Digital Influence | Transparency in influencer marketing: declaring paid for content on Instagram

Speaker A: Have you thought about when I ask you this question about who you are? Have you decided?

Speaker B: Oh, no, I'm completely just gonna.

Speaker C: Okay. No, I haven't either. I didn't realize you were gonna do that.

Speaker A: I text you and said, he's got some questions. As I'm giving the descriptions, I'm going to keep them short and sweet. We've got Jordan Bunker, who's a men's lifestyle and fashion writer and blogger. That is a bit of a mouthful. And Matt M. Buckets, who is also a men's lifestyle fashion writer and blogger. Did I get that right, guys?

Speaker C: Well, yeah, sounds good to me.

Speaker B: We'll take it. And what about you, Nick? What do you do?

Speaker A: I'm an influencer. Marketing specialist. That's what I've started to call myself. I thought consultant sounded a bit stupid.

Speaker C: It's tricky.

Speaker A: What do you think, Matt? Consultant or specialist?

Speaker C: Specialist. Uh, I'd, uh, listen to you more. So.

Speaker A: Okay.

Speaker B: Jordan, consultant sounds a bit corporate.

Speaker A: Just to give a bit of a flavour for who you are. Can you tell me the last project you worked on? Who was it for and what did you do? Jordan, did you want to start?

Speaker B: The last project would be. So last week I get. Well, depending on when this goes out. Um, I did a talk with, um, Hardy Amers alongside Oliver Hooson and Charlie Irons on like, on a style panel and we talked through like winter looks and winter styling and then we gave a bit about like Instagram and social media. And yeah, we did kind of. We had to post our photo on Instagram as well as a. We had to put it, include it in our own newsletters as well and invite our followers to come and attend. And yeah, it actually went really well. Surprisingly we had about 90 people, um, RSVP.

Speaker A: Um, Matt, what was the last project you worked on?

Speaker C: The last project I worked on was with Ikea, uh, for a home interior project where I styled the latest hay collection in our house. Uh, and with that came a little bit of social media here and there. Newsletter and bish, uh, bosh bash. Job done.

Speaker A: Cool. So we're going to talk about sponsored post declaration, which sounds like a riveting subject, but I feel like it's a very. I, uh, hate using the phrase, but I'm going to. On trend topic.

Speaker C: Oh, I, uh, was going to use Zeitgeist.

Speaker A: The Zeitgeist. Okay. Yeah, I like it. Maybe we can re edit what I said so that it sounds like I said Zeitgeist. Um, so I guess the reason this has come to light is because as, ah, more money is going into influencer marketing and more, uh, bloggers and Instagrammers and YouTubers are being asked to do more work. The Advertising Standards authority in this country and others around the world are starting to take more of an interest into how people disclose whether or not the work they've done has been paid for by brand. Would you say that's a good, uh, assessment of where we are?

Speaker C: Hoof?

Speaker A: Of course you can say yes. Just both, you can both say yes at once.

Speaker C: Yes.

Speaker A: I think, and I think what I find is maybe missing in all of this is so for someone like you, Matt, who's been doing this for quite a while now, how many years have you been blogging? It's got to be 10 years. 10 years?

Speaker C: 10, yeah.

Speaker A: When, when was your first paid project into that? 10 years.

Speaker C: Hmm, that's interesting. I would probably say within a year, possibly.

Speaker A: Really?

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker C: There might have been like a 30 quid, 40 quid here and there. Uh, not too sure.

Speaker A: And you, can you remember? I don't, you don't need to say brands or anything unless you want to. But what, um, can you remember what the project was?

Speaker C: I can't, I really can't. It's a long time ago. I could find out but.

Speaker A: And it's only 30 quid. I guess it's not, not, not to

Speaker C: belittle that it was definitely going to be SEO related at that time. Nothing of interest actually.

Speaker A: That must have been quite a surprise because were many people getting paid back

Speaker C: then, uh, for anything?

Speaker A: Was it a surprise to you that someone said to you, here's 30, uh, quid if you drop in? It's linked?

Speaker C: Yeah, I mean it sounded great at the time because I was just a student.

Speaker B: And out of interest, did you actually declare that you put that paid link in, if it was a link?

