WEBVTT - Influencer Scandals of 2023

0:00:00.120 --> 0:00:02.480
<v Speaker 1>We want to issue a trigger warning as this episode

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:08.760
<v Speaker 1>discusses animal cruelty and child exploitation. Hello and welcome to Outspoken.

0:00:08.920 --> 0:00:11.680
<v Speaker 1>On today's show, we are counting down the top five

0:00:11.880 --> 0:00:15.240
<v Speaker 1>influencer scandals of twenty twenty three. God, there have been

0:00:15.280 --> 0:00:17.640
<v Speaker 1>some huge scandals this year. I can't wait to get

0:00:17.680 --> 0:00:19.800
<v Speaker 1>into them before we do, though, I hope that everyone

0:00:19.920 --> 0:00:22.880
<v Speaker 1>had an amazing Christmas with their family and friends. It

0:00:22.920 --> 0:00:25.680
<v Speaker 1>is depressing that Christmas is over. I have been speaking

0:00:25.720 --> 0:00:28.280
<v Speaker 1>now for weeks about how it's just gone so quickly.

0:00:28.320 --> 0:00:30.280
<v Speaker 1>This whole year has gone quickly. I can't believe there's

0:00:30.280 --> 0:00:32.640
<v Speaker 1>only a few more days left of twenty twenty three. Oh,

0:00:32.680 --> 0:00:35.360
<v Speaker 1>it is crazy. Particularly when I was reflecting what's actually

0:00:35.360 --> 0:00:38.440
<v Speaker 1>happened in the influencer space this year, it was actually

0:00:38.479 --> 0:00:41.440
<v Speaker 1>hard to pick five top scandals, and a lot of them.

0:00:41.479 --> 0:00:43.000
<v Speaker 1>I was like, oh, that only happened a couple of

0:00:43.080 --> 0:00:45.640
<v Speaker 1>months ago, but it was back in January or February.

0:00:45.760 --> 0:00:48.320
<v Speaker 1>Let's start the countdown. Now, coming in at number five

0:00:48.479 --> 0:00:52.440
<v Speaker 1>is the Karna Irby photoshopping debacle. So this happened back

0:00:52.479 --> 0:00:55.320
<v Speaker 1>in May when an American sloper sluthor count run by

0:00:55.400 --> 0:00:59.319
<v Speaker 1>John Dawesy accused the body positivity influencer of editing her

0:00:59.320 --> 0:01:03.440
<v Speaker 1>body on Instagram. Now, she was labeled a hypocrite because

0:01:03.480 --> 0:01:07.480
<v Speaker 1>her whole social media platform is based on embracing your body,

0:01:07.520 --> 0:01:10.240
<v Speaker 1>and she even urges her followers not to edit their

0:01:10.240 --> 0:01:14.720
<v Speaker 1>own photos. This story was massive, particularly because Instagram watchdog

0:01:14.720 --> 0:01:18.800
<v Speaker 1>account Influence Updates got dragged into the drama. So, like usual,

0:01:18.880 --> 0:01:21.040
<v Speaker 1>she picked up on the story and reshared the real

0:01:21.120 --> 0:01:24.680
<v Speaker 1>to her account. Absolute chaos followed. So it turned out

0:01:24.680 --> 0:01:29.040
<v Speaker 1>that Karna allegedly sent both John and Influencer updates AU

0:01:29.200 --> 0:01:32.319
<v Speaker 1>a cease and desist letter demanding they remove the content

0:01:32.440 --> 0:01:36.000
<v Speaker 1>before blocking them. The best bit is that Karina wrote

0:01:36.160 --> 0:01:39.680
<v Speaker 1>crease and desist rather than cease and desist. Look, I

0:01:39.680 --> 0:01:43.160
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't quite say the Influencer Updates was dragged into this drama.

0:01:43.200 --> 0:01:45.480
<v Speaker 1>She was quite happy to report on it. But it's

0:01:45.560 --> 0:01:48.200
<v Speaker 1>quite funny the turn of events suddenly when these pages

0:01:48.200 --> 0:01:51.040
<v Speaker 1>start reporting that they have been sent legal letters and

0:01:51.080 --> 0:01:53.120
<v Speaker 1>it becomes part of the story. Well, I don't think

0:01:53.160 --> 0:01:56.080
<v Speaker 1>she was expecting the backlash that occurred because she simply

0:01:56.120 --> 0:01:58.680
<v Speaker 1>just reshared the reel. It wasn't like she was further

0:01:58.760 --> 0:02:01.800
<v Speaker 1>commenting on it. She was just aring it to her audience. Now.

