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: Sophie Torba and coming up on today's show, Josh Miller's
Speaker 1: bizarre ads campaign with Sun Harvey sparks backlash, Influencer Integrity
Speaker 1: is in the spotlight, as Sarah's Day parts ways with
Speaker 1: a long standing sponsor, and Our Friday Debrief. But first,
Speaker 1: Sophie Kasha has surprised her followers by announcing the arrival
Speaker 1: of her baby girl. She first broke the news on
Speaker 1: her Instagram story, sharing a polaroid of her kids, Bobby
Speaker 1: and Flossy meeting the baby for the first time. Underneath it,
Speaker 1: she simply wrote the date, which was the twenty eighth
Speaker 1: of January. She followed it up by sharing a very
Speaker 1: cute video of her breaking the news to her sisters
Speaker 1: via FaceTime. And she was supposed to be at her
Speaker 1: sister's birthday celebrations, but she went into labor, so she
Speaker 1: said it was an early birthday present for the Aunties.
Speaker 1: Let's throw to the clip. Oh my god, what I
Speaker 1: look at that? Immy? As well? Is mum really not
Speaker 1: seeing my Mum's actually saying you could tell that they
Speaker 1: knew something was up. Now. A day later, Sophie revealed
Speaker 1: the name and also released a carousel of black and
Speaker 1: white images from the hospital, and some of the photos
Speaker 1: appeared to be taken during Sophie's labor, which showed Sophie
Speaker 1: and her new girlfriend, Mattie kissing, and also Maddie hugging
Speaker 1: Flossy following the baby's arrival. I think that speaks volumes.
Speaker 1: It shows how much involvement Mattie is hoping to have
Speaker 1: in this child's life, and I think it cements how
Speaker 1: strong their relationship is. I mean, last week we spoke
Speaker 1: about that Q and A that Sophie and Maddie put out.
Speaker 1: M Yeah, the photos are really beautiful, and I think
Speaker 1: it shows the connection that Maddie already has with Sophie's kids.
Speaker 1: I've been really curious to see what name Sophie would choose,
Speaker 1: and that is because she created headlines when she gave
Speaker 1: birth to her daughter, Florence a number of years ago,
Speaker 1: because Florence was originally called Betty Margaret, and two weeks later,
Speaker 1: Sophie admitted that she wasn't sure about the name, so
Speaker 1: she changed it to Florence Betty instead. A lot of
Speaker 1: celebrities do this, remember Kylie Jennef. Do you think it's
Speaker 1: because influences and celebrities feel this pressure to announce it
Speaker 1: to their audience straight away. So some parents will actually
Speaker 1: take a couple of weeks until they officially announce a name.
Speaker 1: But because they have currency and there's prominence in announcing
Speaker 1: the birth quickly, they might jump to a decision. They're
Speaker 1: not entirely happy. You do have to make a decision
Speaker 1: quite quickly because you need to put it on the
Speaker 1: birth certificate. I just think it's a case where this
Speaker 1: happens more than you realize. I think a lot of
Speaker 1: people often have a name in mind for their child,
Speaker 1: but then when the child comes out, they're like, wait
Speaker 1: a second, this kid does not look like a Betty.
Speaker 1: Like it just doesn't work. I fear that that will
Speaker 1: be me. I always change my mind in the side.
Speaker 1: You're the sort of person you always buy something from
Speaker 1: the shops and we be the best thing ever, and
Speaker 1: then two weeks later you're like, I'm not wearing it.
Speaker 1: Car't despise So I'd never get a tattoo because I
Speaker 1: would change my mind. Now we have been holding off
Speaker 1: on this name. The name is esmey Sophie Sure. All
Speaker 1: I can think of was the brand as May. When
Speaker 1: I saw this announcement, someone did put this in our
Speaker 1: group and a lot of people jumped to Sophie's defense,
Speaker 1: saying this is a beautiful French name and it's not
Speaker 1: fair too. I mean, I think this listener made a
Speaker 1: joke saying, oh, she clearly wants a sponsorship with ESME.
Speaker 1: I'm sure that's the least of what she's thinking now.
Speaker 1: Oh but I mean it's It's always a bonus, isn't it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: just for an influencer again, esme sponsorship. Yeah, well, she
Speaker 1: wrote on Instagram, Esme Sophie Sure joined our world on
Speaker 1: the twenty eighth of Jan at five point fifty eight,
Speaker 1: watched on by her amazing big brother and sister. My
Speaker 1: dream experience to have them there and now diving deep
Speaker 1: into my love bubble. And I really like that she's
Speaker 1: given her second daughter her name as the middle name
Speaker 1: Pille because she has decided to do this on her own.
Speaker 1: I think that's a really special decision. Do you think
Speaker 1: she's going to be going back to her maiden name
Speaker 1: of Shaw. I feel like. Legally she probably is known
Speaker 1: as Sophie Shaw, but Sophie Kaisha is almost like her
Speaker 1: stage name, particularly because her pajama name is called Kasha Pajamas.
Speaker 1: It'd be very confusing if she changed her Instagram handle over.