Speaker C: I really can't remember. It's really. I can't remember at all. I'd probably say no at the time.

Speaker B: I guess people didn't care though. Well, not didn't care, but it wasn't a big deal.

Speaker C: It was, it was, it was. I think at the time. At the time it was probably. I didn't even realize at all that that was a bit like a concern at that point. It was more just great, let's do it.

Speaker A: I wonder if it crossed anyone's mind back then. Wouldn't really, would it?

Speaker C: So long ago, isn't it? Uh, interesting question in some respects.

Speaker A: I guess it's the value as well. Not that I was trying to belittle £30. But think £30. It's like, oh, uh, what? And I have to put terms and conditions on it. It just doesn't seem like something.

Speaker C: No, I can relate to that.

Speaker A: Jordan, can you remember the first paid project you did? Because you've only, you've been blogging for what, four years?

Speaker B: No, it's um, a little over three years. I think it was three years in September.

Speaker A: When was your first paid project? How long into blogging?

Speaker B: I think it, I think it was even sooner than that. I think it would have been, I think within about six months. I can't again, I can't remember what it was, but I think it was more than like 30, 40 pounds. I think it was around 250 I think.

Speaker C: So how old are you at the moment, Jordan? Just remind me.

Speaker B: 22.

Speaker A: Okay.

Speaker C: So my blog was in 2008 when it started, so I would have been 23. No, 22. I'd have been 22.

Speaker A: And Jordan's getting 10 times what you were getting.

Speaker C: Inflation, I guess.

Speaker A: Going back to that question, do either of you think that knowledge of the regulations is widely known in the industry?

Speaker C: Uh, simple answer, yes for me, totally.

Speaker B: I think now people know that they need to do something, but I just don't think they know what they're exactly supposed to say or how they're supposed to phrase something. And by putting certain rules in place, I don't know whether that'll make sense, things better or worse. I think we're in an interesting time where people are more mindful of it though.

Speaker C: I think some people ah, assume they are immune to it because they are not working in a position as a full time job. I think that's quite a big part of it, personally.

Speaker A: That's interesting. So you reckon people who go full time blogger are more likely to kind of uh, read up on the rules and respect them a bit more than people who just dally in this area.

Speaker C: You should hope so. You should hope so because hopefully they're taking it seriously. Uh, and checking the, checking the facts, crossing the, crossing the t's.in the I's

Speaker A: in terms of regulations going back to Jordan's point, um, do you think that they're, do you think the regulations need to be more kind of draconian and firm, I. E. They specifically say if you're doing a paid piece of work on Instagram, it has to say advertisement and that has to be the first word that's on your copy. Do you think it needs that level of uh, would that make it easier?

Speaker C: It's not for me to decide that, is it? I would actually say that. Could. Could there be. Could it be more clear on Instagram?

Speaker A: Made by Instagram, as in, like the branded content tool they've got. Do either of you have that.

Speaker C: Some kind of more. More guidelines actually on the, uh, app.

Speaker A: Oh, right, I see what you mean. Uh, because at the minute it basically just says refer to your local. It's a free for all button maker. Um, yeah. Do either of you have the branded content tool?

Speaker B: Not yet, but if Instagram are listening, I would. I'd want it.

Speaker C: And same not yet for me either. No. Um, yeah, I got the prompt. Uh, I think Jordan got the prompt as well, if I remember rightly. But I've not seen anything. I've tried to use it, but I've still not got anything going.

Speaker A: That's interesting.

Speaker C: It would make things a lot easier.

Speaker A: I'm not 100% sure how it works, actually, because obviously you tag a brand in. So let's say you do some work with Gucci, Matt, because I know that's a big brand.

Speaker C: Yeah, yeah.

Speaker B: That's next week.

Speaker A: Next week you do a piece of Gucci, you tag them. But they have to confirm that. So I don't know if that stops your post going live until they've confirmed it. Which would be really irritating, wouldn't it, if you said, I'm going to put it out on a Monday and they didn't say yes till a Thursday.

Speaker C: Yeah, but I think there is. I think you can agree to that or not agree to that. You can agree to the brand checking it or not.

Speaker A: Oh, really?

Speaker C: If I remember rightly.