0:02:01.880 --> 0:02:04.440
<v Speaker 1>Rather than backing down, John used the moment to call

0:02:04.520 --> 0:02:08.320
<v Speaker 1>Karina out for more alleged photoshopping. It was then time

0:02:08.400 --> 0:02:11.200
<v Speaker 1>for Karina to release a statement, so she admitted to

0:02:11.360 --> 0:02:13.680
<v Speaker 1>editing her photos in the past and said that she

0:02:13.800 --> 0:02:17.600
<v Speaker 1>suffers from mild body dysmorphia. Things didn't end there, so

0:02:17.840 --> 0:02:20.880
<v Speaker 1>Karna then enlisted the help of a lawyer who sent

0:02:20.960 --> 0:02:24.440
<v Speaker 1>John the most bizarre legal letter I've ever read. It

0:02:24.600 --> 0:02:29.600
<v Speaker 1>sounded completely unprofessional and very highly emotive. For instance, one

0:02:29.639 --> 0:02:31.839
<v Speaker 1>of the lines read, it is one thing to call

0:02:31.840 --> 0:02:35.000
<v Speaker 1>my client out for photoshopping photos and being hypocritical. It

0:02:35.080 --> 0:02:37.880
<v Speaker 1>is another to obsess over my client, pick a public

0:02:37.919 --> 0:02:40.400
<v Speaker 1>fight with her, and encourage others to bully and incite

0:02:40.440 --> 0:02:44.320
<v Speaker 1>hate towards her. The letter then oddly also confirmed the

0:02:44.360 --> 0:02:47.640
<v Speaker 1>original claims that Dawsy made, stating to be frank my

0:02:47.720 --> 0:02:51.360
<v Speaker 1>client gently photoshopping photos, not immediately owning up to it,

0:02:51.440 --> 0:02:54.040
<v Speaker 1>and responding in a way that suggests the conduct you

0:02:54.160 --> 0:02:57.720
<v Speaker 1>complained about was old. Behavior does not deserve the vitual

0:02:57.760 --> 0:03:02.200
<v Speaker 1>your repeated videos and aggressive hate campanes continue to incite.

0:03:02.360 --> 0:03:04.080
<v Speaker 1>Well done on reading that out, because it was a

0:03:04.200 --> 0:03:06.560
<v Speaker 1>very long run on sense. It was a bit of

0:03:06.600 --> 0:03:10.240
<v Speaker 1>a struggle. Yeah. Now, John ended up enlisting the free

0:03:10.280 --> 0:03:14.880
<v Speaker 1>service of an American lawyer who absolutely schooled Karna's Gold

0:03:14.960 --> 0:03:18.000
<v Speaker 1>Coast lawyer in Australian defamation law. Now he referred to

0:03:18.040 --> 0:03:21.040
<v Speaker 1>the original legal letter as a prank cease and assistance

0:03:21.080 --> 0:03:24.080
<v Speaker 1>that it obviously must have been sent in jest. He

0:03:24.280 --> 0:03:27.760
<v Speaker 1>also labeled Karina's claims as farcical and said the lawyer

0:03:27.800 --> 0:03:31.240
<v Speaker 1>had failed to include any legal authority to demonstrate how

0:03:31.360 --> 0:03:35.360
<v Speaker 1>Karina was entitled to relief in the Federal Court of Australia. Now,

0:03:35.400 --> 0:03:37.840
<v Speaker 1>this line was my favorite bit, he wrote. Rest assured

0:03:37.880 --> 0:03:39.920
<v Speaker 1>I've at least convinced him that it was certainly not

0:03:40.040 --> 0:03:44.040
<v Speaker 1>some impulsive, ham fisted attempt to bully an individual solely

0:03:44.080 --> 0:03:46.240
<v Speaker 1>because of his well known efforts to shed lights on

0:03:46.280 --> 0:03:49.600
<v Speaker 1>the Charlatans ramp it throughout the fitness industry. After all,

0:03:49.640 --> 0:03:52.040
<v Speaker 1>as lawyers, you and I both know that would be

0:03:52.080 --> 0:03:56.280
<v Speaker 1>flagrantly unconstitutional. I love that people are finally hitting back

0:03:56.320 --> 0:03:58.880
<v Speaker 1>at these bullshit legal letters that are being sent out

0:03:58.880 --> 0:04:01.960
<v Speaker 1>by influencers, because quite frankly, most of the time they

0:04:01.960 --> 0:04:04.400
<v Speaker 1>are not worth the paper that they are written. On. Yeah,

0:04:04.400 --> 0:04:07.400
<v Speaker 1>but I'm actually surprised though that these lawyers will even

0:04:07.480 --> 0:04:10.360
<v Speaker 1>send them out, because it's quite embarrassing for this legal

0:04:10.400 --> 0:04:12.360
<v Speaker 1>firm to put their name to it. No, it's all

0:04:12.400 --> 0:04:15.240
<v Speaker 1>about threatening people most of the time. There's no legal

0:04:15.280 --> 0:04:17.400
<v Speaker 1>substance to these letters that are being sent out, and

0:04:17.440 --> 0:04:20.039
<v Speaker 1>it's just in a way to try and rinse people

0:04:20.080 --> 0:04:22.159
<v Speaker 1>of any money. Yeah, but this one was written in

0:04:22.200 --> 0:04:25.800
<v Speaker 1>such an unprofessional way. It wasn't evenly a motive, wasn't it. Now.