Speaker 1: I wonder if Sarah's day is spewing, because I know
Speaker 1: often we joke about the fact that Sarah might have
Speaker 1: a fourth baby. She said she's only wants three, but
Speaker 1: we know that she does want a daughter, and she
Speaker 1: does have a thing for naming her kids after brands,
Speaker 1: and she has a long running alignment with esme Maybe
Speaker 1: that was her baby girl's name. Well, she's definitely not
Speaker 1: going to call her future daughter Esmee now because she
Speaker 1: likes to be unique, and this name has now been taken.
Speaker 1: What is it? I wor we got for Brecky. Look
Speaker 1: at that babe, Everything we need for a poor some breakfast.
Speaker 1: A paid ads campaign created by staf Claire Smith's husband
Speaker 1: Josh Miller for Uber Eats is generating attention online, but
Speaker 1: for all the wrong reasons. While the TikTok video promoting
Speaker 1: Uber Eats's new Kid's breakfast box garnered over one point
Speaker 1: four million views, comments had to be disabled as followers
Speaker 1: were distracted by the couple's comical attempts to conceal their
Speaker 1: son's face throughout the ad, leading many into question if
Speaker 1: privacy is paramount, why include their three year old in
Speaker 1: brand deals at all? Now? So, can you bring us
Speaker 1: up to speed about the couple's backflip on privacy. Yeah, Well,
Speaker 1: late last year, Steph and her husband Josh spoke in
Speaker 1: depth about their decision to no longer show their son
Speaker 1: Harvey's face online. And this decision came after he started
Speaker 1: to be recognized in public even when he wasn't out
Speaker 1: with his famous parents, so he was approached by fans
Speaker 1: whilst he was on a childcare excursion and also when
Speaker 1: he was out with different family members. That would be
Speaker 1: really scary as both a parent and also for Harvey
Speaker 1: to have complete strangers come out up talking to you.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's obviously a safety concern. Well, in this case,
Speaker 1: luckily it was just fans of Steph who approached Harvey
Speaker 1: to say hello, But it did open Josh and Steph's
Speaker 1: eyes to the fact that people with not so good
Speaker 1: intentions could also approach Harvey, and their decision to start
Speaker 1: concealing Harvey's face was really big for the couple because
Speaker 1: Harvey regularly featured on both of his parents' social media accounts,
Speaker 1: and that's why I think it was really jarring when
Speaker 1: Steph and Josh started sharing these videos of Harvey where
Speaker 1: he had a big emoji over his face or it
Speaker 1: was pixelated, especially considering old content of Harvey still remained
Speaker 1: on Steph's social media account. I think a lot of
Speaker 1: people were confused because they thought, oh, step and Josh
Speaker 1: are just going to stop sharing Harvey altogether, but they
Speaker 1: their idea was, no, we're still going to share him,
Speaker 1: but we're just going to pixelate his image, and they
Speaker 1: also still share about him as if he's a main character.
Speaker 1: I know recently Steph has been sharing sort of chronicles
Speaker 1: of his sleeping patterns and how she keeps getting woken
Speaker 1: up in the middle of the night, and it is
Speaker 1: something that a lot of parents relate to. But it's
Speaker 1: an interesting move when you are wanting to have a
Speaker 1: level of privacy for your son, but then you're still
Speaker 1: sharing intimate details about their tantrums or what different milestones
Speaker 1: they're in now. Steph did explain at the time that
Speaker 1: she wouldn't be removing old content of Harvey, but going forward,
Speaker 1: they would no longer share his face because his facial
Speaker 1: features were becoming more recognizable. Well, I can totally understand
Speaker 1: why Steph and joshuad want to stop sharing Harvey's face,
Speaker 1: and a lot of people applauded their decision to do so.
Speaker 1: And this is why a lot of followers were surprised
Speaker 1: this week to see Josh accept a sponsorship deal with
Speaker 1: Uber Eats, which featured Harvey heavily in the video. Now,
Speaker 1: the ad was promoting Uber Eats's new kids breakfast boxes
Speaker 1: and it showed Josh and Harvey unboxing all of the
Speaker 1: ingredients and cooking up the omelet together. And I have
Speaker 1: to say this video was very creatively shot, because I'll
Speaker 1: give it to the couple. They stuck to their guns
Speaker 1: and they didn't include Harvey's face in the video. So
Speaker 1: many of the shots of Josh and Harvey cooking were
Speaker 1: filmed from overhead, from behind. They even used the Uber
Speaker 1: Eats box and a vase of flowers to conceal his face,
Speaker 1: which I have to admit I burst out laughing when
Speaker 1: that's scene popped up. Look, I get what they're trying
Speaker 1: to do, but it's getting to the point, as you said,
Speaker 1: where it's just comical. You will almost looked like he
Speaker 1: was part of some witness protection program because it showed
Speaker 1: Harvey also playing with a toy that came in the
Speaker 1: breakfast box, and every time he spun around, it would
Speaker 1: cut to a new different shot of him to conceal
Speaker 1: his face. Again, I understand what they're doing. I commend
Speaker 1: them for doing it, but it just doesn't make sense
Speaker 1: if you want to keep your son's life private, why
Speaker 1: you would include him in sponsorship deals. And this video
