Forgot about those!! Are they still on her YouTube?Remember those weird 'baby glitter' Q&As she used to do where she must have been made to sit for ages to get content while she was a toddler. At least Pearl's involvement in the vlogs is less staged or forced than Darcy's was. Pearl still does too much and the ads are disgusting but at least she isn't made to sit on a bed and pretend she's talking to friends via a camera
Remember one vlog not long after she moved house where she was crying about how she wanted to protect Darcy from the public blah blah...fast forward two weeks later and the child was front and centre advertising Lord knows what! This mother has zero boundaries when money is on the table, no one is safe. She's featured her kids, father, step sister, late grandparents, ex husband, partner, so called friends - you name them and they are dragged on in the name of cash. She's even using her sidekick Carrie Hopeless Fletcher to see if she can open musical theatre doors for her daughter who has sung twice in publicInteresting to see her answer to this question- “How do you manage the issue of sharing your kids online to such a large audience?”
She says she has very firm boundaries and “only” shares dance life, days out, holidays and happy moments”. ONLY?! Surely that’s over half of their time. What doesn’t she film then? School and bath time?
I wonder if she really truly believes she has firm boundaries. Having been in social media for so long, she certainly has a warped perception of what is normal in this area.
The very next question- “would you ever do more routine videos with Darcy and Pearl?” Answer “Yes, we’re going to film a mini routine for YouTube soon!”
that's exactly how i interpreted her response too! so she's incredibly selective about the PR gifts she receives, in the sense that she only accepts gifts she seems "good enough", and purposefully keeps her PO Box private so that she doesn't get sent tat that she doesn't want to promote. even to the point that if she does somehow end up receiving a gifted item that she didn't officially accept, she won't mention it on SM and will give it to a friend or family member. and sure, donating the excessive amount of gifted products she recieves is nice in theory, but not when she's explained that she ensures she accepts the best stuff and keeps it for herself, whereas it's only unannounced tat that arrives unexpectedly and she didn't specifically approve that she will give away.The question about feeling guilty for receiving PR gifts was side stepped too. She didn't say whether she does or doesn't, just that she only accepts gifts she wants from companies who reach out... which somehow seems more greedy? No PO Box but they send her offers and she filters through and only takes the best stuff. Gross.
Ah yes, of course... firm boundaries in which we know the name and location of her daughter's dance school due to her tags. BS.Interesting to see her answer to this question- “How do you manage the issue of sharing your kids online to such a large audience?”
She says she has very firm boundaries and “only” shares dance life, days out, holidays and happy moments”. ONLY?! Surely that’s over half of their time. What doesn’t she film then? School and bath time?
I wonder if she really truly believes she has firm boundaries. Having been in social media for so long, she certainly has a warped perception of what is normal in this area.
The very next question- “would you ever do more routine videos with Darcy and Pearl?” Answer “Yes, we’re going to film a mini routine for YouTube soon!”
This was also a BS response.The question about feeling guilty for receiving PR gifts was side stepped too. She didn't say whether she does or doesn't, just that she only accepts gifts she wants from companies who reach out... which somehow seems more greedy? No PO Box but they send her offers and she filters through and only takes the best stuff. Gross.
Exactly this. Their image and social media presence is their own digital property. They should have the right to decide how they present themselves online when they’re at an age to manage it themselves. Children do not have the understanding to consent to this. How could they understand the concept that these images will be online forever and could impact them later in life?! It makes me so sad for those girls.I don’t give a shit what Louise’s boundaries are when it comes to pimping out her children. Children aren’t property, and the only thing that matters is what their boundaries are - that’s how they’ll feel now, in five years time, and for the rest of their lives. Nobody knows how they’ll feel, so they should’ve be put out there until they at least have some idea of how it’ll affect their lives.
This is Gleams old address so this isn’t her current PO Box. However for years she did have her PO Box as public knowledge (as did all of the Brit crew) because they used to get fan Mail!Furthermore, a quick google search shows her PO Box is publicly available on her website, http://sprinkleofglitter.blogspot.com/p/want-more-glitter.html
So it was all BS.
This is what I always think. I don't think I'd care about my parents sharing a photo of me now and then, but the near daily updates some parents (Louise included) give on their kids makes me feel uncomfortable for them when they get older. Sharing a cute photo of your kid on Christmas morning is one thing, posting about where they go to school or them in the bath or whatever else is just overstepping their privacy.Also I am trying to think how I'd feel if my baby pictures and whole childhood memories were all over the internet for everyone to see. I am starting at a new job in July and stressing about it. If my new workmates would have had the chance to take a look at my childhood and family on the internet before even meeting them, I would feel so awkward when meeting them!
Couldn't agree more, what on earth is she talking about, how can 3 and 11 year olds have socials? Unless she has opened them in their names and is building an online presence which they will then take over at a certain age, surely not? No NSPCC Ambassador should be allowed to act like this, it is ludicrousTaking pics of the girls 'for their socials'.... Just sounds so wrong.
Louise did start an IG account that was dedicated to Darcy's dance, completely full of photos and reels focused on Darcy's dancing and posing in tutus etc. she deleted it after a while - or at least made it private - explaining that Darcy had told her that it felt like too much pressure - yet she continued to plaster the exact same dance content all over her own socials, keeping everyone updated on every aspect of Darcy's dancing, including details of competitions and exams, and sharing results, in addition to the endless photos and reels. she no longer has an account in Darcy's name, but obviously totally ignored the fact that her daughter told her it was all too overwhelming, or she would have had the respect to rein in the dance content she shares on her own account too - especially since her account has far more reach than the account she had set up specifically for Darcy. the fact she uses Darcy's hobby to create content for her #DanceMumMonday hashtag shows how happy sh eis to exploit her daughters for content and make their lives all about her, without any regard for the impact it has on them.Couldn't agree more, what on earth is she talking about, how can 3 and 11 year olds have socials? Unless she has opened them in their names and is building an online presence which they will then take over at a certain age, surely not? No NSPCC Ambassador should be allowed to act like this, it is ludicrousstep away from the charities Louise and look after your daughters' privacy and stop lecturing others.
Think she meant the dance schools socials not her daughtersCouldn't agree more, what on earth is she talking about, how can 3 and 11 year olds have socials? Unless she has opened them in their names and is building an online presence which they will then take over at a certain age, surely not? No NSPCC Ambassador should be allowed to act like this, it is ludicrousstep away from the charities Louise and look after your daughters' privacy and stop lecturing others.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?