Speaker A: But that would mean anyone could put it up, surely. So I could say I was doing a good job.

Speaker B: One for you, Nick.

Speaker C: Nick, you should look into it.

Speaker A: I should look into it. I should know this. But being an emphasis on marketing, the problem is with anything on Instagram like that, if you don't have access to it, you can't check it.

Speaker C: That's true.

Speaker A: You can't, like test it. So it's really difficult to work out. And try chatting to Instagram. They're not the easiest organization to speak

Speaker B: to and it's frustrating as to why some people have it and some people don't. Just because you've not got as many followers as the person that has got it, it doesn't mean that you shouldn't be entitled to use a tool which should help us disclose or it's.

Speaker C: Yeah, it's just as important for everyone, isn't it?

Speaker A: This is A strange one. I guess they're still testing it. I know that the FTC in America said that it didn't go far enough and that so they don't think it's clear enough if someone uses that, that

Speaker C: it's paid for content from knowledge of the business. Are, uh, they, what are they deciding on? Are they deciding on impartial feedback, do you think?

Speaker A: Uh, who's that?

Speaker C: The regulators. So when they say it's not going far enough, is that because they've asked a hundred people, 100 housewives in Texas?

Speaker A: I think that's, that's a really interesting point. It would be interesting for the regulators to actually go out and ask people because I think we in the industry, all three of us here, make assumptions, don't we? I think we were chatting the other day, Matt, and you said something like, would your mum know it's sponsored content?

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: Would, would someone who doesn't use Instagram go on there and know from the tag ad or tag spawn that ah, something has been paid for by a brand? And that's quite interesting because I don't even think ad does. I think anyone who uses Instagram knows what it means. But if you've never used Instagram before, would you know that ad meant that it's an ad?

Speaker C: I mean that goes straight to the point of what we were discussing the other day when we were talking about the subject of that hashtag ad. Could be anything, couldn't it? Like Jordan was saying it could be an emoji of a frog. But if that was the widely used, yeah, uh, way to do it, then

Speaker B: we pinned that on me. Is that what I said?

Speaker A: Frog did specifically say emoji of a frog. I actually remember it.

Speaker C: Okay, you did.

Speaker A: Oh, maybe I did then maybe I said it. I think I said it.

Speaker B: I'll let, I'll let you have that one.

Speaker A: But I think I'm wrong. I think I'm wrong. I'm going, I'm turning my. Turn it around. I mean if. Well, no, I think what I meant was if the regulator said it has to be a hashtag, hashtag picture of a frog, then that's what you have to do. Now, I'm not saying the regulator is right if they do that. I guess the question here is what is transparency? As in does ad even mean anything? I mean we've, I'm gonna say we've grown up with it. I guess we have. Ad to me immediately means this is a paid for piece of content. But I don't know that. Yeah, the man on the street. The hundred housewives of Texas. Do they know that ad means that Gucci has paid Matt to wear some of their perfume?

Speaker B: I think I'd agree with the FTC in the sense that I don't think it does go far enough. Because if we all think about the way that we interact with our phones, the speed at which we scroll, you almost miss the bit at which it inserts the paid partnership. Uh, you scroll too quick to even see that it was an ad. And now people will take out the hashtag ad in their caption because they've got this. And if you miss that top line, then it even becomes even more unclear. So it's only when you look at a photo in isolation that you realize it's a paid photo or a paid for project.

Speaker C: It's an interesting point, what you were just saying there about the speed of scrolling, because some people use Instagram for a totally different reason. Uh, literally just scrolling through. Like for instance, my partner Holly, she doesn't like any images, she just scrolls through really quickly.

Speaker B: I've had a like or two. I've made the cut.

Speaker C: Oh, have you now?

Speaker A: Yeah.

Speaker B: Okay, thanks, Holly, if you're listening.

Speaker C: But generally she'll just like, I'll see her scroll past and she'll just ignore one of my pictures because she's doing it so fast. She's basically just looking for dog pictures and like dog videos and stuff. But it's a different way of using it. So, like, what are the regulations for? Are they to protect the people that really engage with the content or just everyone? Because I guess a lot of people don't care, do they? I imagine. Is it just.

