Speaker 1: On today's show, Sky Wheatley slammed through promoting Calarium Sunbeds
Speaker 1: only fans. Creator Mikayla Tester is detained by US Border Forces,
Speaker 1: Ruby Tuesday, Matthews designer Baby Haul, and why Bet Judd
Speaker 1: can't buy.
Speaker 2: Wine in New Zealand.
Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to Outspoken. It's your dose of the
Speaker 1: hottest influencer and pop culture news twice a week. I'm
Speaker 1: Kate Torbert and I was really surprised over the weekend
Speaker 1: to find out how Jardey Tunci and Steph Claire Smith met.
Speaker 1: So I always assumed that they met on a brand trip. However,
Speaker 1: jar Day has revealed that she fanned girl Steph Claire
Speaker 1: Smith on a photo shoot before they became friends. I
Speaker 1: was even more surprised to find out that Jarday was
Speaker 1: actually working as a social media manager for a fast
Speaker 1: fashion brand on this photo shoot, so it was her
Speaker 1: job to take content of Steph, and jar Day basically
Speaker 1: went up to Stephan straight out said that she loved her.
Speaker 1: That's a bold move to actually go up and tell
Speaker 1: somebody that you love them. I've been in those situations
Speaker 1: at work where we've been on photo shoots and there's
Speaker 1: been people there with a high profile, and my go
Speaker 1: to is to act like I don't know who they are,
Speaker 1: which I think isn't the best move after hearing this,
Speaker 1: because you almost don't want to make yourself look like
Speaker 1: a loser and beneath them. But if you're in a
Speaker 1: photo shoot and it's with a well known person, it's
Speaker 1: pretty obvious that everyone knows who they are. You always
Speaker 1: freeze Sophie that I do. It might be these people
Speaker 1: that Sophia would probably get along with so well and
Speaker 1: that you really admire, but you just don't know what
Speaker 1: to say. But the thing is, this would have been
Speaker 1: a couple of years ago and Steph probably wasn't a
Speaker 1: huge name that she is now. She would have just
Speaker 1: been an influencer. So I think in those situations you
Speaker 1: could legitimately pretend that you don't know who they are,
Speaker 1: and that would be my go to, because I never
Speaker 1: think that this person is going to want to be
Speaker 1: my friend if there's an power imbalance there. But even
Speaker 1: I think you don't pretend that you don't know who
Speaker 1: they are, but actually going up and fangirling as different
Speaker 1: like you can act as if you know who the
Speaker 1: person is and you've got admiration for them, but you
Speaker 1: don't go, oh my, I effing love you.
Speaker 2: I think it's different.
Speaker 1: If you say I really respect what you do and
Speaker 1: I've followed you from Afar and it's really nice to
Speaker 1: meet you.
Speaker 2: I think that's completely different.
Speaker 1: Do you think that they became friends after this shoot
Speaker 1: or they only became friends when jar Day became an influencer? Well,
Speaker 1: she actually explained that they were on several shoots together
Speaker 1: before deciding to actually meet up outside of work, and
Speaker 1: that's how the friendship blossomed. So there was a power
Speaker 1: and balance there. I do wonder though, Steph Glear Smith
Speaker 1: has spoken a lot about how she was friends with
Speaker 1: Taylor Swift when she was living in New York, so
Speaker 1: Steph would have been on the other side of this
Speaker 1: type of relationship, and I suppose that might be why
Speaker 1: she agreed to be friends with jar Day. I wonder
Speaker 1: if Steph provided jar Day with any pointers about how
Speaker 1: to build her influencer following or perhaps start a business,
Speaker 1: because it seems like her career really came out of nowhere.
Speaker 1: Perhaps it was like that Shaney, Grimm and Click where
Speaker 1: Lily Brown suddenly befriended Shana and then her Instagram took off. Yeah,
Speaker 1: she's probably that background person. Everyone's like, who is that
Speaker 1: girl that's friends with Steph?
Speaker 3: Like, I don't know.
Speaker 4: It just feel like it's such a massive call to
Speaker 4: say to someone with the following, like all the people
Speaker 4: who are following you are your responsibility. Like that just
Speaker 4: wigs me out.
Speaker 1: Sky Wheatley has caused outraged after promoting the use of
Speaker 1: colarium sun beds on her Instagram. The twenty nine year
Speaker 1: old hit back at her critics, saying she shouldn't be
Speaker 1: held accountable for what her followers choose to do, so.
Speaker 2: What's gone down?
Speaker 4: Well.
Speaker 1: On Friday night, Sky Wheatley took her followers along for
Speaker 1: her appointment at Gold Coast tanning clinic Body Bronze and
Speaker 1: followers were shocked when she posted a video of a
Speaker 1: sun bed with its bright purple light on and wrote
Speaker 1: found a calarium. Now I have never heard of a
Speaker 1: calarium until now. I assumed it was a typo. Well, yeah,
Speaker 1: they seem to have recently emerged on the market, so
Speaker 1: Sky wrote it looks like a solly, but it's not.
