My first thought when I saw that post and her replies was that it was disrespectful to her followers/fans. Many of I guess who had bought her books and kit. Of course they would have questions about the pictures. Knock back. And that photo could have been taken or edited to not include the pictures.
Sali Hughes #17 So shady she doesn't need an SPF.
- 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:
What must she think of herself to take a picture, and then think that she must now list everything she has purchased, as the plebs will want to emulate her. It is weird. What a mindset.
I think this is a similar vibe that a lot of influencers that weren’t originally influencers have. Like The Frugality, where there’s a history of magazine / journalism work. Which I think is fine, but if you blame your audience for being unreasonable, then maybe you’re not cut out for it. I wouldn’t be!
"Support those with mental illness" unless they're proper mentals, of course.
Can whoever is reading here on SH's behalf (and I do hope you're being appropriately recompensed for your time) ask SH familiarise herself with the definition of a conspiracy theory. No one, as far as I am aware, has suggested that SH is conspiring with others. As a "proper writer" she really ought to know the true meaning of such terms or at least where to learn the actual meaning.
Sali's terminology around mental health is absolutely appalling and disgraceful. Incredibly jarring every time you see it.
And yes @Mselvista of course there are no conspiracy theories. People independently questioning how she does/does not define advertising, why she keeps mentioning brands favourably and is working with them yet that isn't an #AD, why she keeps pretending her taut face is nothing to do with Botox - these are questions people are entirely entitled to ask. No conspiracy.
And yes @Mselvista of course there are no conspiracy theories. People independently questioning how she does/does not define advertising, why she keeps mentioning brands favourably and is working with them yet that isn't an #AD, why she keeps pretending her taut face is nothing to do with Botox - these are questions people are entirely entitled to ask. No conspiracy.
Sali’s chum, a bloke, taking the piss out of her acolytes. Us silly, air-headed women, eh?
I don't understand the way she keeps compartmentalizing her working with brands. She has mentioned a few times 'full disclosure I am working with this brand but this is not an AD'. And then goes on to talk favourably about a product from that range. I simply don't understand what she doesn't understand. It is an AD.
Yes! This! I don’t understand it at all - the whole ‘I’ve worked with this brand, but not here’ eh?!
And also, the #presssamples - if it’s a press sample, surely it was sent to you in the hope you’d advertise. Is that not an ad because she may not be getting directly paid? It’s so confusing. All I know is I wouldn’t trust anything she recommended unless she’d obviously been using it for years, and even then my skin isn’t dry like hers. Of which she must keep informing us. All the time. She does like a dewy skin finish didnt you know?
In the weird mask video she hasn't tagged any brands or listed and painstakingly explained where every item is from. Could this be #notanad??
And to further fuel our wild speculation, she gave the response below when someone asked where she was going.
What on earth was the point of the post?
Imagine it told as an anecdote. "I wore a face covering and got the train".
Sparkling conversationalist.
And to further fuel our wild speculation, she gave the response below when someone asked where she was going.
What on earth was the point of the post?
Imagine it told as an anecdote. "I wore a face covering and got the train".
Sparkling conversationalist.
Attachments
#ASOS
So she's compassionate by calling Tattlers mental...
Attachments
She is awful. Someone points out her appalling terminology yet she sticks to it. And she set this whole nonsense up herself. Not one person here is remotely bothered where she got her bleeping carpet. It is the stuff she actively shills people question. But of course more muddying the water to make it look like an unhinged witch hunt.
Pathetic.
Pathetic.
“Cheers me up to have something to dress up for, however inappropriately.”
Hmm. Is this perhaps a Dressing for Leonard situation?
(With a side of Botox, obviously.)
Hmm. Is this perhaps a Dressing for Leonard situation?
(With a side of Botox, obviously.)
And she's got it the wrong way round. It's her use of the word 'mental' in a derogatory way that's the issue. Not where it's being pointed at.
Yes, she’s doubled down there. She sees “mental”, clearly short for “mentally ill”, as a slur to be used against people who criticise her. Very telling that she doesn’t acknowledge that it’s actually the offensiveness to people with mental ill health that matters.
I wondered after the awful p@edo candle debacle when she might have another pop at Tattle.
I notice she kept remarkably quiet then. Didn't want any one having a casual look here. She must think there is enough clear water to take the moral high ground and be brave again.
I notice she kept remarkably quiet then. Didn't want any one having a casual look here. She must think there is enough clear water to take the moral high ground and be brave again.
This is 60% of Michael "Hoges" Hogan's Twitter timeline ' taking mocking the cliches women use. And they are cliches which wouldn't use but I've not seen him do it with the way men are online and it feels like it has a nastier edge when it's a bloke doing it.
Didn't Hogan use his Telegraph column to criticise Dawn Porter as she then was, having also engaged on the "prawn" stuff on twitter?
She’s got a full bag of Harry Ramsden’s on them
Hogan’s an unappealing chap isn’t he, @Mselvista? It’s almost like so many of her friends are foul... 
- Status