Speaker 1: elicited a huge response, so it quickly gained over one
Speaker 1: point four million views, probably because all the comments were like,
Speaker 1: what the fuck is going on in this video? The
Speaker 1: last I was gonna say, you might think, oh, uber
Speaker 1: Eats would be stoked with it, but it quickly became
Speaker 1: apparent that a lot of followers were amused and distracted
Speaker 1: by the level that the couple went to to hide
Speaker 1: his face, and many also questioned why Josh and Steph
Speaker 1: don't just keep their son off social media if they
Speaker 1: want to maintain his privacy. Well, I would have liked
Speaker 1: to have seen the reaction from the brand manager at
Speaker 1: uber EA's getting this ad because if it was me,
Speaker 1: I would have said, guys like, very creative, but this
Speaker 1: is so distracting. It completely takes away from the messaging,
Speaker 1: like the marketing messaging of uber e. But going into
Speaker 1: that campaign, the manager would have full well known that
Speaker 1: they didn't feel comfortable to show their son's face, so
Speaker 1: they probably agreed on this. I mean, there are some
Speaker 1: brand managers who were only keen on the stats, so
Speaker 1: for them they would have been like, wow, this was
Speaker 1: a win. We had one point four million views, we
Speaker 1: had one hundred and eighty three cent. But they did
Speaker 1: have to turn the comments on because it got out
Speaker 1: of hand with people being like, what the fuck is
Speaker 1: going on here? This is ridiculous. I mean that speaks
Speaker 1: volumes the fact that the comments were turned off. It
Speaker 1: reminds me of when Queensland influencer Courtney Mangnan and she's
Speaker 1: a business owner of course as well friend of the
Speaker 1: podcast Yes, when she spoke about a video which went
Speaker 1: viral on TikTok of her So she had mentioned toblarone
Speaker 1: the chocolate, but she had called it toblarone, which is
Speaker 1: how my mother in law pronounced. I've heard a few
Speaker 1: people say toblerone, but most people will say toblerone, and
Speaker 1: the whole comment section was just field of people being like, oh,
Speaker 1: it's toblerone. But she said that, Yes, this video got
Speaker 1: over a million views, but it didn't actually translate to
Speaker 1: anybody going over really to follow her page, and it
Speaker 1: didn't really reach the people that would be interested in
Speaker 1: her content. So I would argue that this has happened
Speaker 1: with this video of Josh and his son. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: got one point four million views, but are these parents
Speaker 1: who are wanting to buy this uber eats box or
Speaker 1: are these people just poking fun at them? Yeah, you
Speaker 1: would think that the success of an ad like this
Speaker 1: would be pinned on actually seeing the excitement on the
Speaker 1: child's face that you know, their reaction to the box.
Speaker 1: So I'm surprised that uber eats would have agreed to
Speaker 1: these terms. I want to share a few comments from
Speaker 1: our Facebook community in response to this video. So One
Speaker 1: listener wrote, I understand them not wanting to show the child,
Speaker 1: but continuing to post the child daily and covering his
Speaker 1: face is just silly to me. Just keep him off
Speaker 1: social media entirely. Another said, so keen on their kids
Speaker 1: privacy that is, until the right brand deal comes along,
Speaker 1: whilst another said, imagine showing the child this ad down
Speaker 1: the road and trying to explain to him Mum and
Speaker 1: Dad needed the cash, but we didn't show your face
Speaker 1: this time. At least if I was him at that point,
Speaker 1: I'd be asking for the money. Do you think they
Speaker 1: put it aside for him? Well, on the topic of money,
Speaker 1: the first thing that sprung to mind was does Josh
Speaker 1: really need the funds from this ad? Because it's pretty
Speaker 1: well known how successful the couple is. I mean, Steph
Speaker 1: was on the afr's Rich List. Yeah, it said that
Speaker 1: her net worth was forty two million dollars, which it's
Speaker 1: incredibly inspirational. The fact that she has been able to
Speaker 1: grow her business, keep it cleaner, it's remarkable what she's done. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So it just makes you think, I mean, I don't
Speaker 1: know how much uber EAT's paid for this ad, but
Speaker 1: I don't know if it's worth it, especially because of
Speaker 1: the backlash as well, with so many people commenting it's
Speaker 1: very contradictory. You don't want to show your child off
Speaker 1: on social media, but then it looks as if you're
Speaker 1: prepared to actually use him in adverts. To make money. Yeah,
Speaker 1: That's the thing that people can't get their head around
Speaker 1: is why Harvey is still a permanent fixture on their
Speaker 1: social media accounts. And the reason I think this is
Speaker 1: for Steph is because she still wants to maintain a
Speaker 1: certain positioning in the family space. For her, sharing about
Speaker 1: being a mum comes naturally to her because she's had
Speaker 1: her Instagram account for what like fifteen years, shares about
Speaker 1: every facet of her life, and I think for her
Speaker 1: it would feel suddenly unnatural to stop talking about one
Speaker 1: of the biggest areas of your life. And I think
Speaker 1: for her being a mum adds a certain level of
Speaker 1: relatability with her audience. Unfortunately, they need to make a decision.
