastating.
Speaker 1: In brackets aka Bobby steals it for his iPad. I
Speaker 1: will never go back to any other cord, not spawn,
Speaker 1: just simply life changing when you need your phone constantly
Speaker 1: and charged so fast. This was also accompanied by a
Speaker 1: link to Signet's website.
Speaker 2: I don't know aber anyone else, but when I use
Speaker 2: something like a phone charger, I just feel like telling
Speaker 2: the world about it. Not sponsored.
Speaker 1: The only time I've ever felt compelled to put something
Speaker 1: up on Instagram about a product is when I got
Speaker 1: a Dyson, and I feel like that's something everyone who
Speaker 1: turns thirty they always are raving about their vacuum cleaner
Speaker 1: and also, most recently, my wheat bag. You're saying that, yeah,
Speaker 1: but you're not going to take a photo of yourself
Speaker 1: with your fucking wheat bag on your lap and say,
Speaker 1: oh hey, guys, probably just snapchat or say it on
Speaker 1: the podcast or something like. This was a very orchestrated
Speaker 1: post sitting on a table with the charger, like it
Speaker 1: was very obvious what was going on?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm sorry. I mean, you're not gonna put a
Speaker 2: feed post about your wheat bag? Well, I hope not.
Speaker 1: Now, for those who aren't in the pr and marketing space,
Speaker 1: when influencers accept a paid brand deal, they must make
Speaker 1: it clearly distinguishable that the post is branded content. So
Speaker 1: the bare minimum influencers are required to do is use
Speaker 1: the hashtag ad or sponsored. Now, clients can request additional
Speaker 1: hashtags such as ambassador, collab, and paid partnership, So I
Speaker 1: mean it's not.
Speaker 2: Very difficult to do these things.
Speaker 1: Now. For short videos, the brand association must be declared
Speaker 1: through the use of screen soupers at the beginning of
Speaker 1: the videos, whereas in long videos, the brand association must
Speaker 1: be declared within the first thirty seconds, both verbally and visually. Now,
Speaker 1: Instagram has even introduced in built Instagram ad tools to
Speaker 1: make it very imp and these rules were introduced in
Speaker 1: October twenty twenty, so influencers and brands have had adequate
Speaker 1: time to get to know these rules and get around them.
Speaker 2: Well.
Speaker 1: According to The Daily Mail, it was actually one of
Speaker 1: Sophie's followers who made the complaint to add Standards. So
Speaker 1: the complaint read, Sophie is obviously getting paid to be
Speaker 1: an ongoing ambassador for this product brand and should clearly
Speaker 1: display that it is a paid post. Now, the watchdog
Speaker 1: determined that her post did breach section two point seven
Speaker 1: of the AANA Code of Ethics, which requires advertisers to
Speaker 1: make it clearly distinguishable that a post is branded content.
Speaker 1: So the tech brand Signet hit back, blaming the incident
Speaker 1: on Sophie, claiming she uploaded the post without prior approval
Speaker 1: and that they shouldn't be held responsible for it. So
Speaker 1: the team from Signet also responded to ad Standards, saying
Speaker 1: it had an agreement with Sophie Keisha regarding paid brand
Speaker 1: endorsements on social media, but that this post was shared
Speaker 1: outside Miss Caaisha's paid agreement with the brand and was
Speaker 1: not included in the content calendar. Signet through further shade,
Speaker 1: saying if an influencer decides to post without permission or
Speaker 1: knowledge of a brand, why is the brand being held responsible.
Speaker 2: I'm pretty shocked that Signet have turned on Sophie because
Speaker 2: she has been a long time ambassador for the brand.
Speaker 2: She's even got them listed in her Instagram bio. So
Speaker 2: it's just really weird how that this is playing out.
Speaker 2: It seems like, you know, she's in it for herself
Speaker 2: and the brands in it for herself. I'm not shocked
Speaker 2: by this at all.
Speaker 1: Sophie was in the wrong in this situation. She put
Speaker 1: up a post that was not agreed upon by them,
Speaker 1: and she said, oh, not spon con. Even though she's
Speaker 1: clearly an ambassador of theirs. They're deeply embarrassed by this.
Speaker 1: They probably want to distance themselves from her. I remember
Speaker 1: there was a similar issue where it was an Adelaide influence.