0:04:25.839 --> 0:04:29.400
<v Speaker 1>As for Influencer updates AU, she ended up removing the

0:04:29.480 --> 0:04:31.880
<v Speaker 1>real and announce she was taking a break from public

0:04:31.920 --> 0:04:34.839
<v Speaker 1>posting and would only share updates to her paying close

0:04:34.880 --> 0:04:37.599
<v Speaker 1>friends list. This was clearly the straw that broke the

0:04:37.600 --> 0:04:40.719
<v Speaker 1>camel's back, because Amber, the owner of Influencer updates AU,

0:04:40.800 --> 0:04:42.960
<v Speaker 1>then went on to say that this was the sign

0:04:43.000 --> 0:04:44.960
<v Speaker 1>that she needed to make the decision to change the

0:04:44.960 --> 0:04:48.039
<v Speaker 1>page over to a subscriber sort of format, and she

0:04:48.080 --> 0:04:50.320
<v Speaker 1>felt like a weight had been lifted off her shoulders.

0:04:50.640 --> 0:04:53.200
<v Speaker 1>Since then, she has been posting constant updates to her

0:04:53.200 --> 0:04:56.360
<v Speaker 1>close friends list, but she has returned to publicly posting

0:04:56.440 --> 0:04:59.040
<v Speaker 1>feed posts now, Sophie, I feel like this one has

0:04:59.080 --> 0:05:01.800
<v Speaker 1>a special place in your heart. Coming in at number

0:05:01.800 --> 0:05:05.719
<v Speaker 1>four is Lily Brown and her smelly pajamas. So back

0:05:05.760 --> 0:05:09.520
<v Speaker 1>in August, Lily gave influences a masterclass on how not

0:05:09.680 --> 0:05:13.000
<v Speaker 1>to respond to criticism. So it all started when her

0:05:13.040 --> 0:05:17.039
<v Speaker 1>sleepwear line She'll, issued an apology to customers after receiving

0:05:17.080 --> 0:05:20.760
<v Speaker 1>complaints that their latest pajama range had an unusual odor.

0:05:21.160 --> 0:05:24.159
<v Speaker 1>So in an email to affected customers, the brand stated

0:05:24.200 --> 0:05:27.680
<v Speaker 1>that the unfamiliar scent was caused by an eco die

0:05:27.760 --> 0:05:31.320
<v Speaker 1>used in manufacturing. And if you're wondering, well, what did

0:05:31.320 --> 0:05:34.200
<v Speaker 1>those pajamas smell like? One of our listeners wrote in

0:05:34.360 --> 0:05:37.640
<v Speaker 1>alleging the chill was stinky, Let me tell you that

0:05:37.760 --> 0:05:40.839
<v Speaker 1>it smelt like boiled egg after you peel it. Best

0:05:40.839 --> 0:05:43.680
<v Speaker 1>way to describe it geez. I could not imagine wanting

0:05:43.720 --> 0:05:46.560
<v Speaker 1>to sleep in that sort of scent. The funniest thing

0:05:46.800 --> 0:05:49.159
<v Speaker 1>was that in this email that they sent out to

0:05:49.240 --> 0:05:52.800
<v Speaker 1>customers alerting them of what had happened, they were trying

0:05:52.800 --> 0:05:54.320
<v Speaker 1>to come up with a remedy of how to get

0:05:54.400 --> 0:05:55.760
<v Speaker 1>rid of it, and they said, oh, you've got to

0:05:55.880 --> 0:05:58.920
<v Speaker 1>wash it a number of times. In this particular solution,

0:05:59.160 --> 0:06:02.279
<v Speaker 1>it was in white vas and buikarb soda and to me,

0:06:02.680 --> 0:06:05.039
<v Speaker 1>I always see this as a remedy to make things

0:06:05.080 --> 0:06:08.400
<v Speaker 1>smell better, but whenever I've used it, it actually makes things

0:06:08.400 --> 0:06:11.359
<v Speaker 1>smell worse. Yeah. A few days later, Lily then jumped

0:06:11.400 --> 0:06:15.120
<v Speaker 1>in her stories to finally address the matter personally and said,

0:06:15.440 --> 0:06:17.600
<v Speaker 1>I think we're close to cracking how to get rid

0:06:17.680 --> 0:06:19.520
<v Speaker 1>of this smell. So this smell must have been so

0:06:19.600 --> 0:06:23.520
<v Speaker 1>pungent that even this proposed solution did not work. It

0:06:23.560 --> 0:06:26.440
<v Speaker 1>reminds me of that episode of Seinfeld when that guy's

0:06:26.520 --> 0:06:30.120
<v Speaker 1>bo attaches itself to the car. Now, two options were

0:06:30.120 --> 0:06:32.840
<v Speaker 1>then provided to customers. Those who wanted to keep their

0:06:32.839 --> 0:06:35.920
<v Speaker 1>smelly pajamas were told they could get fifty percent store credit,

0:06:36.200 --> 0:06:38.600
<v Speaker 1>while those who wanted to return their pjs could get

0:06:38.600 --> 0:06:41.640
<v Speaker 1>one hundred percent store credit. However, the option of a

0:06:41.680 --> 0:06:45.120
<v Speaker 1>full refund was omitted. Now we ended up getting dragged

0:06:45.200 --> 0:06:48.920
<v Speaker 1>into the drama after we merely reported on the facts

0:06:48.960 --> 0:06:51.839
<v Speaker 1>of this story in an Instagram reel. So after that,

0:06:51.960 --> 0:06:55.200
<v Speaker 1>Lily DM, thus demanding that we take the video down.