Speaker 1: Are we going to continue to conceal his face or
Speaker 1: are we sharing about him? You can't have you caked
Speaker 1: either wall. We think it'll be interesting to see the
Speaker 1: approach that they take when Steph gives birth to their
Speaker 1: second child this year. It's interesting to look at Josh
Speaker 1: and why he may be the one pushing to do
Speaker 1: these advertisements with Harvey, Because for Josh, over the past
Speaker 1: couple of years, he has built quite a name for
Speaker 1: himself as a daddy influencer. So Josh is Harvey's primary
Speaker 1: care and he has been staying at home with him
Speaker 1: for most of Harvey's life. And on TikTok he markets
Speaker 1: himself as a dadfluencer, so in his bio it says
Speaker 1: just a dad doing his best. And in all of
Speaker 1: his videos he uses hashtags like dads of TikTok, Kids
Speaker 1: of TikTok, and toddlers of TikTok. And he has three
Speaker 1: videos currently in to the top of his page and
Speaker 1: his most viewed video has eighteen million views, and it
Speaker 1: shows Harvey his face front and center, playing pictionary. Now,
Speaker 1: the other pin videos show Josh making coffee with Harvey
Speaker 1: again his face is visible and teaching Harvey matters. On
Speaker 1: his TikTok, all of the videos with Harvey, his face
Speaker 1: is front and center. Well, that's really how Josh's TikTok
Speaker 1: grew because he used to share such cute content of
Speaker 1: him making Harvey baby chee. They're very wholesome content. I
Speaker 1: can see why it's gone on. And Harvey has appeared
Speaker 1: in countless paid ads for Josh. The majority of Josh's
Speaker 1: videos are paid partnerships and he's done very well with them,
Speaker 1: like I was shocked to see how many of these
Speaker 1: videos had millions of views, and I think it's because
Speaker 1: we are crying out for daddy influences. And it's quite
Speaker 1: interesting because when you look at some of the partners
Speaker 1: that Josh and Harvey have worked with, they're pretty prominent
Speaker 1: partners like just Jean's, Omo, Sunglasses, Heart and Cadbury, and
Speaker 1: these videos have wrapped up massive views. So it's clear
Speaker 1: that this was lucrative for Josh in a way, for
Speaker 1: him to contribute financially to the family because he is
Speaker 1: the soul at home care. And as you touched on, Amy,
Speaker 1: there's been a lot of discussion and a lot of
Speaker 1: judgment on how much money does this couple need, and
Speaker 1: I think it is a very valid question, particularly when
Speaker 1: you are taking a stance on your son's privacy. But
Speaker 1: that being said, maybe it is important for Josh to
Speaker 1: feel like he's contributing financially and this is his creative
Speaker 1: outlet and the way that he's doing so, and maybe
Speaker 1: he feels like it's okay because he is hiding Harvey's face.
Speaker 1: I just think they're going to have to make a
Speaker 1: decision one way or another moving forward, because I don't
Speaker 1: think brands are going to be coming forward seeing this
Speaker 1: type of example video and going, yeah, we want to
Speaker 1: pay you for a video where your son's head is
Speaker 1: behind a bunch of flowers. Well, that's the thing I saw.
Speaker 1: He recently did an ad for the Australian Open and
Speaker 1: it only got a couple of hundred views. It seems
Speaker 1: like the ads that perform really well are the father
Speaker 1: son ads. So I think that they just need to
Speaker 1: think about what their stance is on their son's privacy.
Speaker 1: I think, are these videos really worth it? Are we
Speaker 1: going to cop unnecessarily attention or flak over this. If
Speaker 1: you've been following my vlogs and my inst stories, you'll
Speaker 1: be familiar with my pink drink. I have it every
Speaker 1: single morning before breakfast, before I ingest anything, and everyone
Speaker 1: has been asking what it is. I've been like putting
Speaker 1: sneaky clues out there. A debate about influencer integrity has
Speaker 1: broken out in our Facebook community after one list of
Speaker 1: pointed out that fitness influencer Sarah's Day no longer uses
Speaker 1: her daily body bloom powder since parting ways with long
Speaker 1: standing partner Trapeka a year ago. The revelation came about
Speaker 1: when a follower asked, Sarah, do you still take your
Speaker 1: body Bloom every morning? Sarah replied, I'm currently just taking
Speaker 1: my probiotics. Tripeka and I went our separate ways over
Speaker 1: a year ago. Unfortunately, I can't say more than that,
Speaker 1: and she put two crying face emojis. That led another
Speaker 1: follower to chime in, writing, how has your digestion been
Speaker 1: since stopping body Bloom? I remember you swore by it
Speaker 1: for your morning movements, Sarah. Sarah replied saying all good,
Speaker 1: because now I'm on two different probotics for Harlow's reflux,
Speaker 1: So my whole protocol now is really about him and
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with me, mum life at its core.
Speaker 1: That's really a way of her answering the question but
Speaker 1: not really addressing the issue, because I take from that, well, actually,
Speaker 1: you could have just been taking a few probotics rather
Speaker 1: than my very expensive body Bloom for the last couple
Speaker 1: of years. Yeah. Now, this split from Trepeka has been
Speaker 1: a pretty big deal for Sarah because she has been
Speaker 1: working with them for over eight years, and I think
Speaker 1: for Sarah, at the core of her success as and
Speaker 1: influencer has really been the fact that she doesn't just
Speaker 1: work with anyone and everyone. She's really known for aligning
Speaker 1: herself with key sponsors who actually make sense to her
Speaker 1: brand and who she can have a long standing relationship with.
