Sali, I know you are reading this. I'm not some pathetic woman who hates you, I'm not a troll or a bully or any of the other things you've said about us. I'm a woman with a lot of insecurities, who was looking to you for advice and help. I wanted an expert opinion, from someone who had a lot more experience, with a wider range of products than I could ever dream of. You let me down. You sold me products you would never dream of using on yourself, they were paying you. I have lost hope, not just in you but in all others like you. I read every review and recommendation with suspicion. You did that, it's your fault. Why weren't you honest? Stop making stupid little digs and comments about us. We are real people, consumers tricked by you, not trolls or sad little jealous women. You can't blame us for being disappointed in you, you're a sell out. I respected you, I looked up to you and you conned me.
Sali Hughes #13 The best new products I’ve been using for years
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Sali Hughes Threads Wiki
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
The Estée Lauder Futurist Hydra Rescue content today (and a few mentions recently when asked for recommendations) on Sali’s channel goes right to the heart of a huge issue with influencer marketing and culture.
Understandably an influencer wants the product to look as good as possible for the brand so it sells. It’s an ad, they say. No different to what you would see in a magazine.
Yes ok I get that. But here’s the thing. When I see Kendall Jenner in the Estée Lauder Double Wear Foundation ad in store or in Vogue, I *know* it’s not reality. I know what I’m being sold.
But the influencer who sets up forums and Facebook groups, creates communities, who says they are a journalist, whose USP by their own design is being honest and transparent? It’s a different ball game, and *we* are being set up as the bad guys for not playing by the rules. Because we are refusing to turn a blind eye to what is really going on in order for that transaction to take place.
So then what I struggle with is the lack of dialogue to explore these and other influencer issues, especially by people who fill that curious space of someone who has another expertise and has entered the influencer arena to take advantage of the financial incentives. When it suits, they will act as if they are with you - guiding, advising, sharing knowledge in a conspiratorial manner. It’s this duplicity that is a part of what people are pushing back at, I think. Or me, at least.
Understandably an influencer wants the product to look as good as possible for the brand so it sells. It’s an ad, they say. No different to what you would see in a magazine.
Yes ok I get that. But here’s the thing. When I see Kendall Jenner in the Estée Lauder Double Wear Foundation ad in store or in Vogue, I *know* it’s not reality. I know what I’m being sold.
But the influencer who sets up forums and Facebook groups, creates communities, who says they are a journalist, whose USP by their own design is being honest and transparent? It’s a different ball game, and *we* are being set up as the bad guys for not playing by the rules. Because we are refusing to turn a blind eye to what is really going on in order for that transaction to take place.
So then what I struggle with is the lack of dialogue to explore these and other influencer issues, especially by people who fill that curious space of someone who has another expertise and has entered the influencer arena to take advantage of the financial incentives. When it suits, they will act as if they are with you - guiding, advising, sharing knowledge in a conspiratorial manner. It’s this duplicity that is a part of what people are pushing back at, I think. Or me, at least.
Last edited:
Who is the “bereaved mum” she refers to?Sali and Lauren are ON ONE on Twitter. It does very much seem to be just the two of them, chatting to each other...
It’s not terribly coherent, but they seem to be attempting to defend their bullying behaviour on Twitter on the grounds that they didn’t know any better at the time.
View attachment 90485View attachment 90486View attachment 90487View attachment 90488
Actually Sali’s line seems to be that only Lauren behaved badly on Twitter. Chivalrous of her.
Probably just bait to create speculation here. Takes the heat off shady influencer activities.
Yes and yes. This (going back to dark ages when threads on her began here) was what posters were wary of. The murky area between jolly friend on FB, and influencer selling you stuff in the guise of the jolly friend and making a living from you. I'm like a stuck record on this but I only started to notice it when she kept wearing Whistles on FB, people did likewise and then she declared she had a 40% discount from Whistles. Now influencer culture was in it's infancy back then, and people were incredibly naive about the soft sell and how you buying something she recommended rewarded her. It didn't make her a bad person obviously but surely people were allowed to question the 'honest' element to recommendations?
Is this... irony? It’s such a weird reaction to criticism of your professional integrity.