0:06:55.680 --> 0:06:59.200
<v Speaker 1>When we declined, she publicly commented on the video, calling

0:06:59.200 --> 0:07:02.359
<v Speaker 1>it fake news and claimed we slanted her name and

0:07:02.400 --> 0:07:06.080
<v Speaker 1>her business. She also said not issuing refunds would be

0:07:06.120 --> 0:07:09.279
<v Speaker 1>against the law. There was a lot of back and forth,

0:07:09.320 --> 0:07:12.760
<v Speaker 1>but essentially Lily ended up confirming the pajamas were in

0:07:12.800 --> 0:07:15.640
<v Speaker 1>fact faulty. She also said that the option of a

0:07:15.720 --> 0:07:19.440
<v Speaker 1>refund was always available to customers, and it was stated

0:07:19.520 --> 0:07:22.120
<v Speaker 1>on the website. But I personally found this to be

0:07:22.200 --> 0:07:26.560
<v Speaker 1>quite deceptive because when the original letter came out alerting

0:07:26.600 --> 0:07:30.240
<v Speaker 1>customers to the issue, they only offered store credit. They

0:07:30.280 --> 0:07:34.000
<v Speaker 1>didn't say that any exchanges were possible, so they assumed

0:07:34.040 --> 0:07:36.440
<v Speaker 1>that the consumer knew that legally they had the right

0:07:36.520 --> 0:07:38.600
<v Speaker 1>to an exchange. That's what Lily said, So she said,

0:07:38.640 --> 0:07:41.160
<v Speaker 1>all consumers know they are entitled to a full refund,

0:07:41.280 --> 0:07:45.040
<v Speaker 1>so there was no point including it in the original email. Now, interestingly,

0:07:45.160 --> 0:07:48.280
<v Speaker 1>Chill's website returns page only offers store credit to not

0:07:48.320 --> 0:07:51.800
<v Speaker 1>full refunds, like Lily had stated. Now we ended up

0:07:51.840 --> 0:07:54.280
<v Speaker 1>receiving a legal letter and I do use that term

0:07:54.320 --> 0:07:57.800
<v Speaker 1>loosely from Lily's manager. I didn't think that managers had

0:07:57.880 --> 0:08:01.200
<v Speaker 1>law degrees. No, I mean this one did. So she

0:08:01.400 --> 0:08:04.080
<v Speaker 1>accused us of defamation and slander and said if we

0:08:04.080 --> 0:08:07.320
<v Speaker 1>didn't agree to their terms, they would seek legal action.

0:08:07.680 --> 0:08:10.040
<v Speaker 1>So Essentially what they wanted was they wanted us to

0:08:10.040 --> 0:08:11.880
<v Speaker 1>take the reel down and to not comment on the

0:08:11.960 --> 0:08:14.800
<v Speaker 1>matter any further. Now, what we ended up doing was

0:08:14.840 --> 0:08:18.040
<v Speaker 1>a full episode on the segment, and because it wasn't

0:08:18.080 --> 0:08:20.240
<v Speaker 1>worth the paper, the legal letter was written on. We

0:08:20.280 --> 0:08:22.760
<v Speaker 1>didn't mention this in the original segment, but it was

0:08:22.880 --> 0:08:26.280
<v Speaker 1>quite disappointing because around that time we got a lot

0:08:26.320 --> 0:08:29.120
<v Speaker 1>of abuse from one particular account who was linked to

0:08:29.120 --> 0:08:32.440
<v Speaker 1>a number of Lily Brown's friends, pinpointing our age and

0:08:32.440 --> 0:08:36.280
<v Speaker 1>making derogatory comments towards us. And when you're just reporting

0:08:36.400 --> 0:08:38.920
<v Speaker 1>news at the end of the day and facts that

0:08:38.960 --> 0:08:41.000
<v Speaker 1>have been put out from a statement, I didn't quite

0:08:41.080 --> 0:08:44.200
<v Speaker 1>understand the complete hostility, and that account seemed to know

0:08:44.280 --> 0:08:46.120
<v Speaker 1>a lot about what was going on behind the scenes,

0:08:46.559 --> 0:08:48.640
<v Speaker 1>was really sticking up full Lily. So it was quite

0:08:48.920 --> 0:08:52.840
<v Speaker 1>interesting anyway. Moving on at number three, we have Ruby

0:08:52.960 --> 0:08:56.360
<v Speaker 1>Tuesday Matthews, who back in May was accused of sharing

0:08:56.400 --> 0:08:58.880
<v Speaker 1>an exploitative photo of her four year old son to

0:08:58.920 --> 0:09:02.240
<v Speaker 1>sell a hat for her and Roby. Now. Ruby got

0:09:02.240 --> 0:09:04.880
<v Speaker 1>her son Mars, to model in the marketing campaign at

0:09:04.880 --> 0:09:07.640
<v Speaker 1>a banana farm. Now in the photo, the four year

0:09:07.640 --> 0:09:11.280
<v Speaker 1>old was photographed shirtless in low slung pants standing next

0:09:11.320 --> 0:09:14.400
<v Speaker 1>to a box of bananas that said lady fingers. Now.