Speaker 1: She doesn't just flog any old shit. Yeah, she's not
Speaker 1: just doing the teeth whitening ads. Yeah. And it's products
Speaker 1: that you, as a consumer, you totally believe that she
Speaker 1: actually uses. And when she was pregnant with her first child, Fox,
Speaker 1: six years ago, that's when she actually launched body Bloom
Speaker 1: through Trapeka, And at the time, she was very hands
Speaker 1: on and she helped create the pink powder, which supposedly
Speaker 1: provides support for healthy skin, nails, and hair and apparently
Speaker 1: keeps you very regular with your movements. And I have
Speaker 1: to say she really integrated this powder into her morning routine.
Speaker 1: It would feature a lot in her Instagram stories and
Speaker 1: her vlogs. You truly believed that she was invested in
Speaker 1: this product. Well, you forget that it was an ad
Speaker 1: because as you said, she would do it every morning,
Speaker 1: So it genuinely seems like this is a product she uses,
Speaker 1: this is part of her routine. You kind of forgot
Speaker 1: that it even had her name on it. Because she
Speaker 1: kind of just go on about the health benefits. Sarah
Speaker 1: also has a habit of not really disclosing her paid partnerships,
Speaker 1: and in the beginning, that's what all influencers did because
Speaker 1: they didn't have the same rules and restrictions in place.
Speaker 1: And that's why it's led a lot of consumers to
Speaker 1: feel like she genuinely cares about these products. Because when
Speaker 1: she was at the height of her fame, probably about
Speaker 1: seven or eight years ago, she was synonymous with Tripeka
Speaker 1: and also Loving Earth, and I remember going out and
Speaker 1: buying Tripeka and Loving Earth, and a lot of people
Speaker 1: have actually had the same experience where they've said I
Speaker 1: actually tried it and I was like, this is revolting.
Speaker 1: Like I remember, Sarah kept saying that one of the
Speaker 1: powders tasted like caramel. It didn't taste like caramel. It
Speaker 1: was a lot earthier than that. And some people might
Speaker 1: really love the flavor, but when you're being sold that
Speaker 1: this is like some kind of caramel smoothie. I used
Speaker 1: Trapeka for quite a number of years, always thought it
Speaker 1: tasted okay, but when you're being sold it's better than chocolate.
Speaker 1: She made that brand, Yeah, she did, and they did
Speaker 1: part ways in kind of mysterious circumstances. It was over
Speaker 1: a year ago. Nothing was said, and you can see
Speaker 1: that Sarah isn't actually allowed to speak about the departure.
Speaker 1: And the thing is Tripeka has continued to sell body Bloom.
Speaker 1: They just don't don't have Sarah's Day's name slapped on
Speaker 1: the packaging anymore. And it does lead you to question
Speaker 1: just how much she had to do with the creation
Speaker 1: of this powder. Well, they wouldn't be stupid. They would
Speaker 1: own the formula to this and they would have said, look,
Speaker 1: regardless of how much involvement you've apparently had in the
Speaker 1: creation of it, we own this product. We're using your
Speaker 1: name for marketing pace. That's the thing. I think that
Speaker 1: she still could have been part of the creation process
Speaker 1: and maybe was involved in a couple of meetings where
Speaker 1: she said, it's really important for me for this powder
Speaker 1: to have X, Y and Z. But I don't think
Speaker 1: she had as much involvement as she initially sold that
Speaker 1: she did. Well, we've seen her creating a new perfume
Speaker 1: and she might go in and say, I really like
Speaker 1: this smell. But it's not that she's in the lab
Speaker 1: and she's designing every signature cent Really, it's probably the
Speaker 1: same with this. She know. What's quite interesting is that
Speaker 1: over the past couple of weeks she has been subtly
Speaker 1: dropping hints about a new pre workout drink. So there's
Speaker 1: been no paid partnerships, no hashtag ads, but she's just
Speaker 1: had a couple of videos of her stirring up another
Speaker 1: powder in some of her water bottles before she works out.
Speaker 1: So you're telling me now that we don't just suddenly
Speaker 1: need a couple of probiotics, No, we now need a
Speaker 1: pre workout drink. Where do you sound on this though?
Speaker 1: How do you feel about Sarah no longer using body
Speaker 1: Blue now that she's not being paid for it? I mean,
Speaker 1: I obviously understand why she's not spooking it anymore because
Speaker 1: she's not getting some kind of kickback from Trapeka to
Speaker 1: do it. But it doesn't really make Sarah look good
Speaker 1: because she has used this every day for six years
Speaker 1: and then suddenly because her name's not on it, it's
Speaker 1: not worthy of her using it because she has pushed
Speaker 1: the benefits so much. It does make it look quite disingenuous. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, I can see why you would be reluctant
Speaker 1: to continue spooking a brand that maybe you finished on
Speaker 1: a sour note with, even if you really like the product,
Speaker 1: because let's be real, this isn't some sort of magical powder.
Speaker 1: There's clearly a lot of other products on the market
Speaker 1: that do the exact same thing. And if it was
Speaker 1: me and I had this long standing partner she with
Speaker 1: a brand and maybe though potentially were a jerk to
Speaker 1: me or I was a jerk to them, I wouldn't
Speaker 1: want to be promoting it. And we've got to remember
Speaker 1: her social media is her business at the end of
Speaker 1: the day. We're not going to be naive and think
Speaker 1: that the reason she took all of this time to
Speaker 1: capture body Bloom as part of her morning routine wasn't
Speaker 1: because she was making money off it, like that's why
Speaker 1: she was doing a lot of people genuinely thought in
Speaker 1: the early days that she was a huge fan of Tripeka.