Speaker 1: For those not following along. That is the short term
Speaker 1: for solarium so the commercial use of solariums was banned
Speaker 1: in Australia in twenty fifteen due to the risk of
Speaker 1: melanoma in its users. Disturbingly, though, they can still be
Speaker 1: purchased for private use. Before I read out the rest
Speaker 1: of Sky's quote, I want to preface that what she
Speaker 1: wrote has no factual basis and is incredibly dangerous. So
Speaker 1: she wrote, the calarium has red light therapy with zero
Speaker 1: point eight percent UV, so you won't burn, and it's
Speaker 1: a safer alternative to sun baking. Naturally, it improves sleep
Speaker 1: and helps with collagen and elastin for overall good skin health. Now,
Speaker 1: Sky's sun forest was also in the room with her
Speaker 1: whilst the sun bed was on and emitting the light.
Speaker 1: She also shared a subsequent photo of herself standing in
Speaker 1: front of the calarium with her pants pulled down and
Speaker 1: she was wearing Brazilian cut undies to show off her
Speaker 1: tan marks from the colarium, and she was looking incredibly bronzed.
Speaker 1: She wrote, I wasn't expecting to get any color at all.
Speaker 1: I mainly wanted to improve my sleep. Apparently it helps
Speaker 1: with that. He here, so we keep you posted. I
Speaker 1: actually wanted to buy one for myself, so I'm already sold.
Speaker 1: This actually makes me feel so so sick and really
Speaker 1: pissed off. We have seen an influx of influencers sharing
Speaker 1: their tan lines, and I feel like it is slowly
Speaker 1: creeping back into our culture. The absolute joke that Sky
Speaker 1: is saying that she's actually using it for her sleep.
Speaker 1: I mean, the thing is called a kolarium. It's playing
Speaker 1: off the word solarium.
Speaker 2: We all know what people are using it for.
Speaker 1: She's also visiting a tanning salon to get it done.
Speaker 1: I don't buy for a second that this is used
Speaker 1: for sleep, because she has such a long documented obsession
Speaker 1: with tanning. So when she started her YouTube channel, she
Speaker 1: would share videos of her excessively tanning with oil, and
Speaker 1: in twenty seventeen, she caused outrage when she told her
Speaker 1: followers that she wished she was a naturally tanned Aboriginal.
Speaker 1: After apologizing for having streaky tanned hands, she added that
Speaker 1: she didn't mean for the comments to sound racist and asked,
Speaker 1: was that racist. I'm not a racist person, Like I
Speaker 1: actually dated an Aboriginal guy and I wish I had
Speaker 1: Aboriginal in my blood or just some type of anything
Speaker 1: that makes you brown. I don't even know where we
Speaker 1: go from those comments because they are so appalling. She
Speaker 1: has also continue to share videos and photos of her
Speaker 1: self tanning throughout the years, but says it's okay because
Speaker 1: she has sun cream on. Do you think that Sky
Speaker 1: is so foolish that she actually believes there are health
Speaker 1: benefits to this calarium and she thinks that she's actually
Speaker 1: helping her followers by telling them about this. No, it
Speaker 1: was clearly a paid partnership, and that she wants this
Speaker 1: calarium tanning machine for herself. I am really sick of
Speaker 1: Sky getting off scott free by saying, oh, maybe she
Speaker 1: didn't understand. I mean, I think in this day and age,
Speaker 1: we've had enough education, particularly in schools, to know how
Speaker 1: dangerous the sun is. Well. Following Sky's post of the calarium,
Speaker 1: she did receive widespread backlash. One user wrote, you absolutely
Speaker 1: do not understand how skin cancer is caused. There is
Speaker 1: no level of a safe tan Another said, you're not
Speaker 1: just sharing what you do. There are so many impressional
Speaker 1: people that you were reaching. So Sky responded to the
Speaker 1: hate in a nine minute rant, saying she isn't responsible
Speaker 1: for the choices her followers make and shouldn't be held accountable.
Speaker 1: Here's a snippet of what she said.
Speaker 3: Honestly, to hold people accountable for what other people do
Speaker 3: in their life, that's got to fucking stop. Like absolutely
Speaker 3: not Like I don't agree with that, I agree with
Speaker 3: what some people have said and the dangers of skin cancer,
Speaker 3: et cetera. But holding people accountable online for other people's
Speaker 3: wellbeing and lives and stuff like that, Like, no, babe,
Speaker 3: I'm sorry.
Speaker 4: I'm gonna draw the line there, like I'm really drawing
Speaker 4: a lot. In no way, shape or fucking form, am
Speaker 4: I holding a gun to someone's head saying you must
Speaker 4: do as I do.
Speaker 5: You must speak as I speak, you must breathe as
Speaker 5: I breathe, you must live as I live. Like, That's
Speaker 5: not what I'm doing, And I'm not trying to force
Speaker 5: people to do what I'm doing. I'm simply sharing what
Speaker 5: I like to do. I understand that young teenage girls
Speaker 5: get the impression that if they do what I do,
Speaker 5: they're gonna look like me or whatever, Like I understand that,
Speaker 5: so it, But I'm not your mother.
