Clemmie Telford #2

[OneLineResponse]

Yes she said she’d sell it and donate the money to Centre Point. But she would have had to do a post of her sleeping rough to raise awareness for homelessness and hashtag a gifted £1,000 sleeping bag in the post! Tone-deaf to say the least. And in very bad taste.

This is such poor poor taste it beggars belief. Not just for CT but also for the company that are advertising off of the back of homeless people. This is the type of crappy marketing behaviour that makes my blood boil.

Think she sees herself as the new Jane Garvey, or even Emily Maitlis.

Stop it

 

[Avocadoontoast]

Such a passive aggressive response from CT!

I feel exactly the same way. I have messaged a few times and my messages have never been noted as being seen. I’ve subsequently unfollowed

 

[GreyWolf]

I feel exactly the same way. I have messaged a few times and my messages have never been noted as being seen. I’ve subsequently unfollowed

She answered me once but in such a terse rude way! And it was a genuine question to advice she had given.

 

[HAforlyfe]

This is my first post but like others I’ve been drawn over in the wake of recent events.

I did a list for Clemmie Telford. It was about my experience with a difficult and highly emotive topic.

She writes a little intro to her lists and in mine she got names wrong (like, totally wrong). She also didn’t communicate much with me despite the high emotion I felt around the topic.

Probably worst of all she recently re-shared it without crediting me or fore-warning me that it would be shared. As it was a difficult topic and I still follow her, I think a heads-up would have been nice as I suddenly saw my face and the title on her stories, two years after writing the list.

Anyway I didn’t really think about how bad it was until I read this thread.

As for why I wrote it - it’s a difficult subject, about a difficult time in my life, it was cathartic and I also wanted to help break down some stigmas.

 

[Ummasad]

I’m sorry you had such a crappy experience with her. The more I think about it, the angrier I get. She basically takes advantage of highly personal and emotive situations/experiences for her own benefit. And she isn’t even remotely sorry about it.

 

[notthefullshilling]

I'm sorry that those who wrote lists for her were treated so poorly. It makes me really sad that people have made themselves properly vulnerable (for free!) and she can't treat them with respect and manners. I also find her 'research' for her podcasts by asking on stories really lazy and problematic in that she's asking such a self selecting group of people (her followers) and not exactly pushing the boundaries in terms of going outside of her own and her followers' experiences.

Someone, I think in a pretty kind and well meaning way, once offered to proofread her work and she lost her tit, cos of her sensitivity around her dyslexia. But surely as a communications professional you would graciously accept where support might be needed? Plus I think it's also a matter of respect to the people whose stories she shares (and indirectly profits from).

 

[Ummasad]

Yep! I spotted a (pretty glaring) typo on the homepage of her website and was going to (kindly and privately) point it out to her (‘cos I would want to know!) but then saw her lose her tit when someone else corrected her spelling so thought better of it!

 

[Belulah]

People with dyslexia have a tendency to double and triple check their work. I hate how people who are just bad spellers use a legitimate difficulty as an excuse for being sloppy.

 

[GreyWolf]

This is my first post but like others I’ve been drawn over in the wake of recent events.

I did a list for Clemmie Telford. It was about my experience with a difficult and highly emotive topic.

She writes a little intro to her lists and in mine she got names wrong (like, totally wrong). She also didn’t communicate much with me despite the high emotion I felt around the topic.

Probably worst of all she recently re-shared it without crediting me or fore-warning me that it would be shared. As it was a difficult topic and I still follow her, I think a heads-up would have been nice as I suddenly saw my face and the title on her stories, two years after writing the list.

Anyway I didn’t really think about how bad it was until I read this thread.

As for why I wrote it - it’s a difficult subject, about a difficult time in my life, it was cathartic and I also wanted to help break down some stigmas.

What a selfish, thoughtless fucktard. I’m so sorry you experienced that.

 

[Stringyone]

Someone should set up their own list and do it professionally and actually be grateful to those who provide content.
It would be lovely if she did one of those ‘dinners’ for people who have contributed rather than the instamums. At least there will be a space now MoD has been blacklisted...

 

[yootubesuperstar2]

Whilst I get angry about the other Instamums I cannot bring myself to feel the same about her. She seems tone deaf and thick to the extent I wonder if she's taking the mick. Who on earth would try to blag a very expensive freebie for a charity event? I have so much second hand embarrassment for her.

