Moya wrote an article (I think for Gal Dem) discussing a trend where young women are pushed forward by management & publishing houses as the face and brain of an issue (like feminism) and then, as very young people are wont to do, blinded by constant validation and assurances that they're always right, eventually
duck up in some way, shape or form and end up on the receiving end of floods of criticism. She said that they are predominately white, thin and straight because this is easier for the management/publishing houses to sell. She also said that it's to be expected that any discussions of social issues pushed by agencies in this way will be diluted and made accessible and less radical, as that's usually necessary for discussion of the issues to become mainstream and therefore profitable for the agencies.
The crux of it was that it's not fair to expect so much from these young women and that rather than being surprised and outraged when they
duck up, we should be asking why management/publishing houses are putting them in these positions in the first place, and engaging more critically with these girls & agencies ourselves. (OFC, publishing houses do do this in an attempt to gain popularity & business in/from in the new generation of readers.)
However, I think Grace is on a different level to the standard 'face of (issue)' young woman she's talking about, because Grace actively and knowingly contributes to the exploitation of her workers, content creators, and customers. At this point, Grace is more than just a naive young person that thinks she knows everything and is delighted to be platformed to give her two cents. She needs to be held accountable, because it's not just about her/whether it's fair to treat
her a certain way, it's about the people she is exploiting. Florence Given, as bad as she was, AFAIK isn't potentially employing people in China to work in dismal standards whilst earning vast amounts of wealth for being an 'ethical' businesswoman. Florence Given didn't rope her late-teenage content creators into making days' worth of free content for her for her own profit and then threaten to sue them, with her dad and a few companies behind her, when they voiced their complaints. And the 'PR surrounding Grace Beverley' isn't out of Grace's hands - Grace has very much been at the heart of that for years,
she has been the one forwarding the message that she's middle-working class and self-made. But then we can't say that Grace wasn't encouraged to do this by whichever publisher it was/Gleam.
I really don't want Grace to be able to get away with it as I think it's important to understand that Grace is responsible for her actions. The notion that it's excusable to exploit multiple people continuously because you were "growing" is wrong and unfair, IMO. That being said, I'm in Grace's age bracket and maybe would be horrified that I said this in five years' time. Moya is right to identify that companies like Gleam should be questioned more in this conversation - thinking about opening a 'Gleam' thread here if there isn't one already! /Cliff over