Speaker 4: I'm not your mother. I do not have responsibility over
Speaker 4: what you do in your life. I'm sorry, Like I love,
Speaker 4: I love and care for you guys, and I genuinely
Speaker 4: like I love you.
Speaker 3: All like a mother. But I did not fucking birth
Speaker 3: six hundred thousand people.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. You have responsibility. As soon as you take
Speaker 1: a paycheck. As an influencer, you are a role model.
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know why she is a role model.
Speaker 1: She has so many followers, and I'm surprised they haven't
Speaker 1: dropped off. But her job is an influencer. As the
Speaker 1: name suggests, she influences people, right or wrong. She even
Speaker 1: acknowledged in that rant that young women want to follow
Speaker 1: her beauty routine so that they can look like her,
Speaker 1: so she is aware of the influence that she has.
Speaker 1: The difference is that she only wants the influence when
Speaker 1: it's good. So she wants the influence when she's trying
Speaker 1: to flog off her own products or trying to do
Speaker 1: a brand sponsored post. But she doesn't want the influence
Speaker 1: when she has to stop doing things that she literally
Speaker 1: wants to go out and do herself. Don't partner with
Speaker 1: this colarium company, then if you don't want that, well,
Speaker 1: it's unclear whether she did partner with the company, because
Speaker 1: there was no you know hashtag gifted or anything, but.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that doesn't mean anything.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but she could have got a freebie from there.
Speaker 1: And also talk about shifting the blame to your followers.
Speaker 1: I mean, half of her following probably didn't even know
Speaker 1: what a qularium was until she posted the story.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and also.
Speaker 1: She's saying, oh, I wasn't telling people what to do,
Speaker 1: but she was literally outlining all the supposed benefits of
Speaker 1: this product.
Speaker 2: I mentioned it.
Speaker 1: There is no way that that was an organic post,
Speaker 1: like she was getting something out of it. She also
Speaker 1: finished the rant by saying that the more people who
Speaker 1: hate her, the better.
Speaker 6: Here's what she said, I personally would rather follow someone
Speaker 6: who is genuine and authentic to themselves rather than someone
Speaker 6: who's trying so hard to get everyone to like them.
Speaker 7: Do you know what, guys, the more people that.
Speaker 8: Hate me the fucking better, because it shows how organic
Speaker 8: and authentic I'm being to myself.
Speaker 4: And I fucking love that my followers don't drop tonight.
Speaker 8: I'm going to be concerned because I am so authentic
Speaker 8: and true to myself that if people ain't hated on me,
Speaker 8: it's a fucking concern. That's what's up. Peace out to
Speaker 8: get sushi after Jim and live my fucking amazing life
Speaker 8: that I built and I love.
Speaker 1: So much that I don't have the time to troll.
Speaker 1: The thing that's so depressing about that comment is it's
Speaker 1: so true because influencers only stay relevant when they are controversial.
Speaker 1: She has been involved in so many controversies and still
Speaker 1: has so many followers, remains relevant, still gets brand deals.
Speaker 1: Away from this circus, let's get into some of the
Speaker 1: actual facts. So, Body Bronze is a tanning salon on
Speaker 1: the Gold Coast and the business doesn't appear to have
Speaker 1: a website. They did have an Instagram account, but it
Speaker 1: is no longer showing up under the same handle. Following
Speaker 1: all of this backlash that I would presume was directed
Speaker 1: to their page by sky So before the business owner
Speaker 1: chose to shut down the account, they wrote on Instagram
Speaker 1: just a friendly reminder that Body Bronze does not sell sessions.
Speaker 1: We sell lotion. The use of the calarium is free
Speaker 1: and at your own discretion. If this is something you
Speaker 1: were interested in, then please DM me. If not, continue
Speaker 1: to fake ten Now this statement made my blood boil.
Speaker 1: This is such a deceptive practice because commercial use of
Speaker 1: sun beds as I mentioned, has been banned in Australia
Speaker 1: since twenty fifteen.
Speaker 2: However, it is still legal.
Speaker 1: To own one in your home as long as you
Speaker 1: don't charge anyone for the use of it. So what
Speaker 1: Body Bronze appears to be doing here is working under
Speaker 1: a loophole. So they won't charge you for the use
Speaker 1: of the clarium, but they'll charge you for the lotion,
Speaker 1: probably a ton for that lotion too, because legally it
Speaker 1: means that they don't get in trouble for operating the calarium.
Speaker 1: It's like back in the day when it used to
Speaker 1: be illegal to sell pet rabbits and used to buy
Speaker 1: a little starter kit of you know, carrots and letters
Speaker 1: and then they'd throw in a rabbit. Yeah, not as dangerous, no,
Speaker 1: not as cute. It actually makes me feel ill that
Speaker 1: tanning salons are operating in this way. It's actually so
Speaker 1: appalling that this is able to happen, and it is
Speaker 1: actually a good thing almost that Sky Wheatley has brought
Speaker 1: this to the public attention, because I think there are
Speaker 1: a lot of people online who didn't know about this,
Speaker 1: and maybe through people power we can actually get this
Speaker 1: loophole eradicated. Well, I don't even know why they still
Speaker 1: sell sun beds if they're that dangerous. I mean, the
Speaker 1: argument would be, oh, well, people can still burn themselves
Speaker 1: in the sun, but you burn yourself at much more
Speaker 1: of a rapid pace in a celario. It's literally like saying, oh,
Speaker 1: we don't sell guns, We just sell the bullets. We
Speaker 1: loan out some guns and you can just go and
Speaker 1: use them. It's even more disturbing to take a look
Speaker 1: at how these calariums are being falsely advertised as something
Speaker 1: that helps you boost collagen and also is a safe
Speaker 1: way to tan, because it couldn't be further from the truth.