 

[Twittrerisyouroffice]

Clemmie Telford profiting off other women's adversity is vile. To not edit, proof or even communicate with your writers is not only unprofessional, but exploitative and exceedingly unfeminist. Pay. Your. Writers. Don't act like you're doing them a favour. Also, her 'research' for her podcast is embarrassingly pitiful. I don't get why any brand would want to be associated with her or pay for her consulting. She appears to be the least strategic person on Insta.

Edited to add 'podcast'

 

[notthefullshilling]

And her latest ad also riles me! Prime example of the co-option of dim mummy bloggers 'opening up the conversation' in order to subliminally push products onto the vulnerable (also see her previous 'not an ad' body positivity photo shoot set up by a self tanning company).

So this one is an ad for Johnson and Johnson, (but you wouldn't know at first glance thanks to their sneaky @jnj insta handle). Ostensibly a conversation about removing the stigma around taking anti depressants (something I am all for), but when this is pushed by a multinational pharma conglomeration seeking to maximise their profits, this is all kinds of wrong in my opinion. This kind of advertising is so shady and subliminal. I wonder how much she was paid for this and how much 'research' she did on them. As one of her more astute commenters points out, Johnson and Johnson has been a key player in the US opioid crisis amongst many other scandals. For me, this is amongst the shadiest and grimmest type of advertising. Helping to rehabilitate big pharma's image, pushing the boundaries there, Clemmie!

Edited to add that the comment that mentioned Johnson and Johnson's role in the opioid crisis has been deleted, natch.

 

[Mustard]

Clemmie Telford profiting off other women's adversity is vile. To not edit, proof or even communicate with your writers is not only unprofessional, but exploitative and exceedingly unfeminist. Pay. Your. Writers. Don't act like you're doing them a favour. Also, her 'research' for her podcast is embarrassingly pitiful. I don't get why any brand would want to be associated with her or pay for her consulting. She appears to be the least strategic person on Insta.

Edited to add 'podcast'

I'm glad that people she's used to do the lists for her have come forward to tell us about her unprofessionalism.

 

[Twittrerisyouroffice]

And her latest ad also riles me! Prime example of the co-option of dim mummy bloggers 'opening up the conversation' in order to subliminally push products onto the vulnerable (also see her previous 'not an ad' body positivity photo shoot set up by a self tanning company).

So this one is an ad for Johnson and Johnson, (but you wouldn't know at first glance thanks to their sneaky @jnj insta handle). Ostensibly a conversation about removing the stigma around taking anti depressants (something I am all for), but when this is pushed by a multinational pharma conglomeration seeking to maximise their profits, this is all kinds of wrong in my opinion. This kind of advertising is so shady and subliminal. I wonder how much she was paid for this and how much 'research' she did on them. As one of her more astute commenters points out, Johnson and Johnson has been a key player in the US opioid crisis amongst many other scandals. For me, this is amongst the shadiest and grimmest type of advertising. Helping to rehabilitate big pharma's image, pushing the boundaries there, Clemmie!

Edited to add that the comment that mentioned Johnson and Johnson's role in the opioid crisis has been deleted, natch.

Yeah, I raised my eyebrows at the J&J ad. Obviously didn't do her due dil or just doesn't care about ethics. And once again, exploiting her followers' vulnerability, getting them to share difficult topics purely her own engagement.

 

[notthefullshilling]

Yeah, I raised my eyebrows at the J&J ad. Obviously didn't do her due dil or just doesn't care about ethics. And once again, exploiting her followers' vulnerability, getting them to share difficult topics purely her own engagement.

yep, and cynically, to what extent is this sharing also some sort of market research for johnson and johnson...

 

[Seastar]

I also had a list published. The formatting I used did not translate to her page and it looked dreadful (and made me look like I didn’t care). She also managed to mis-refer to an important person in the intro which changed the whole premise of what I had written

 

[AfroCircus]

Wait...she doesn’t pay people for those lists? What?

 

[Jackso]

All of the mean girl brigade have a hissy fit if you dare to pass comment about their spelling. All of a sudden they are dyslexic. They will never ever take criticism cries or bullying and trolling then begin. Don't honestly know how they have lasted in the real world!

 

[Twittrerisyouroffice]

I also had a list published. The formatting I used did not translate to her page and it looked dreadful (and made me look like I didn’t care). She also managed to mis-refer to an important person in the intro which changed the whole premise of what I had written

That's awful. I'm so sorry to all of you who took the time to write personal pieces. How can she show her contributors such little respect?