0:09:14.520 --> 0:09:18.120
<v Speaker 1>The backlash was swift, with people labeling the photo exploitative

0:09:18.160 --> 0:09:22.040
<v Speaker 1>and disgusting. Ruby was also accused of being ignorant to

0:09:22.080 --> 0:09:25.600
<v Speaker 1>the dangers of online predators. Now. Ruby addressed the concerns

0:09:25.600 --> 0:09:28.640
<v Speaker 1>on her Instagram story, claiming she had taken the photos

0:09:28.679 --> 0:09:31.000
<v Speaker 1>of her son on her iPhone and it wasn't a

0:09:31.040 --> 0:09:34.920
<v Speaker 1>staged photo shoot. This is despite Ruby tagging a professional

0:09:34.960 --> 0:09:38.760
<v Speaker 1>photographer in the photos and reels. For me, it doesn't

0:09:38.800 --> 0:09:41.000
<v Speaker 1>really change things. If she took the photo or the

0:09:41.000 --> 0:09:43.160
<v Speaker 1>photographer took the photo, there was still the choice to

0:09:43.240 --> 0:09:45.720
<v Speaker 1>publish these photos. I think she was trying to act

0:09:45.760 --> 0:09:47.400
<v Speaker 1>like it was just the way the kid happened to

0:09:47.400 --> 0:09:50.160
<v Speaker 1>be standing. It wasn't some sort of photo shoot where

0:09:50.200 --> 0:09:53.160
<v Speaker 1>he was instructed to stand in a certain way. Now.

0:09:53.240 --> 0:09:56.160
<v Speaker 1>Ruby then explained that they had visited her friend's banana

0:09:56.200 --> 0:09:58.640
<v Speaker 1>farm and that's just how Mars was wearing his outfit

0:09:58.720 --> 0:10:02.720
<v Speaker 1>that day. She so defended the images, saying I'd also

0:10:02.880 --> 0:10:05.520
<v Speaker 1>like to say, if you were sexualizing that image of him,

0:10:05.880 --> 0:10:08.000
<v Speaker 1>I think you actually need to have a look at

0:10:08.000 --> 0:10:11.000
<v Speaker 1>the bigger picture of what your issue is, and maybe

0:10:11.000 --> 0:10:13.880
<v Speaker 1>you have become so overly sensitive that the line is

0:10:13.960 --> 0:10:16.360
<v Speaker 1>blurred of what is wrong and what is right, and

0:10:16.400 --> 0:10:18.640
<v Speaker 1>there is nothing wrong with that image. Now, that was

0:10:18.679 --> 0:10:21.200
<v Speaker 1>really a sad turn of events because Ruby revealed that

0:10:21.240 --> 0:10:23.960
<v Speaker 1>she had been a victim of sexual assault at fourteen,

0:10:24.240 --> 0:10:27.200
<v Speaker 1>which has made her super aware and vigilant around the

0:10:27.240 --> 0:10:29.880
<v Speaker 1>content that she shares of her children. And she went

0:10:29.920 --> 0:10:32.160
<v Speaker 1>on to say that she could claim the backlash had

0:10:32.160 --> 0:10:34.880
<v Speaker 1>triggered her, but she's a little bigger than that. She

0:10:35.000 --> 0:10:37.680
<v Speaker 1>finished up by saying how soft she thinks society is

0:10:37.760 --> 0:10:40.360
<v Speaker 1>these days, and that the lines have been so blurred

0:10:40.400 --> 0:10:44.040
<v Speaker 1>that anything can be taken the wrong way. Now. Adam Whittington,

0:10:44.240 --> 0:10:46.600
<v Speaker 1>the CEO of a not for profit charity that fights

0:10:46.600 --> 0:10:50.240
<v Speaker 1>to end child trafficking and exploitation of children, weighed into

0:10:50.280 --> 0:10:54.000
<v Speaker 1>the matter, labeling the photos as total exploitation of the child.

0:10:54.280 --> 0:10:57.480
<v Speaker 1>He also said it happens every single time a so

0:10:57.600 --> 0:11:02.080
<v Speaker 1>called influencer gets caught up exploiting their own kids. They always, always,

0:11:02.200 --> 0:11:04.800
<v Speaker 1>always say, in response to the backlash, if you see

0:11:04.840 --> 0:11:08.040
<v Speaker 1>my child's image as sexual, you have the problem. You

0:11:08.120 --> 0:11:10.560
<v Speaker 1>need to look at your stick problems. They then send

0:11:10.600 --> 0:11:13.000
<v Speaker 1>trolls to make comments in support of their actions, or

0:11:13.040 --> 0:11:16.040
<v Speaker 1>call those genuinely trying to help them by educating them

0:11:16.160 --> 0:11:19.480
<v Speaker 1>trolls and haters. Now, coming in at third place, we

0:11:19.600 --> 0:11:23.360
<v Speaker 1>have the South Australian Tourism Commission's Influencer only event with

0:11:23.520 --> 0:11:27.680
<v Speaker 1>Sam Smith. Now, South Australians were left less than impressed

0:11:27.679 --> 0:11:30.320
<v Speaker 1>when they were not only excluded from being able to

0:11:30.360 --> 0:11:34.120
<v Speaker 1>attend the concert, but discovered their taxpayer funds we used

0:11:34.120 --> 0:11:38.000
<v Speaker 1>to pay for the exclusive event. Now as South Australians ourselves,

0:11:38.320 --> 0:11:40.720
<v Speaker 1>the state was in uproar. I was pissed off about this.