Speaker 1: Maybe it started like that, maybe she started genuinely using
Speaker 1: it and then they reached out for to I think
Speaker 1: she genuinely did believe in the product and it was
Speaker 1: a win win for her because here's this product that
Speaker 1: contained certain ingredients that give her health benefits that she's
Speaker 1: happy to use. But she's also making money off. If
Speaker 1: you go back and look at her old videos, the
Speaker 1: amount of times they were featured, like every vlog she
Speaker 1: was making herself some kind of green powdery thing. She
Speaker 1: was being paid, of course she was, but I spec
Speaker 1: had off to her because she's fucking good at what
Speaker 1: she does. She makes you buy in. I mean, she
Speaker 1: did a marketing degree, I think for a term or
Speaker 1: something when she left school, and I think that she
Speaker 1: actually learned a lot during this course. She is a
Speaker 1: fucking marketing whiz. People buy into whatever she's selling because
Speaker 1: she actually sells it well. And I think that that
Speaker 1: is a real talent in order to get people to
Speaker 1: buy into your world, buy into what you're selling. It's
Speaker 1: really interesting because this isn't the first time a product
Speaker 1: has continued to be produced just without Sarah's name and branding.
Speaker 1: Around five years ago, she brought out those natural deodorants
Speaker 1: with Lebang. I used to buy those, and so you
Speaker 1: bought it. You've brought into all of this, Yeah, but
Speaker 1: oh I did, and I bought into the whole natural deodoran.
Speaker 1: I still think that that's a good concept. Fuck I
Speaker 1: stunk using it. My husband boyfriend at the time, had
Speaker 1: to tell me to stop wearing it because he's like,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, but this just does not work. No. I know,
Speaker 1: with natural deodorance, you do have to use them for
Speaker 1: a couple of weeks until they start being affected. And
Speaker 1: it's interesting because le bang Body ended up splitting ways
Speaker 1: with Sarah's Day, but they continue to sell this natural
Speaker 1: deodor and I'd love to know the figures how much
Speaker 1: money they're still making without Sarah's Day's name attached to her. Well,
Speaker 1: I think it must be pretty successful because they're still
Speaker 1: selling it. And at the time, unlike Drepeka, they actually
Speaker 1: made it very public that they were parting ways with her,
Speaker 1: and they ended up thanking her for taking a chance
Speaker 1: on them. It was kind of awkward though, because they
Speaker 1: did this gushy post about Sarah and she ended up
Speaker 1: not liking it, not commenting on it, and making no
Speaker 1: statement about le Bain going forward. So it wasn't the
Speaker 1: whole marketing pitch about this is our end of like
Speaker 1: collaboration with Sarah. Yeah, it was, it's like, let's get
Speaker 1: rid of this shit and we're just going to put
Speaker 1: our new logo on it. A couple of years ago,
Speaker 1: Sarah did speak on her podcast about blacklisting brands that
Speaker 1: she worked with in the past, and she blacklisted them
Speaker 1: when things had turned sour, and he Housepan Kurt joked
Speaker 1: that they should name and shame the brands then, and
Speaker 1: they're on the podcast, but Sarah said she didn't want
Speaker 1: to get sued. And she went on to say that
Speaker 1: one brand in question and treated her like a punching bag,
Speaker 1: and she was encouraged by friends to take legal action
Speaker 1: for money that they owed her. It's pretty out there
Speaker 1: for her to actually say these kinds of comments because,
Speaker 1: as we touched on, she doesn't work with that many sponsors,
Speaker 1: so you could whittle it down to a number of
Speaker 1: the brands that she's worked with over the years. I
Speaker 1: found this line quite interesting. She also said that she
Speaker 1: ends up trying to seek revenge on brands that she
Speaker 1: parts ways with by dominating the competition. So maybe I
Speaker 1: kind of like that. I do like that too. Maybe
Speaker 1: that's why she's releasing this new pre workout drink. She's like,
Speaker 1: maybe maybe it's her own project that she's going to
Speaker 1: do solely her. I'd love to know how Georgie Stevenson
Speaker 1: feels about that because she of course has Naked Harvest,
Speaker 1: which is doing exceptionally well. Well, it's the perfect time
Speaker 1: for her to release it, because she's finally about to
Speaker 1: release her pregnancy ebook as well. Well, you'd hope if
Speaker 1: Sarah brings out a pre workout drink she focuses a
Speaker 1: lot on the taste of it, because Naked Harvests are
Speaker 1: one brand that I have used and they actually do
Speaker 1: days really yummy. Well, Sophie, let's get into our Friday debrief,
Speaker 1: and I want to kick things off with it's more
Speaker 1: of a Friday frustration. So, as a lot of listeners
Speaker 1: will know, I got married last year in January, and
Speaker 1: I'm yet to change my last name. You haven't either.