Speaker 1: So a local dermal therapist by the name of Jordan Russell.
Speaker 1: She has a bachelott of dermal science and she has
Speaker 1: been warning about these colariums for some time now. She wrote,
Speaker 1: there has been a new development in the world of
Speaker 1: sun beds with the emergence of colariums, which are a
Speaker 1: play on collagen and solarium. So Jordan said that colariums
Speaker 1: are being marketed as a safe way to tan and
Speaker 1: claims are being made that they stimulate collagen whilst providing
Speaker 1: a tan through uva radiation without the burning effects of UVB.
Speaker 1: She says, the harsh truth is that there is no
Speaker 1: way to safely tan, so whether you're exposed to UVA
Speaker 1: or UVB, you were always at risk of developing skin
Speaker 1: cancers and effects of premature aging due to uv damage.
Speaker 1: She also said the irony is that the beds claim
Speaker 1: to stimulate collagen, when in actual fact, the UVA exposure
Speaker 1: which you get in these beds actually breaks down collagen.
Speaker 1: So if you use these, your skin is actually going
Speaker 1: to age faster. Yeah, I was really shocked when I
Speaker 1: heard the term UVA thrown around because when I met
Speaker 1: with my dermatologists last year, she was talking about the
Speaker 1: suncream I should use because I have a lot of pigmentation,
Speaker 1: and she was saying that a lot of people focus
Speaker 1: on UVB because it's what is around when it's really hot,
Speaker 1: and it's the UVB.
Speaker 2: From the sun. However, UVA is around all the.
Speaker 1: Time and in winter, and it's something that really ages
Speaker 1: your skin and pigments it. So it just cracks me
Speaker 1: up that they're trying to push it as this new
Speaker 1: beauty treatment when an actual fact is aging your skin
Speaker 1: and causing pigmentation.
Speaker 2: Do you think there's a bit of.
Speaker 1: Confusion with consumers because we've seen so much about red
Speaker 1: light saunas and how different light therapy can help the skin.
Speaker 1: Do you think people are actually confused by these colariomses?
Speaker 1: And I think that that's a part of the marketing spin.
Speaker 1: They're trying to confuse people, and they're trying to say, oh, look,
Speaker 1: you can actually get tanned and it's not going to
Speaker 1: damage your skin. And they're also using so many loopholes.
Speaker 1: So I think that people who are listening they should
Speaker 1: think to themselves next time they go to a tanning
Speaker 1: salon or to get a cosmetic procedure done, if this
Speaker 1: doesn't quite sound right, why am I not being charged
Speaker 1: for something? Maybe they should do a bit more research
Speaker 1: into it. And also the fact is that when you
Speaker 1: have signs of a tan on your skin, that is
Speaker 1: because your skin cells are in trauma.
Speaker 2: So it's obviously doing the.
Speaker 1: Same thing that a selarium does well, particularly when she
Speaker 1: had such evident tan lines after using this thing supposedly once.
Speaker 1: It just makes me so incredibly mad, And I hope
Speaker 1: that this conversation does generate a bit more awareness of
Speaker 1: what's happening at the moment, particularly after all the work
Speaker 1: that Sun Safety advocate Natalie Furnasia has done to raise
Speaker 1: awareness of melanoma. It just makes me feel so sick
Speaker 1: to my stomach that this is going on. We need
Speaker 1: to stay educated on these matters, and we need to
Speaker 1: ensure that the younger generation who were impression will also
Speaker 1: knows the truth.
Speaker 8: We've all started when we got off the plane.
Speaker 7: Yes, thank you, Peter. It all started when we got
Speaker 7: off the plane and discovered that the fly Low Hotel
Speaker 7: complex hadn't been built yet. It was just a mound
Speaker 7: of earth well, and that was our first disappointment. But
Speaker 7: we thought, ho hum, let's get on with it, and
Speaker 7: we dug a hole in the ground and stayed there.
Speaker 1: TikToker and OnlyFans creator Mikayla Tester has revealed she was
Speaker 1: detained by US border forces for forty two hours before
Speaker 1: being deported back to Australia. Now it's the second time
Speaker 1: the twenty three year old has been detained in the US.
Speaker 1: So Michayla took to her TikTok to explain exactly what happened.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1: So Michayla was actually on her way to Cochella with
Speaker 1: her personal assistant Alisha on the White Fox sponsored trip.
Speaker 1: So after flying twenty hours from Perth to Los Angeles,
Speaker 1: Michaela said she was immediately approached by an American.