0:11:41.400 --> 0:11:44.520
<v Speaker 1>It was just such a bad look. So the invite

0:11:44.559 --> 0:11:47.560
<v Speaker 1>only event was Sam's only performance in Australia and the

0:11:47.600 --> 0:11:51.280
<v Speaker 1>first in South Australia since twenty fifteen. So in total,

0:11:51.360 --> 0:11:54.679
<v Speaker 1>three hundred people were invited and the Tourism Minister, Zoe

0:11:54.840 --> 0:11:58.960
<v Speaker 1>Bettison claimed one hundred and fifteen were competition winners, while

0:11:59.040 --> 0:12:02.559
<v Speaker 1>ninety were influences and media personalities and twenty one were

0:12:02.679 --> 0:12:06.760
<v Speaker 1>SATC staff Lucky SATC stuff getting a front row ticket

0:12:06.800 --> 0:12:09.800
<v Speaker 1>to that. Now, the event was supposed to attract national

0:12:09.800 --> 0:12:13.720
<v Speaker 1>and international exposure for the state through Sam's social channels

0:12:13.960 --> 0:12:18.040
<v Speaker 1>as well as the influencers. The problem was the Contra

0:12:18.160 --> 0:12:22.359
<v Speaker 1>deal offered by the government didn't attract big name influencers,

0:12:22.559 --> 0:12:26.680
<v Speaker 1>and furthermore, as the influencers were obligated to post, the

0:12:26.800 --> 0:12:29.880
<v Speaker 1>coverage was very minimal, with most of it disappearing after

0:12:29.920 --> 0:12:33.199
<v Speaker 1>twenty four hours. They were clearly banking on Sam Smith

0:12:33.280 --> 0:12:36.280
<v Speaker 1>sharing this to their account because they do have over

0:12:36.320 --> 0:12:40.559
<v Speaker 1>fourteen million followers. The only catch was the content that

0:12:40.600 --> 0:12:44.960
<v Speaker 1>they did share was of them outside McDonald's on South

0:12:45.160 --> 0:12:48.120
<v Speaker 1>Road and it was a glamorous spot. No because the

0:12:48.120 --> 0:12:52.720
<v Speaker 1>Tourism Commission they'd taken them to all of these fancy restaurants,

0:12:53.080 --> 0:12:56.440
<v Speaker 1>winder Stars, grease, wined and dined them and then that

0:12:56.640 --> 0:12:59.920
<v Speaker 1>was the photo that they chose to share them outside

0:13:00.160 --> 0:13:04.120
<v Speaker 1>this huge golden Arch sign. They literally could have been anywhere.

0:13:04.200 --> 0:13:07.560
<v Speaker 1>Now in March, the ABC obtained documents which revealed the

0:13:07.640 --> 0:13:11.000
<v Speaker 1>details of the deal the SATC struck with influencers to

0:13:11.000 --> 0:13:14.599
<v Speaker 1>get them to attend the event. So for some interstate influences,

0:13:14.960 --> 0:13:19.320
<v Speaker 1>the Contra deal included free flights, transfers, accommodation and meals,

0:13:19.520 --> 0:13:23.920
<v Speaker 1>with the commercial costs predicted at two thousand dollars per influencer. Now,

0:13:23.920 --> 0:13:26.520
<v Speaker 1>the SATC confirmed that they shared the cost for the

0:13:26.559 --> 0:13:30.040
<v Speaker 1>event with Frontier Touring, who was putting on Sam Smith's concert,

0:13:30.280 --> 0:13:33.400
<v Speaker 1>and in January, Tourism Minister Zoe Betterson said the Sam

0:13:33.440 --> 0:13:36.720
<v Speaker 1>Smith concert cost less than half a million dollars and

0:13:36.800 --> 0:13:40.120
<v Speaker 1>resulted in thirty two million dollars worth of advertising for

0:13:40.160 --> 0:13:42.840
<v Speaker 1>the state. This was despite the fact that a review

0:13:42.960 --> 0:13:46.000
<v Speaker 1>found that they had absolutely no way to measure the

0:13:46.080 --> 0:13:49.480
<v Speaker 1>influencer's return on investments. Yes, so the results of a

0:13:49.559 --> 0:13:52.560
<v Speaker 1>review into the handling of the event were revealed in May,

0:13:52.880 --> 0:13:55.600
<v Speaker 1>and it was found that the SATC needed a greater

0:13:55.720 --> 0:13:59.400
<v Speaker 1>level of transparency when choosing which influencers to engage with.

0:13:59.840 --> 0:14:04.599
<v Speaker 1>Sa also agreed to overhaul its policies about engaging with influences.

0:14:04.640 --> 0:14:06.920
<v Speaker 1>We also have to mention the fact that there was

0:14:07.000 --> 0:14:10.959
<v Speaker 1>a rogue pisser, so someone apparently pissed in the mosh pit.