Speaker A: I guess it's to protect everyone. But I do feel like they are actually geared towards people who use the service, which is an odd one because it means if someone comes in new, how many times they see ad before they realize it's an ad? And by then they'll have seen three or four posts which were ads and they didn't know.

Speaker C: Yeah, yeah, that's a weird one.

Speaker A: But then what would you do? I mean, what would you say, Jordan? What should, what could they do to reduce that in terms of the speed of scrolling? Like stick a hologram on the picture that says ad would look a bit weird, wouldn't it?

Speaker C: I did see that recently, actually. Funny you mentioned that. I got a contract through that had some guidelines, and I think the guidelines have been copied from a, uh, tv, um, advertising because it did say insert hologram in corner type thing.

Speaker A: Would you, Would you Do that. Would either of you do that?

Speaker C: I wouldn't personally, but then if I had to, I guess I would.

Speaker B: Yeah, but then I guess the argument again, is it depending on the opacity of that hologram, it could have the same great word, great word. It has no effect on whether the visibility of it. It's like the speed of scrolling. Again, if it's not. If it's not bold enough, then you might not even see that. So it's all down to interpretation, isn't it?

Speaker C: At the end of the day, I think, like, I think I can count. I can speak for you, Jordan, on this one.

Speaker B: We all want to do it. I'll go downstairs there, make a pretend you speak for me.

Speaker C: No, but we want to do the right thing. We want to set a good impression to everyone and we want to do the right thing. We don't want to get in trouble because we're doing this probably properly. So we want to follow the guidelines, which is probably why we're having the discussion in the first place, isn't it?

Speaker B: Yes, definitely.

Speaker C: Um, the last thing we want to do is get in trouble because that could ruin our job, which people just, um. I feel like people are just disregarding, though, because they're not doing it full time, or maybe they're too naive, I guess, in a way, or just careless a lot of the time.

Speaker A: I was going to ask you this question, but there's no point. So I know the answer. I guess we three, and more of us aside, do see on a daily basis, content that we know or we're pretty confident is paid for without a disclosure.

Speaker B: Yeah, I think for me, the main. When I see that, it's frustrating because at the. I think I just feel not sorry, almost. I don't know of a better word, but it's like the only reason you're getting these opportunities is because of the audience you've been able to garner. And if you're then not disclosing, it's almost disrespectful to them that you're not telling them it's a paid project.

Speaker C: What do you think the reason would be that people wouldn't do? Uh, it.

Speaker B: I think there's so many reasons. I think people say, oh, it's uncool, or, oh, I just didn't think I needed to. I think there's so many excuses or people that forget initially and then add it in, add it, add it in and then put it in an hour later. It's like, well, have you missed the boat then? Because the Visibility of that post is going to be very small afterwards.

Speaker C: Um, there's only a certain amount of mistakes you can make, isn't there, really? Yeah, before. It's just way too convenient, which is a shame.

Speaker B: But I think we were having the conversation the other day. It's like, well, maybe in their contract, it's weird in the sense that they're only getting paid for their blog post with the presumption that they'll post an Instagram post. And then by the letter of the law, they're then not doing anything wrong because they're not getting paid for that part of the content. But it just looks. It looks bad anyway. It'd still look bad.

Speaker C: I mean, that's something that I've definitely done in the past, um, because it's not been in the contract. But then recently that's. That's not the case. But, yeah, I think that that's definitely happened. Happening still, doesn't it?

Speaker A: That's a really interesting one because I think, um, you know, if there's an assumption of a post, because the whole thing is about control, isn't it? If the brand is controlling your editorial, uh, output, then you have to disclose. But if they haven't said, you've got to put an Instagram post up. Yeah, if you do a YouTube video that's paid for, but just post and they say, that's all we want. And then you do an Instagram story or post that says, come and check out my new video, you're not getting paid for that, but you are getting paid. The example I would use, Matt, is when we went to, um. Maybe grassing myself up a bit here, when I went to that gin distillery for you, for the blog, the contract was very specific and it said, it even listed the channels on which paid content was going to appear, and they were all your channels. So, of course, when we put the content up, we fully disclosed. But of course, I went to the distillery. Yeah, I took Instagram stories, I took photos. On the day, I think when I posted about the actual blog post, I put up ad on one of them. But for everything else I posted, I didn't.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker B: On your channels, was that.