Speaker 1: So he shared a post I think it was about
Speaker 1: a fast food chain, so he had an existing relationship
Speaker 1: with them. He wasn't paid to share about the fast
Speaker 1: food chain, but he actually liked it and shared, oh
Speaker 1: you know, I'm having mac Donald's night or something along
Speaker 1: those lines. And he got in trouble as well well,
Speaker 1: because they said, well, you have this existing relationship, you're
Speaker 1: being paid by them, so anything you post about them,
Speaker 1: it's sort of skewed. Well, I think the worst thing
Speaker 1: Sophie did was put in the caption not spon con
Speaker 1: because this was deliberately misleading to her audience when there
Speaker 1: was an ongoing relationship with this brand. So the ad
Speaker 1: standards panel ruled that her post had many hallmarks of
Speaker 1: sponsored content, including a link to Signet's website, the positioning
Speaker 1: of the product, and a glowing endorsement. They also noted
Speaker 1: that Sophie's long standing relationship with the brand was another
Speaker 1: indicator that the post was an advertisement, and that an
Speaker 1: explicit inclusion of the word not spawn further obscured the
Speaker 1: post distinguishability as advertising. Now Mummy bloggers Sarah Kerns found
Speaker 1: herself in a very similar situation, so a follower complained
Speaker 1: that Sarah failed to properly indicate the nature of her
Speaker 1: relationship with Thermomix on an Instagram story image of the product.
Speaker 1: So the text read, Okay, Tuesday is normally quick dinner
Speaker 1: slash takeaway as Knox has art until and we aren't
Speaker 1: home till six tonight. I made butter chicken in less
Speaker 1: time than it would have taken to grab a takeout.
Speaker 1: We'll keep the Thermo mix updates coming for those interested.
Speaker 1: The complaint read the Thermo Mix was gifted to Sarah
Speaker 1: Kerns for promotional reasons. It has not been declared as
Speaker 1: a paid advertisement or listed as gifted or anything to
Speaker 1: indicate a relationship between Thermo Mix and Miss Kerns. Thermo
Speaker 1: Mix is tagged in very small white writing hidden against
Speaker 1: a white bench top. Now you may be wondering what
Speaker 1: is the go with gifted products. So in this situation,
Speaker 1: Sarah was paid to promote Thermo Mix's cordless vacuum. However,
Speaker 1: the Thermomix appliance that she used in the offending post
Speaker 1: formed part of her reimbursement. So it's believed that she
Speaker 1: was paid money and they must have thrown in a
Speaker 1: Thermo Mix. Now, when an item is gifted, it's pretty simple.
Speaker 1: You just have to declare it's gifted by writing hashtag gifted.
Speaker 1: In this situation, I think Sarah probably could have also
Speaker 1: gotten away with using the term collab or partners. Yeah. Now,
Speaker 1: Thermo Mix responded to the Ad Standards Panel saying Ms
Speaker 1: Kerns was engaged to promote only the vacuum cleaner and
Speaker 1: she had no authority, direction, or retain it to promote
Speaker 1: the Thermo Mix appliance. Any promotion of that appliance, if
Speaker 1: it had occurred, was without the company's knowledge or approval,
Speaker 1: nor as a paid sponsorship. Now, the panels say that
Speaker 1: while the post was made at the discretion of the influencer,
Speaker 1: it did still fall reasonably within the control of the
Speaker 1: advertiser as the product had been provided as part of
Speaker 1: a broader sponsorship and ambassadorship deal. Thermomix actually intends to
Speaker 1: appeal against this ruling. It kind of sounds like people
Speaker 1: aren't educated on what they can and can't post. They
Speaker 1: think they're helping the brand out by posting more and
Speaker 1: trying to impress them, I feel, and it's interesting to
Speaker 1: see how quickly these brands are just willing to turn
Speaker 1: on the influencers.
Speaker 2: Now you may be wondering what other consequences for these breachers. Now,
Speaker 2: the Code of Ethics itself is not enforceable in the
Speaker 2: same way that Australian Consumer law is. However, if a
Speaker 2: complaint is raised to add standards, the panel may report
Speaker 2: it to the relevant government agency or industry body. Now
Speaker 2: this includes the a Triple C, which enforces the Australian
Speaker 2: Consumer Law. So under the Australian Consumer Law, advertising must
Speaker 2: not mislead or deceive consumers. So basically, if an influencer
Speaker 2: doesn't disclose a sponsor on their page. This could be
Speaker 2: considered misleading or deceptive conduct. Therefore, they could actually be
Speaker 2: found in breach of the Australian consumer Law and liable
Speaker 2: to pay a significant fine. Now it hasn't happened yet,
Speaker 2: but it could only be a matter of time.
Speaker 1: Well that's all the influence and news we have for
Speaker 1: you guys today. This podcast was recorded on the traditional
Speaker 1: land of the Garner people of the Adelaide Planes. We
Speaker 1: pay respect to elders past, present and emerging And if
Speaker 1: you did enjoy today's episode with love, if you could
Speaker 1: go and leave us a five star review and don't
Speaker 1: forget to follow us on TikTok and Instagram at Outspoken
Speaker 1: Underscore The Underscore Podcast