Speaker 2: Official and detained.
Speaker 1: She says this was due to an accidental violation of
Speaker 1: her Electronic system for Travel Authorization, which is known as
Speaker 1: an ESTER. So Michayla had listed her employment as self
Speaker 1: employed in the EST instead of listing her job as
Speaker 1: an OnlyFans creator. She explained that she completed the EST
Speaker 1: years ago and thought that self employed was the appropriate title.
Speaker 1: So once detained, Michaela said her devices were seized and
Speaker 1: officers started going through her phone.
Speaker 2: Here's what she said.
Speaker 9: When you're detained, you have no rights.
Speaker 10: They can take any of your they can seize your
Speaker 10: devices forever, they can go through.
Speaker 9: Them, they can take download anything off your phone. You
Speaker 9: have no rights.
Speaker 10: They basically own you and everything when you step foot
Speaker 10: into their country. I hadn't even given any CPP office
Speaker 10: on my phone yet, and they were already asking me
Speaker 10: questions about all of the people that I'm friends with
Speaker 10: in LA and about their business. They were asking me
Speaker 10: about their money, what they do on a daily basis,
Speaker 10: just if they do anything illegal, like just questions that like,
Speaker 10: I understand one hundred percent that this is a process
Speaker 10: and this.
Speaker 9: Is how things work and everything.
Speaker 10: And I was just in this room for hours, and
Speaker 10: I was willing to do this because if it meant
Speaker 10: that I was going to be able to get let
Speaker 10: into the US.
Speaker 9: I would do anything.
Speaker 1: Mikayla was then questioned by officers about who she was
Speaker 1: visiting in the US, about their businesses, their money, and
Speaker 1: if they do anything illegal. The officers then asked Mikayla
Speaker 1: if she had ever collaborated with anyone in the US before,
Speaker 1: and she confirmed that she had not. Just moments later,
Speaker 1: the officer then pulled up a Twitter photo of Mikayla
Speaker 1: topless with a number of girls from the US and
Speaker 1: accused her of lying to her face. Mickayla then explained
Speaker 1: that she had worked with the women, but not on
Speaker 1: US soil. So it was at this moment that Michaela
Speaker 1: then got sent to a secondary holding room where she
Speaker 1: was strip search and left in a room which she
Speaker 1: said look like it belonged in a war movie. She
Speaker 1: said the experience made her feel like a prisoner.
Speaker 2: Here's more of what she said.
Speaker 9: Had to go sit in a room where they have
Speaker 9: a box of tan PACs.
Speaker 10: They have a kettle, they have some cups of noodles,
Speaker 10: and they have these old outbeds.
Speaker 9: It looks like where they hold people like from the war,
Speaker 9: like the enemies. Look that was so that was so
Speaker 9: out of pocket, but like that's literally what it looked like.
Speaker 9: And I was just breaking down.
Speaker 1: So at this point, Mikayla assumed she was going to
Speaker 1: be deported and banned from the US because she had
Speaker 1: heard stories about other sex workers being banned for twenty years. Now,
Speaker 1: this is such a sterious story, but I did have
Speaker 1: to laugh because Michayla admitted that she started spiraling at
Speaker 1: the thought of no more American boys. She also said
Speaker 1: she developed Stockholm syndrome for one of the officers who
Speaker 1: was kind and sweet.
Speaker 2: Here's what she said.
Speaker 11: I cannot stop thinking about this man. I'm in love
Speaker 11: with him. He was so nice to me, Like just
Speaker 11: seeing him come into the room. I was in there
Speaker 11: for like days, just seeing him come into the room
Speaker 11: calling my name to talk to me and just being
Speaker 11: so kind and sweet.
Speaker 9: I'm in love with him, like I was just I
Speaker 9: was just watching the door waiting for him to walk
Speaker 9: in to talk to me. And this happened like ten times.
Speaker 1: It was quite funny because in the comment section on
Speaker 1: this video, one of Mikayla's followers wrote, girl, it's an
Speaker 1: interrogation tactic, him being so nice, to which Michayla responded.
Speaker 2: No, we're in love. I can feel it.
Speaker 8: Well.
Speaker 1: McKayla remained in this room for almost two days before
Speaker 1: she was then deported for violating her Esther NOW officers
Speaker 1: believed she was trying to work in the US.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 1: Mikayla found out she was being deported only an hour
Speaker 1: before the flight. And if you're being deported you aren't
Speaker 1: allowed to go through the airport like a regular passenger.
Speaker 1: You have to be a s it into a car
Speaker 1: onto the tarmac and led by police right to the
Speaker 1: plane door. Can you imagine the person that she was
Speaker 1: sitting next to, like if you're on a plane seeing
Speaker 1: someone come in like that? Or she actually flew business
Speaker 1: class still because her original flight was in business class
Speaker 1: and the US border people were going to send her
Speaker 1: back economy. But I think she begged this guy that
Speaker 1: she had a crush on to let her fly business
Speaker 1: so they actually did. Do you think that because she
Speaker 1: flew business over there, that they might have flagged her
Speaker 1: as someone of concern, particularly if they're trying to work out, well,
Speaker 1: she's self employed, how is she affording this? I mean
Speaker 1: they have all her information there as well. Let's not
Speaker 1: doubt that they're googling her. Oh and it would be
Speaker 1: such salt in the wound for Mikayla because, as I
Speaker 1: mentioned earlier, her personal assistant Alisha, traveled with her to
Speaker 1: Cochella and she was let through whilst Mikayla was detained.