Speaker A: Yeah, because I was getting paid essentially, in a way, I guess I was getting paid by Matt for producing content for his channel and the channel the brand were paying for the content to appear on Matt's channel. I was just the creator, not the publisher. So, yeah, I think.

Speaker B: I think that's the same argument for photographers and videographers and for anyone that does anything editorially for a brand, and then they feel they want to share that work. They're not being paid to put stuff on their social media if they have a big following. Um, so I think that's. Again, it's another murky area.

Speaker A: It's a strange one though, isn't it? Because when I looked at the regulations and somebody whose name escapes me wrote a really good blog on this and I'll. If wherever the hell we post this, if there's room to put links, I will put this as a link. She mentioned gifting and said that gifting, um, has to be disclosed if there was any creative control from the brand. Um, and in a way, you think that sounds really clear to me, doesn't it? So if a brand give you a pair of trainers, if Gucci give Matt some perfume, but don't pay him and say, can you say this about the perfume? And Matt says that about the perfume, then he should disclose that the brand are essentially paying him, but it's just in perfume. Um, firstly, I guess. Do you agree with that?

Speaker B: I don't think you should agree to do a project on the basis with that example. If a brand wants to talk, wants you to say something particular about that perfume without even testing it. Well, it's a job that I wouldn't personally take because how can you agree to that without even like using it?

Speaker A: Yeah, that's a good point. But some people do and we all know that people do. But should they disclose how?

Speaker C: What? How would you disclose it?

Speaker A: Well, that's actually a question I got asked, um, earlier this week. Someone said this is a good example, actually. They said, um, I was gifted a product and asked to include it in a look. Yep. That I was going to do in the next coming weeks. I included it in the look. Should I put that that item was gifted out of all the other items? So he did a whole look of like five, six pieces. He's wearing a lot of clothes. Um, should he put. It's like winter wear, uh, socks, hat, box of shorts, everything. Should he have put gifted next to the item that was gifted to him? Like, should he make that clear? They did ask him to do a post with it in. They weren't paying him.

Speaker C: And is this is who's. Whose rules was this? Did you say was it from the same.

Speaker A: This is from the asa.

Speaker C: I have heard this in the past,

Speaker B: but I think the clues in the name. It's a gift. So, uh, I think a gift without any, uh, editorial control is a gift. But a gift where you're like, oh, we're not going to send this to you without conditions. Without the conditions of it's included in the blog post, then there should be some disclosure. But I don't think the disclosure should be in this current saying hashtag ad, because that then, in other people's minds, constitutes that as payment in terms of financial reimbursement. So I think there's almost two different brackets. You don't want to say ad, but you do want to disclose it. So there's always two different fields. It should be one for gifting, one for financial payment.

Speaker C: The classic courtesy of ex Gucci in this case, which I'm not working for Gucci, but it sounds like I am.

Speaker A: Um, sounds like you will be. No, it's interesting. I think that's a really hard area because even with you summing up there, Jordan, which sounded very clear and, um, to the point, there's so many different permutations, isn't there? It's like there's so many different ways you can work with a brand. Yeah. And it's kind of like it gets that level of like, oh, well, I came for. I went for dinner with a brand, and at the end of the dinner, the person invited me, said, oh, would you mind posting about this dinner on your. On your Instagram? Do you then put up hashtag gifted or hashtag well, not gifted? That sounds weird. Hashtag gift? Or do you disclose this dinner paid for by me? It's a really. It gets into a level where you're like, you know, disclaimers and everything. There should be even like an Instagram disclaimer section. Not even just at the top, like a. Like a whole box. Fill in your comment, fill in your hashtag, fill in your disclaimer.

Speaker C: That sounds like a great idea.

Speaker A: Yeah. Could be actually Instagram, if you're listening. Um, my fee is 10%.

Speaker C: Yeah. I'll take one for, uh, knowing Nick,

Speaker A: because, like the gin example, I put up some pictures of the gin distillery. I'm advertising the brand to people, to the very, very few followers I have, but I'm not telling them that the brand paid me. And it's almost as if I'm giving an endorsement to the brand. I'm definitely making a connection between them and me. People are like, oh, this guy went and bought some gin from that brand. Therefore he must like that brand. Therefore, if I respect his authority on gin, or lack thereof, I should buy that brand.