Attachments
Imagine carrying on a conversation like that on twitter with no one but your flying monkeys. It’s embarassing for the flying monkeys the most, I think.
Anyway... it’s full of bait to try and turn the talk here away from talking about shady influencer behaviour into she said she said tit-for-tat. I’m not biting today.
Edit: thank you for posting it @Disillusioned. Good to have evidence of the contradictions and sleight-of-hand.
Anyway... it’s full of bait to try and turn the talk here away from talking about shady influencer behaviour into she said she said tit-for-tat. I’m not biting today.
Edit: thank you for posting it @Disillusioned. Good to have evidence of the contradictions and sleight-of-hand.
If that was a true depiction of the SH threads on this site, I wouldn’t be participating. She says there are “literally hundreds of lies still up”. Where?
SH: ‘If someone says “this is awful, false, humiliating, deeply painful. People are suffering, their mental health is affected”, and your reaction is to think “I don’t care. I am in the right because I don’t like her”’
It might be very uncomfortable to have your honesty and professionalism dissected, but it is not the same as trolling or bullying, by a long way.
Either she genuinely doesn’t read here and someone is feeding her lies and exaggerations, or she’s projecting and dissembling.
ETA: Hang on, she’s “got everything on screengrab” but she would never read here?
SH: ‘If someone says “this is awful, false, humiliating, deeply painful. People are suffering, their mental health is affected”, and your reaction is to think “I don’t care. I am in the right because I don’t like her”’
It might be very uncomfortable to have your honesty and professionalism dissected, but it is not the same as trolling or bullying, by a long way.
Either she genuinely doesn’t read here and someone is feeding her lies and exaggerations, or she’s projecting and dissembling.
ETA: Hang on, she’s “got everything on screengrab” but she would never read here?
Last edited:
Something that has been puzzling me. Does anyone wash their bras while they take a bath?
Attachments
I think the elephant in the room that she won't address is her role as an influencer. So many new people here say they were a fan of hers but something happened. Along the lines of 'she recommended something for ages, I trusted her judgement and bought it, only for there to be a new favourite the next week. And this happened again and again'. Now obviously that is her right, nothing wrong with that and we are all adults with free will. But she now represents a new breed of influencer, not the young Youtuber from their bedroom showing you their Primark haul, but an older trusted expert using the same friendly medium. It is a new way of advertising and stealth selling masquerading as something else. The downside for them is that they are open to more scrutiny which has been seen as trolling.
Not explaining myself very well - made sense in my head!
Not explaining myself very well - made sense in my head!
How can she write this and not expect people to make fun of it? Relaxing in a bath while your bras float around you? Like Kramer from Seinfeld washed his food in the shower? New curly girl method: plop your hair in a big cabbage leaf.
Makes perfect sense.
It comes down to how she can reconcile her current position with how she wrote about her place within the wider industry in her book;
“Glossy magazines, although I adore them more than most, and their often excellent beauty editors, simply cannot be wholly honest with you about beauty. They are at the mercy of major beauty advertisers, relying on them to keep them in business.”
(There’s more than that par - goes on about how people unencumbered by financial incentives like her are the most trustworthy - but you get the gist.)
No one is denying anyone a lucrative income, it’s the unwillingness to be honest (lol) and at least have a dialogue about what’s changed and what that means for a very loyal and trusting audience. The audience that was the ticket to becoming an influencer, with all its trappings, in the first place.
At some point she decided to cross over and clearly feels uncomfortable about the implications but not enough to be open about it or scale back. No amount of word salad can get her around that conundrum.
No wonder she rallied so vociferously when the ASA cracked down on disclosure - her carefully constructed reputation was probably the most exposed.
The quote from her about magazines, advertising and impartiality is really very interesting. It is what her entire 'brand' was founded upon. Trust me - I'm not being rewarded in any way for my recommendations. But somewhere along the line that changed.
Not just her obviously - almost all influencers.
'Anonymity is their oxygen'. So says 'feebee79', wearing a big hat and glasses in her profile picture.
Yeah. Ok, love. Your oxygen is self-righteousness. We get it.