Speaker 1: And she has been sharing so many photos of the
Speaker 1: trip showing the very lavish mansion that the group of
Speaker 1: influencers are staying at, and there was even a TV
Speaker 1: screen welcoming Michayla and Alisha to the accommodation, and she said, oh.
Speaker 2: Miss you.
Speaker 1: This actually reminds me when I was working at the
Speaker 1: thirty Six's and we flew over to Singapore to be
Speaker 1: a part of the Merlin Cup and we were all
Speaker 1: going through customs and one of the players got detained
Speaker 1: because his passport didn't have six months on it, and
Speaker 1: he actually got sent home that night. And we felt
Speaker 1: so bad because we're all living it up, sharing on
Speaker 1: our Instagram stories, and the poor thing was on this
Speaker 1: flight back home, well, Alicia.
Speaker 2: Must just be loving it.
Speaker 1: She has about thirteen thousand followers, which I think are
Speaker 1: off the back of Michayla, and they are apparently very
Speaker 1: good friends. But Mikayla does seem to have quite a
Speaker 1: falling out with friends, so I wonder whether this will cause.
Speaker 2: A bit attention.
Speaker 1: It's not her fault, Yeah, I know, it's not her fault.
Speaker 1: It's nice to see that she's actually got a real
Speaker 1: PA or one of the fake ones that we talked about.
Speaker 1: I do wonder if White Fox does hold some responsibility
Speaker 1: to ensure the influencers and talent get there safely well,
Speaker 1: particularly when White Fox knows she is big on OnlyFans.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't they have said, oh, make sure you feel this
Speaker 1: form in correctly and give a bit of a guy,
Speaker 1: particularly because this is the second time, as we mentioned,
Speaker 1: that Mikayla has been in the US. So in October
Speaker 1: last year, she and a friend were detained for five
Speaker 1: hours and Mikayla, of course did a TikTok video about this,
Speaker 1: and she explained that she made sure that she looked
Speaker 1: really ratchet bad because she knows that US customs are
Speaker 1: really strict, but her friend drew attention for her eyelash
Speaker 1: extensions and, as Mikayla described them, big fat, juicy lips.
Speaker 1: So it's kind of interesting though, because what she's clearly
Speaker 1: saying here is that US Border Control they do profile people,
Speaker 1: and they do have rules regarding sex workers being let
Speaker 1: into the country. So she's obviously making it aware that
Speaker 1: she knows about these rules. So it does seem like
Speaker 1: she probably purposely put that she was self employed. So
Speaker 1: her theory is that if you don't look as glam
Speaker 1: they're not going to pick on you. Well, yeah, and
Speaker 1: she said that she knew for a fact that they
Speaker 1: thought that she was a sex worker or an escort
Speaker 1: looking to work in the US, but on this occasion
Speaker 1: they were let into the country. The thing is she
Speaker 1: was clearly flagged back then in October as someone of
Speaker 1: interest to check in on next time, so that's probably
Speaker 1: why it happened. Well, this does seem to be an
Speaker 1: issue that is happening again and again, And in March
Speaker 1: of this year, freelance journalist Sophie k Rosa investigated this
Speaker 1: very issue, and she explored why an influx of sex
Speaker 1: workers are being detained by US border agents and the
Speaker 1: article explained that undercurrent laws, any person US border agents
Speaker 1: suspect has sold sex in the last ten years can
Speaker 1: be denied a visa, refused entry, detained, deported, and banned
Speaker 1: from the US for five to ten years. The laws
Speaker 1: are very vague, though, and referred to prostitution and commercialized
Speaker 1: vice and crimes involving moral turpitude. So many of these
Speaker 1: laws are grounded in turn of the twentieth century morality
Speaker 1: and they single out in particular female sex workers as
Speaker 1: a moral and as threats to American marriages and families.
Speaker 1: And once detained, many of these sex workers are subject
Speaker 1: to very intrusive, offensive, and harmful treatment. They asked a
Speaker 1: detail questions about their personal life and work, and they
Speaker 1: also must give up their phones, which a lot of
Speaker 1: agents tend to take advantage of and troll through for
Speaker 1: free incriminating evidence. And the experience in this article has
Speaker 1: been described by many sex workers as incredibly traumatizing. Many
Speaker 1: said that they felt as though they were being treated
Speaker 1: like a second class citizen and that the work they
Speaker 1: did was perceived as inherently criminal. So the journalists also
Speaker 1: interviewed a member of the United sex Workers trade who
Speaker 1: said that based on stories shared with the Union. They
Speaker 1: believe the border forces are using facial recognition surveillance technology
Speaker 1: to detect sex workers as well as background checks.