0:14:11.320 --> 0:14:13.960
<v Speaker 1>This was being reported at the time. We still don't

0:14:14.000 --> 0:14:16.839
<v Speaker 1>know who that influencer is. Yeah, and also this was

0:14:16.880 --> 0:14:21.000
<v Speaker 1>the first event that Sophie Kaisha attended with her new girlfriend,

0:14:21.320 --> 0:14:25.160
<v Speaker 1>Sophie vander Hoovel, so Sophie actually shared vision of her

0:14:25.240 --> 0:14:28.680
<v Speaker 1>cuddling into the other Sophie at the Sam Smith concert

0:14:28.880 --> 0:14:32.040
<v Speaker 1>recently for Sophie's birthday. God, it must be so confusing

0:14:32.040 --> 0:14:34.480
<v Speaker 1>with them both being called Sophie. I'm called Sophie, and

0:14:34.760 --> 0:14:38.520
<v Speaker 1>when we're reporting on issues with Sophie Guidlin and Sophie Kasha,

0:14:38.560 --> 0:14:40.240
<v Speaker 1>it gets confusing. The amount of sophie is that are

0:14:40.240 --> 0:14:44.720
<v Speaker 1>flying around. Well, I think Sophie Kaysha calls her VD instead.

0:14:46.440 --> 0:14:48.360
<v Speaker 1>Now I feel like we need a drum roll because

0:14:48.680 --> 0:14:52.040
<v Speaker 1>coming in in top spot for Outspoken's Biggest Influencer scandal

0:14:52.080 --> 0:14:55.280
<v Speaker 1>of twenty twenty three is Emma Clair. So. In April,

0:14:55.440 --> 0:14:58.600
<v Speaker 1>she shocked the internet when she admitted to killing two

0:14:58.800 --> 0:15:01.640
<v Speaker 1>cats as a child. I can't believe this was in April.

0:15:01.680 --> 0:15:04.400
<v Speaker 1>This just feels like the other day now. The twenty

0:15:04.440 --> 0:15:07.400
<v Speaker 1>eight year old made the disgusting revelation on her newly

0:15:07.480 --> 0:15:11.760
<v Speaker 1>revamped podcast called Simply Chaotic, and the timing could not

0:15:11.800 --> 0:15:14.440
<v Speaker 1>have been worse for Emma, who had just given birth

0:15:14.480 --> 0:15:17.840
<v Speaker 1>to her first child a week earlier. Now. As a refresher,

0:15:17.920 --> 0:15:20.680
<v Speaker 1>Emma and her co host Kirsty had been sharing personal

0:15:20.720 --> 0:15:23.760
<v Speaker 1>secrets on the podcast. When Emma said, I've got one.

0:15:23.960 --> 0:15:26.000
<v Speaker 1>I killed my cat, but I promise I'm really good

0:15:26.040 --> 0:15:28.120
<v Speaker 1>with my animals. She then went on to say, I

0:15:28.160 --> 0:15:30.360
<v Speaker 1>didn't mean to I was young, I was a child.

0:15:30.600 --> 0:15:33.000
<v Speaker 1>I was swinging my cat around like I was thinking

0:15:33.000 --> 0:15:35.200
<v Speaker 1>it was just a stuff toy, and I accidentally let

0:15:35.240 --> 0:15:38.280
<v Speaker 1>go of it. That is really difficult to listen to again.

0:15:38.400 --> 0:15:41.840
<v Speaker 1>It is deeply disturbing. The incident that took place, and

0:15:41.880 --> 0:15:44.040
<v Speaker 1>the fact that she thinks that this is some sort

0:15:44.080 --> 0:15:47.200
<v Speaker 1>of fun secret to share on a podcast. Let's get

0:15:47.280 --> 0:15:51.000
<v Speaker 1>to know me better. Oh, I horrifically murdered a pet cat. Oh,

0:15:51.040 --> 0:15:54.200
<v Speaker 1>it is so disgusting. Emma did later confirm that the

0:15:54.200 --> 0:15:57.480
<v Speaker 1>cat died from fright rather than an injury, and she

0:15:57.600 --> 0:15:59.960
<v Speaker 1>also said her sister didn't speak to her for months

0:16:00.200 --> 0:16:03.200
<v Speaker 1>following the incident and that her mum was fucking fuming.

0:16:03.280 --> 0:16:05.160
<v Speaker 1>She would then went on to say, I'm giggling about

0:16:05.200 --> 0:16:07.440
<v Speaker 1>it now, but this happened years and years ago, and

0:16:07.560 --> 0:16:10.880
<v Speaker 1>like I was a fucking little child. Emma then finished

0:16:10.960 --> 0:16:14.520
<v Speaker 1>up by offhandly revealing that she also killed her best

0:16:14.520 --> 0:16:18.080
<v Speaker 1>friend's cat. For her to then reveal that this wasn't

0:16:18.120 --> 0:16:21.360
<v Speaker 1>an isolated incident and this has actually happened a second

0:16:21.400 --> 0:16:26.240
<v Speaker 1>time with another friend's cat, was just so deeply troubling. Yeah,

0:16:26.240 --> 0:16:28.320
<v Speaker 1>it really was. I just still can't believe that she

0:16:28.480 --> 0:16:31.400
<v Speaker 1>even recorded this, edited it, and then put it out