We all have personal blindspots, but tattle is about calling out people who have a commercial relationship with us as there is nowhere else to do so. We sit in our own homes, as some woman with a ringlight and a face of free botox and fillers lectures us on self-care as an empowering choice which involves buying £90 moisturisers. We let these women directly into our lives. Would we do it if we had to open the door and make her a cup of tea? When this was what was involved, disreputable sellers were called out - timeshare holiday apartments, no deposit real estate investments, fitted kitchens and double glazing. And these people never pretended to be your friend! Now, salespeople are your best mate. They turn up regularly with something new, they engage with you when you're lonely, and perhaps you can buy a little bit of what makes them so cool, and people will like you too (or at least you will have obliterated the most egregious parts of your physicality - fat, spots, wrinkles. Don't think you are acceptable as a human being without buying something. It's just not possible).
SH previously had a sensibly down-to-earth attitude to beauty - don't buy too many products, don't overspend, eye cream is rubbish, 'dehydrated' is generally what skin needs, and I will rummage through the piles of free stuff I get sent to bring you what I think are the best within those parameters.
That is no longer the case. Now, she gets paid to pull things out of that pile, and that payment is overriding her original attitude, hence the eye-cream screeching u-turn.
The whole 'I have authority' aspect of the beauty is bullshit. There is no scientifically optimum product - it's not like finding the cure for cancer. The only thing that gives her any authority is that she looks better than you.
How does she achieve that? She has botox and fillers (and if she does those, she'll be using lasers too), and hair extensions and professional blowdries, and ringlights and lash extensions. None of which are what she is selling. Why? Because there are strict rules on how medical treatments like botox can be marketed, which influencers cannot comply with. That is why they can only sell creams - which do nothing, because otherwise they do would be classed as drugs and therefore subject to the same medical marketing restrictions.
And if we point this out? We are jealous trolls. FFS.
Yeah. Ok, love. Your oxygen is self-righteousness. We get it.
We all have personal blindspots, but tattle is about calling out people who have a commercial relationship with us as there is nowhere else to do so. We sit in our own homes, as some woman with a ringlight and a face of free botox and fillers lectures us on self-care as an empowering choice which involves buying £90 moisturisers. We let these women directly into our lives. Would we do it if we had to open the door and make her a cup of tea? When this was what was involved, disreputable sellers were called out - timeshare holiday apartments, no deposit real estate investments, fitted kitchens and double glazing. And these people never pretended to be your friend! Now, salespeople are your best mate. They turn up regularly with something new, they engage with you when you're lonely, and perhaps you can buy a little bit of what makes them so cool, and people will like you too (or at least you will have obliterated the most egregious parts of your physicality - fat, spots, wrinkles. Don't think you are acceptable as a human being without buying something. It's just not possible).
SH previously had a sensibly down-to-earth attitude to beauty - don't buy too many products, don't overspend, eye cream is rubbish, 'dehydrated' is generally what skin needs, and I will rummage through the piles of free stuff I get sent to bring you what I think are the best within those parameters.
That is no longer the case. Now, she gets paid to pull things out of that pile, and that payment is overriding her original attitude, hence the eye-cream screeching u-turn.
The whole 'I have authority' aspect of the beauty is bullshit. There is no scientifically optimum product - it's not like finding the cure for cancer. The only thing that gives her any authority is that she looks better than you.
How does she achieve that? She has botox and fillers (and if she does those, she'll be using lasers too), and hair extensions and professional blowdries, and ringlights and lash extensions. None of which are what she is selling. Why? Because there are strict rules on how medical treatments like botox can be marketed, which influencers cannot comply with. That is why they can only sell creams - which do nothing, because otherwise they do would be classed as drugs and therefore subject to the same medical marketing restrictions.
And if we point this out? We are jealous trolls. FFS.
Spot on.And no doubt she will question why she amongst all the beauty experts out there has these threads - partly it is because she made 'honesty' her thing. And also a lot of us had a connection with her through FB and SHB building up another almost personal layer of trust.
The part about her sons former teacher finding the posts here. How did her sons PE teacher feel when he got slagged in an article on The Pool? And since when do teachers skip into school telling people to kind? Teachers are there to teach practical matters, not dole out life lessons
What was said about the PE teacher?
Something along the lines of her son not liking him and she backed him upWhat was said about the PE teacher?
- Status