Speaker 2: That's pretty extreme.
Speaker 1: Now there is some speculation that some sex worker websites
Speaker 1: might share workers' personal data with the US Now. Others
Speaker 1: also believe that the US has a way of accessing
Speaker 1: this data without websites permission. That's pretty interesting speculation in
Speaker 1: light of the US's problems with TikTok now Away from
Speaker 1: only Fans, I was interested in the concept of whether
Speaker 1: it's legal for influencers to go on brand trips in
Speaker 1: a different country and essentially make money in that country.
Speaker 1: So a lawyer Sidney Wong's as, if a foreign influencer
Speaker 1: visits the US and performs paid marketing work for an
Speaker 1: American business without a work visa, then the influencer will
Speaker 1: have violated US immigration law. Indeed, even a seemingly harmless
Speaker 1: sponsored Instagram post may be a violation. Now, it does
Speaker 1: get very complicated, and of course it depends if an
Speaker 1: influencer has applied for visas or disclosed their work, also
Speaker 1: which country they're traveling too. In Michayla's case, she was
Speaker 1: being paid by White Fox Boutique, which is an Australian brand.
Speaker 1: But it does get murky because she's essentially promoting an
Speaker 1: American festival. We're assuming that Michaela was paid by White
Speaker 1: Fox to attend Coachella, like a number of the other influencers.
Speaker 1: But I do wonder if this is a gifted arrangement.
Speaker 1: And I wonder if a lot of brands do just
Speaker 1: offer gifted trips because then they avoid any of these
Speaker 1: situations where influencers are basically being paid by different countries
Speaker 1: and they avoid any issues with visas. I wonder how
Speaker 1: it works for influencers, say Olivia Rodgers recently went to
Speaker 1: Paris and she went there to shoot a lot of
Speaker 1: content in Clo I mean, two different countries. But I
Speaker 1: wonder how it works in that sense when there's not
Speaker 1: a specific brand deal. It's at the discretion of the
Speaker 1: influencer where they shoot their caun. I think with the
Speaker 1: amount of money that influencers are making off these sorts
Speaker 1: of trips, I think it will be something that new
Speaker 1: laws need to come into place for.
Speaker 12: So she's wearing this little Fendi dress to the wedding,
Speaker 12: which is I can't even then she has this cute
Speaker 12: little dog jacobarna Onesie that she looks so cute.
Speaker 1: In Ruby Tuesday, Matthews has caused a stir by sharing
Speaker 1: a designer baby clothing hall to Instagram. The Byron Bay
Speaker 1: influencers showed off the expensive outfit she was packing for
Speaker 1: her baby daughter ahead of their holiday to Fiji.
Speaker 2: K can you tell us more?
Speaker 1: Well, well, many of us are struggling with the cost
Speaker 1: of living crisis. Ruby Tuesday Matthews thought it was a
Speaker 1: good idea to flaunt her baby daughter's designer wardrobe, so
Speaker 1: she took her followers behind the scenes she packed for
Speaker 1: her holiday to Fiji. So Ruby is taking her three
Speaker 1: kids along to Fiji to attend a wedding.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 1: Ruby shared she had bought her daughter a Fendy dress
Speaker 1: to wear at the wedding, which costs a staggering nine
Speaker 1: hundred and eighty one dollars. Just to reminder, this is
Speaker 1: a dress for a baby which they're.
Speaker 2: Going to grow out of so quickly, I know.
Speaker 1: She went on to show she had also packed adulcy
Speaker 1: in cabanat Wusie that retails at three hundred and forty dollars,
Speaker 1: along with two Stella McCartney dresses and a Chloe dress,
Speaker 1: with all of these items costing in the hundreds. The
Speaker 1: kicker was the plain outfit she packed for Little Sunday
Speaker 1: was a white knitted top and leggins, which were sold
Speaker 1: separately but collectively cost one thousand, three hundred and sixty
Speaker 1: four dollars. It was quite funny because during the clothing haul,
Speaker 1: Ruby exclaimed that her baby daughter had a better wardrobe
Speaker 1: than her and I just wanted to add that.
Speaker 2: Ruby made a.
Speaker 1: Point of saying all the brand names, which she didn't
Speaker 1: actually add the prices. It was the wonderful Amber from
Speaker 1: Influencer Updates that source those prices. I just can't get
Speaker 1: over the fact that she's purchased a white outfit for
Speaker 1: her daughter to wear on the plane. That's over one
Speaker 1: thousand dollars. What if that kid vomits all over it? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm not a mum, but I don't know
Speaker 1: enough about babies that that outfit is going to be
Speaker 1: completely destroyed on that plane journey. I think if she
Speaker 1: wants to dress her baby in design outfit, that's obviously
Speaker 1: her business. She's got the money to do so. However,
Speaker 1: it's a bit tone deaf to share it at this time.
Speaker 1: It's obviously going to piss people off who are struggling financially. Well,
Speaker 1: clearly she's not very good at reading the room, like
Speaker 1: why would you post this in this current economic client.