Speaker 1: It's more out of laziness than anything else. It just
Speaker 1: seems like a big job to do and one that
Speaker 1: I can't be bothered to do right now. Well, I
Speaker 1: only got my ass into gear because I'm having a
Speaker 1: baby in April and I really want to have the
Speaker 1: same name as my child, and I want that last
Speaker 1: name to simply be Humphreys. So Dale's last name is
Speaker 1: Spurway Humphreys. However, I've just discovered that now I've got
Speaker 1: to jump through hoops because I can't just obtain a
Speaker 1: marriage certificate. Apparently I've got to go through the full
Speaker 1: legal name change because you can't just take one of
Speaker 1: your partner's names. That seems absurd to me. I think
Speaker 1: if they have a double barrel name, you should just
Speaker 1: be able to take one of those names. The stupid
Speaker 1: thing is I could extend the last name quite easily
Speaker 1: and go Spaway Humphreys Toll, but that's allowed. But I
Speaker 1: can't just take one of the days. That's just fucking stupid.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry for anyone if they have a three barrel name,
Speaker 1: but I mean Dale can barely fit his name on
Speaker 1: a passport. Imagine trying to fit Taba on there as well.
Speaker 1: On his driver's license, they actually have to shrink his
Speaker 1: full name down because he's also got two middle names.
Speaker 1: And I just see why. I just want my child
Speaker 1: to have the last name Humphreys. And if your child
Speaker 1: is going to have a double barreled name, you would
Speaker 1: like it to be your maiden name and only one
Speaker 1: of your husband's. Last night, I was smoking with Dale
Speaker 1: because I'm like, if my last name is now officially
Speaker 1: Humphreys and the baby's last name is Humphreys. It almost
Speaker 1: looks as if he's then taken on my last name.
Speaker 1: I've got another share for you, Sophie, because Kate's away.
Speaker 1: So this morning I went into my midwife appointment, and
Speaker 1: anyone who has been knows that you have to give
Speaker 1: a few identifying details when you check in to your
Speaker 1: midwife appointments. So normally they say, oh, tell me your address,
Speaker 1: what's your date of birth, et cetera. Today I was
Speaker 1: asked a number of questions, and one of them included,
Speaker 1: are you married? I nearly fell out of my chair
Speaker 1: because when I enrolled into this hospital, they actually asked
Speaker 1: me that already over the phone. Oh are you married?
Speaker 1: What's the name of your husband? And I just thought
Speaker 1: this is so irrelevant. But also is that because your
Speaker 1: husband actually couldn't make that appointment? So you were there
Speaker 1: on your own? Yeah? Yeah, I was there on my own?
Speaker 1: But is that why they asked? I don't know. No,
Speaker 1: I've never I have never been asked, even if I've
Speaker 1: been by myself other times. Do you have a husband?
Speaker 1: I was asked the first midwife appointment I went to
Speaker 1: if I was married? And my husband was standing right
Speaker 1: next to me, and I'm like yeah to him. But again,
Speaker 1: as you say, why does it matter? It just I
Speaker 1: don't know. It came across as really judgmental, I think
Speaker 1: because the woman was also a bit older. And what
Speaker 1: though it's probably just a guideline, I have to ask,
Speaker 1: because I don't what has that got to do with anything? Well,
Speaker 1: I just get youshed to show you fucking id and
Speaker 1: but I call this is the person? Why is it?
Speaker 1: All these random questions. It just made me feel comfortable
Speaker 1: because I thought if I came in there and I
Speaker 1: was feeling self conscious, or maybe I was doing this
Speaker 1: on my own, or my husband had passed away, or
Speaker 1: I don't know, it's quite a triggering question to be like,
Speaker 1: and are you married while you're standing there heavily pregnant.
Speaker 1: I just thought it was a bit off. If there's
Speaker 1: anyone working in the health system that knows the answer
Speaker 1: to this question hit us up in our DMS, well,
Speaker 1: I had a bit of a win this week. I
Speaker 1: have spent most of my nights searching for prints online
Speaker 1: because I am doing up my laundrym at the moment
Speaker 1: and I really am going for this Mediterranean feel. I'm
Speaker 1: such a basic bitch. I think I literally have the
Speaker 1: same print that most people have. It's of Chinkwitira. I
Speaker 1: ordered this print Amy, I didn't realize you actually had
Speaker 1: a very similar one in your whole way. Be fair.
Speaker 1: Most people who have European prints, they go for the
Speaker 1: Amalfi Coast. I went with Chanquitera because I went there
Speaker 1: on holiday. Well, I went with it because I like
Speaker 1: the colors. Because you were like, I feel like you're
Speaker 1: fraud because I've not actually been well, well, that was
Speaker 1: my husband's argument. He said he didn't want the European
Speaker 1: Prince because he only wants to have prints up of
Speaker 1: where we've been. And I said, but we've only been
Speaker 1: to Malaysia and Bali and Singapore. Port Hughes Poor Douglas
Speaker 1: now and I'm like, I don't really want that in
Speaker 1: my house. And our theme for a house is Mediterranean.
Speaker 1: I have been reading too many things on interior design
Speaker 1: and they say that you have to have three key
Speaker 1: colors if you want your house to look really cool. Well,
Speaker 1: we heard the other week now Kate's been scoffing about this.
Speaker 1: How you said that you wanted your house to be
Speaker 1: more like Yeah, she paid me out last week about that.