0:16:31.400 --> 0:16:33.120
<v Speaker 1>for the world to listener, and also used it as

0:16:33.120 --> 0:16:36.000
<v Speaker 1>a teaser to promote the episode. That's so true. This

0:16:36.160 --> 0:16:38.880
<v Speaker 1>wasn't live. This was said with a lot of hindsight,

0:16:39.040 --> 0:16:41.120
<v Speaker 1>and I just can't still get over it now. The

0:16:41.160 --> 0:16:44.960
<v Speaker 1>backlash was swift, causing Emma to share a statement. However,

0:16:45.120 --> 0:16:48.440
<v Speaker 1>rather than apologizing, she told her followers to chill and

0:16:48.480 --> 0:16:51.040
<v Speaker 1>said the story is a bit of light humor. She

0:16:51.240 --> 0:16:54.200
<v Speaker 1>also advised her audience to not listen to her podcast

0:16:54.280 --> 0:16:57.280
<v Speaker 1>if they couldn't handle the humor. She finished the statement

0:16:57.320 --> 0:17:00.400
<v Speaker 1>by writing again, sorry, not sorry for an hour accident

0:17:00.400 --> 0:17:03.680
<v Speaker 1>that happened over twenty years ago, and sorry not sorry

0:17:03.680 --> 0:17:06.200
<v Speaker 1>for having a giggle about it, because I think, still

0:17:06.320 --> 0:17:09.360
<v Speaker 1>twenty years on, I'm in shock by it now. Following

0:17:09.400 --> 0:17:13.160
<v Speaker 1>Emma's statement, multiple brands cut ties with her, including Lust

0:17:13.240 --> 0:17:17.280
<v Speaker 1>Minerals and MC beauty. A day later, Emmett had suddenly

0:17:17.359 --> 0:17:20.879
<v Speaker 1>changed her tune, apologizing for sharing the story and stating

0:17:20.920 --> 0:17:23.119
<v Speaker 1>that she was well aware that the story was not

0:17:23.280 --> 0:17:26.880
<v Speaker 1>light humor and in fact very serious. She also deleted

0:17:26.880 --> 0:17:29.879
<v Speaker 1>the story from her podcast, however, kept up the promotional

0:17:29.920 --> 0:17:33.080
<v Speaker 1>material that featured the story. She did end up leaving

0:17:33.119 --> 0:17:36.440
<v Speaker 1>social media shortly after the incident due to the apparent

0:17:36.480 --> 0:17:39.720
<v Speaker 1>bullying and death threats that she received. Before leaving the platform,

0:17:39.760 --> 0:17:42.000
<v Speaker 1>she said, the last nine weeks have been the toughest

0:17:42.040 --> 0:17:44.800
<v Speaker 1>of my life and my mental health has been destroyed.

0:17:45.080 --> 0:17:48.640
<v Speaker 1>Now she has stayed offline since then, I am wondering

0:17:48.680 --> 0:17:51.960
<v Speaker 1>if we will see her return this year. I am

0:17:52.200 --> 0:17:55.080
<v Speaker 1>really surprised Kate that Sarah's Day has not made the

0:17:55.080 --> 0:17:57.600
<v Speaker 1>top five scandals for this year. Well, if we were

0:17:57.600 --> 0:17:59.760
<v Speaker 1>doing a top ten, I was thinking of putting her

0:18:00.359 --> 0:18:03.359
<v Speaker 1>Sunny scandal in there, But I have noticed that she

0:18:03.480 --> 0:18:06.800
<v Speaker 1>really has taken a step back from really big scandals.

0:18:06.960 --> 0:18:09.200
<v Speaker 1>She's been wearing up to go though, since she has

0:18:09.280 --> 0:18:11.719
<v Speaker 1>shut down Sunny, so I feel like she may feature

0:18:11.800 --> 0:18:14.639
<v Speaker 1>next year. Yeah. I am really excited to see what

0:18:14.840 --> 0:18:17.800
<v Speaker 1>unfolds next year. Now, thank you so much for listening

0:18:17.800 --> 0:18:20.080
<v Speaker 1>to today's episode. If you have enjoyed it, could you

0:18:20.119 --> 0:18:22.760
<v Speaker 1>please make sure you do share across your stories. Yes,

0:18:22.800 --> 0:18:25.480
<v Speaker 1>and we do hope you have a wonderful New Year's

0:18:25.720 --> 0:18:29.199
<v Speaker 1>For Outspoken Plus subscribers, we will be counting down the

0:18:29.240 --> 0:18:32.760
<v Speaker 1>top five relationship dramas of twenty twenty three, so if

0:18:32.760 --> 0:18:35.000
<v Speaker 1>you are a subscriber and are looking for more content

0:18:35.040 --> 0:18:37.080
<v Speaker 1>to get you through the holiday period, it is a

0:18:37.119 --> 0:18:39.920
<v Speaker 1>great time to sign up now. This podcast was recorded

0:18:39.920 --> 0:18:41.960
<v Speaker 1>on the traditional land of the Ghana people of the

0:18:41.960 --> 0:18:45.200
<v Speaker 1>Adelaide Planes. We pay respect to elders past and present,