Speaker C: It sounds slightly similar to the project we did when we went to Copenhagen, even though we weren't actually paid but the brand paid us to stay in the hotel and pay for our flights or some of our flights.

Speaker B: But they were clear on that. They wanted people to disclose that, uh, even though it wasn't.

Speaker C: Yeah, they were. But did the, did the plus. But the plus ones were exempt from that. It's just interesting. It's not like there's a right and wrong there. I'm not saying there is.

Speaker A: But yeah, I guess in that instance the plus one wasn't getting. I guess they were, they were benefiting from the trip. But uh, that was, that was more of a gift because there was no editorial control on it. But at the same time, to go back to my point, it's like, does even editorial control matter? Because if someone sends you a gift, you then they are changing their. You might just be obliged to post and they might be sending you the gif knowing that you're more likely to post about it because you're obliged. Should you just declare that it was free? This is a brand I haven't paid for yet. I am advertising.

Speaker B: People feel more obliged than less than others though, don't they? Like some people feel, oh, someone sent me something, I need to post about this. How can I work this into something? Whereas for me, if something gets sent to me, well, first of all I'll say on email, be like, oh, I really appreciate you getting in touch. Would you mind if they say, oh, we want to send you something in the post? The first reaction for me is like, what is it? And I'll always check if it's something that I'm likely to use.

Speaker A: Gucci perfume.

Speaker B: Yeah, exactly, Gucci perfume. And then. But I don't feel obliged to post about it because, oh, I don't know, it's a difficult one. If people are looking for an answer with this podcast, they're not going to get one. It's just an open ended conversation that

Speaker A: I think to uh, you know, a good point to make clear is, you know, we're not discussing anything to do with paid here. I mean in my view paid is really clear. If someone pays you to post, let's just make it simple. If someone pays you to post on Instagram or to tweet or to produce a YouTube video or to build a Pinterest board, you've got to declare that that was paid for. I find it hard that people still find that hard to understand. Um, I guess so that's kind of point one done. But the point underneath that is, and we've had a lot of chat about this this week where do you disclose? I'm still of the opinion and I have actually shifted this opinion in recent months, but it hadn't really been clear to me, but that the disclosure has to come pretty early on in the text because I think if you're hiding it in any way, then it's not transparent. Um, and I think you two both agree on that point, do you not?

Speaker C: I would only agree if I was told that was the law. I would just go with whatever the rules are.

Speaker A: If the rules say, ah, you have to be transparent, this is a good one to discuss. If they say they're not, it has to be transparent to a user that your content is paid for. Do you not feel that the disclosure has to come before the Read more. Um, on Instagram, this for me is a new one. Even fortnight ago, I would have said, nah, it's fine, just stick it at the end. But actually thinking about it, I'm like, when people scroll through, like Jordan said, they're on their speed scroll, they're not going to click that Read more. And they're not going to see that it was an ad, but they will have seen and consumed the content. So it seems to me like it should come before that to be transparent, which is what the rules say. It has to be transparent.

Speaker B: I think this is something that I'm gonna start doing. I definitely think it needs to be within that top line, above the Read more. Because it's. Without even realizing if your caption starts becoming longer and longer and then it falls into that Read more. It wasn't that I was trying to cover it up, it was just the fact that I had a lot to say and I probably rambled. Um, but now I'll always try and aim to have it in that top line.

Speaker C: I think it's good to set an example as well. A good example, um, because it's not something you see very regularly. I mean, actually it is this week, funnily enough. And you do see it more in American content. Um, at least I do anyway.

Speaker A: But I guess that's because I think the regulator in America is a lot more. I think they have a lot more power. I mean, I don't know this is an assumption, but you know what America's like with litigation and things. In America, you wouldn't want to get sued, would you?

Speaker C: No.