Speaker 1: I think the excessive flaunting of wealth is not what
Speaker 1: her followers want to see, and I'd be interested to
Speaker 1: see if she lost any followers. I did want to
Speaker 1: have a look at Social Blade, but it takes a
Speaker 1: couple of days for them to update their figures and
Speaker 1: this only happened over the weekend. I wonder if the
Speaker 1: items of clothing were gifted, because it does seem like
Speaker 1: such a bizarre flex to put out there, and she
Speaker 1: did make an effort to read out all of the
Speaker 1: brand names. It's just not relatable to her audience at all.
Speaker 1: It was such a weird flex, and we don't know
Speaker 1: if it was gifted because she didn't disclose it. But
Speaker 1: it's not to say that it wasn't.
Speaker 4: A lot of that stuff.
Speaker 6: I've been drinking it for years.
Speaker 5: I'm going to see some identification really makes me feel
Speaker 5: young again.
Speaker 1: Beck Judd was refused service at a bottle oo in
Speaker 1: New Zealand because she didn't look old enough. The forty
Speaker 1: year old mother of four and her sister Kate were
Speaker 1: unable to purchase a bottle of wine because they couldn't
Speaker 1: produce their IDs to prove they were over eighteen, Kate,
Speaker 1: can you tell us more so? On Thursday, Beck shared
Speaker 1: a series of Instagram stories about her experience in a
Speaker 1: New Zealand bottle shop, and at first she wrote that
Speaker 1: she was excited to try a New Zealand bottle of rose,
Speaker 1: but then in the next slide shared a photo of
Speaker 1: the wine confiscated, so Beck revealed it had been taken
Speaker 1: from her and her sister because they weren't able to
Speaker 1: provide ID when they purchased it. She said she told
Speaker 1: the shop assistant that they were actually old enough to
Speaker 1: have eighteen year old children, and later on Beck shared
Speaker 1: a photo of her and Kate posing with the caption
Speaker 1: just a couple of underages trying to get a bottle
Speaker 1: of rose. Well, they do look a lot younger than
Speaker 1: they are. It was quite funny because the Daily Mail
Speaker 1: ran with the lead Bet Judd has been left distraught
Speaker 1: after she was refused to us at a bottle shop.
Speaker 1: This woman turned forty in January. She would have been
Speaker 1: the complete opposite of distoryer. She would have been thrilled,
Speaker 1: and let's be honest, the whole reason she shared the
Speaker 1: ordeal was a flex. I remember when I was younger,
Speaker 1: it used to be so mortifying to be idd However,
Speaker 1: now that I'm in my thirties, I get a kick
Speaker 1: out of it if someone asks for It's funny this
Speaker 1: week because a friend of mine also shared on social
Speaker 1: media that he got asked for ID at bottle shop
Speaker 1: and he's a dad of one. It's offensive as a guy.
Speaker 1: As a guy, I think you always want to look older.
Speaker 1: I was actually I think it was last year for
Speaker 1: Dale's birthday. I was trying to buy him a bottle
Speaker 1: of wine and they refused me too, but I luckily
Speaker 1: had my ID. And it's so funny when the shop
Speaker 1: assistants really embarrassed. Yeah sorry, it's like, nah, I love it,
Speaker 1: thank you. It was quite interesting and I'm sure some
Speaker 1: of our New Zealand listeners can confirm. But apparently in
Speaker 1: New Zealand they're really strict with checking ID. So while
Speaker 1: you can buy alcohol in supermarkets, New Zealand supermarket chain
Speaker 1: Countdown confirmed that they tell their staff to ask anyone
Speaker 1: for ID that looks younger than thirty. Well that makes
Speaker 1: a bit more sense because I think bet Dudd could
Speaker 1: pass for thirty.
Speaker 2: Oh, definitely younger.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean in Australia you're usually told that you
Speaker 1: have to look over twenty five to be idd And
Speaker 1: while it's a win for Beck because she is forty,
Speaker 1: it's not as much of a big win as she
Speaker 1: may be thought.
Speaker 2: You're taking away of flexk. Look, she looks incredible.
Speaker 1: Well, I think that's all we've got time for today.
Speaker 1: We'll be back in your ears tomorrow for a subscriber
Speaker 1: episode and I'm very excited for this one. We're going
Speaker 1: to be taking you behind the scenes of the podcast
Speaker 1: world in Australia. We're going to be sharing some juicy
Speaker 1: details there. Yeah, I'm really looking forward to that one.
Speaker 1: And if you haven't yet subscribed to Outspoken Plus, we
Speaker 1: are going to leave a link in our show notes
Speaker 1: so you can subscribe on either Patreon or through Apple
Speaker 1: Podcast Now. This episode was recorded on the traditional land
Speaker 1: of the Ghana people of the Adelaide Planes. We pay
Speaker 1: respect to Elder's past and present. Now, if you did
Speaker 1: like the show, please leave us a review and don't
Speaker 1: forget to join in on all the conversations happening in
Speaker 1: our Facebook group, which has outspoken the podcast community, and
Speaker 1: please give us a follow on TikTok and Instagram. Our
Speaker 1: handle is outside Can Underscore The Underscore Podcast
Speaker 5: M