Speaker 1: But my three key colors are pink, orange, and potentially yellow,
Speaker 1: which is my favorite color, and I process to all
Speaker 1: have those colors in them and be bright because everything
Speaker 1: else is white. I was going to say, does that
Speaker 1: mean you're like a lot of people who are now
Speaker 1: ditching that beige aesthetic and they're going for pops of
Speaker 1: color that seems to be the trend. Now, well, I'm
Speaker 1: keeping everything white, as in the walls and most of
Speaker 1: the furniture is white and the rugs. But yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: having these hoops of color. Anyway. I have been so
Speaker 1: excited for this print to arrive, and I have copied
Speaker 1: you and bought some beautiful frames from Freedom and I
Speaker 1: was so excited to put it in the frame see
Speaker 1: what it looked like. And I realized that I ordered
Speaker 1: an A one print but I had the border around it,
Speaker 1: and I was like fuck. I was like, is this
Speaker 1: my fault? I think it was my fault, but I
Speaker 1: contacted print place say was it my fault? I've actually
Speaker 1: started to create a list of things, like silly things
Speaker 1: that you've blamed me for during I like today lists,
Speaker 1: don't you. Yeah. So one of them has been that
Speaker 1: you wrung me up and blamed me because I told
Speaker 1: you to get it printed a one. I was like,
Speaker 1: how on earth has this print called? I was concerned
Speaker 1: that you led me up the garden path with the frames. Anyway,
Speaker 1: the place I got them printed at was really amazing.
Speaker 1: It's his store in Melbourne and it was clearly my fault.
Speaker 1: They were so apologetic. They instantly said we will print
Speaker 1: you a new one without the border straight away. I
Speaker 1: literally had it the next day. I was so impressed.
Speaker 1: But now I'm on the hunt to find two more.
Speaker 1: You pin Mediterranean spired princes. Wait, wait, did you get
Speaker 1: it from what's it called? Etsy? No? It was from
Speaker 1: an actual art house, so yeah, that they printed it.
Speaker 1: I chose the design from the art house. Yes, it's
Speaker 1: from inca art house. They have all the different designs.
Speaker 1: I've told you. You go on Etsy, you pay for
Speaker 1: the I liked the colors in this one. They were
Speaker 1: so much bright, exactly, it's brighter than yours. Have you
Speaker 1: seen how bright the colors are? Anyway, So if anyone
Speaker 1: has any cool basic bitch European prints that I should
Speaker 1: be getting because I just can't decide what goes together,
Speaker 1: and I'm stretching out paid for the print. It was
Speaker 1: forty percent off, so I paid seventy two dollars for
Speaker 1: it to be printed. And the design Oh okay, well
Speaker 1: that's not too bad. Yeah, I'm just I wish they
Speaker 1: had more of them. But I just want something with
Speaker 1: the pop of color. If anyone can help me out,
Speaker 1: who's cooler? The man knows what looks good in houses? Well,
Speaker 1: I could always send you the prints that I already
Speaker 1: have up in the house. No, it's something a bit different.
Speaker 1: I haven't been to Venice. I don't have the emotional
Speaker 1: connection with that. I'm thinking more about Fia. Well, I
Speaker 1: think that's all we've got time for today. Thank you
Speaker 1: for listening to another episode of Outspoken, And if you
Speaker 1: haven't already, we would really appreciate if you could leave
Speaker 1: us a five star review because that really is the
Speaker 1: only way that the podcast grows, and we really appreciate
Speaker 1: those people who have left us really nice reviews. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and I want to put some positive thoughts out for Kate.
Speaker 1: She isn't in today's show because she is dealing with
Speaker 1: a snake situation in which we did speak about on
Speaker 1: our Subs episode. There was a snake that turned up
Speaker 1: at her house. I think over the weekend, and they've
Speaker 1: got been very hot, and Kate lives up in the hills.
Speaker 1: So unfortunately, yes, a brown snap, well a suspected brown
Speaker 1: snake was in her yard hiding in some of the
Speaker 1: rocks out there. So they got a snake catcher in
Speaker 1: and basically he has set up this large net and
Speaker 1: they have been waiting for days for this thing to
Speaker 1: come out, and Kate has two large golden retrievers. It's
Speaker 1: all been a bit of a nightmare, having a baby
Speaker 1: and dealing with it all. To be honest, I think
Speaker 1: that that snake is long gone. I think it has
Speaker 1: borrowed its way out somewhere else. I love how because
Speaker 1: it was Kate's husban re that spotted the snake, but
Speaker 1: because it hasn't emerged, I think he started second guessing
Speaker 1: himself because he now said, oh, maybe it was just
Speaker 1: like a really large lizard with a long tail. So
Speaker 1: she will be back next week, Yes she will. Before
Speaker 1: we go, I also want to point out that we
Speaker 1: are across the evolving story that is happening at the
Speaker 1: moment between Mikayla Tester and Anna Paul. We decided that
Speaker 1: We wanted to give the story a bit of space
Speaker 1: so that Anna has a ride of reply. We will
Speaker 1: be covering the story in depth though on Tuesday's episode.
Speaker 1: This episode was recorded on the traditional land of the
Speaker 1: Ghana people of the Adelaide Planes. We pay respect to
Speaker 1: Elder's past and present