Speaker B: And I think if people are fearful of putting it in that top line, then maybe it's a job that they shouldn't be doing. I don't think anyone's gonna look at that top line, see that someone's paid for it and think, oh, I'm not gonna like that photo now. I think if it's a good brand match and it's a great image, then, then the fact that you've put ad in the top line shouldn't impact on that. So I don't think people should worry about that.

Speaker C: Something you were saying the other day, Nick, about, um, ad, um, images on Instagram perform not as well as organic content. Is that something, uh, you would agree with? Uh, someone mentioned it the other day.

Speaker A: Me or Jordan?

Speaker C: One of you two mentioned it.

Speaker A: I think I said it. I mean, that's what I believe, ad content. I mean, in my job we're always telling brands, look, the content won't perform as well as an organic piece of content. That's just something you have to live with. It's particularly, I think on Instagram, it's not such, it's not such a thing. But on YouTube in particular, YouTube content tends to perform a lot worse. If it's an ad, I think it's because, um, I don't know, maybe there's more, I don't know, maybe it's a more scathing audience on YouTube. I don't know, maybe people do see that initial word and YouTube has a lot of boxes and things that say this contains paid promotion. And maybe that does put people off. Um, but I think to go to your point, Jordan, that actually if people are being put off, you've got to ask yourself whether it's the right brand to be working with and whether it's the right content to be creating. Because that's always my counter argument is, you know, those are the two questions you've got to be asking. And if the answer is kind of not so you're then worried about putting an ad, then you shouldn't be doing the project anyway.

Speaker B: I guess it all depends on the image. I think, say if you were a travel influencer, uh, and you got took out by either a car company or a travel insurance company, I think the image that you're going to put up is going to be very in keeping with what you naturally post anyway. So I think the, the level that it performs at should stay quite steady. But I think, say I'm trying to think whether it be a drinks brand or something to do with packaging, it already has that. It's already, it looks more addy. And then if you then put the top line in as well, then maybe that's just like the nail in the coffin and maybe that's why Those posts don't perform well. Um, so that's why generally I don't really do much in terms of having a bottle on the table or holding something up to my face, because that's just not something I would do because I know that it's just. I don't know.

Speaker C: It's going to stand out, isn't it?

Speaker B: Yeah, it's going to stand out.

Speaker A: And that's a really interesting point. And I keep saying that probably have to cut that few of those out. But in terms of, uh, looking forward, I think part of the problem is that ads have underperformed because they're ads and because brands come to guys like you and are very prescriptive about what they want you to do. And they're prescriptive to such an extent that it moves what would be your normal content out of your normal content. I. An example, and I won't mention the influencer. Uh, remember we were chatting the other day about that guy who takes a lot of really nice architecture shots and it's not me. Um, and then like his fifth or sixth post was like a picture of his front room.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: And that was just totally out of sync, wasn't it, with everything else he does and the content that performed awfully. And you think, why would the brand want that? I don't see. This is my kind of counter argument is like, you put you, you're going to have to put ad on anyway or the authorities are going to get you. So it makes you start to question more why you're even doing that and makes you push back on the brand and say, look, the brand is a good match, but the content you're asking me to create M isn't me. It's not my content. And actually this would perform far better if it was done in a style that is much more me.

Speaker C: That's a subject we used to talk about quite a lot, uh, when we were talking about blog posts. I think it was an easy example to say, this is a, uh, golf company once contacted us to see if we wanted to play golf. And the simple answer is no.

Speaker A: Do you remember that? Uh, do you remember that fly fishing one?

Speaker C: I do, yeah.

Speaker A: And we were actually going to do that.

Speaker C: That makes more sense if you look at the brand who wanted to do it. But back to my point, um, so, yeah, we got invited to play golf and that content just didn't fit. But if they had said, would you like to go to a golf ball factory? Sign me up because it makes more sense.

Speaker A: That's what I Always find strange in these situations. It's like, uh, a brand working backwards would think they'd take someone like you, Jordan, but they'll. They should be looking for the audience, and they say, these are the people we want to sell our product to. So who talks to those people? Well, one of the people who talk to those people is Jordan. His audience are the audience we want to speak to. So now how do we work with Jordan to deliver our message to that audience? But it seems to be backwards to me. It's like they decide what they want to do, then they decide who they want to work with, and then they get surprised when people say, I don't want to do that. They don't just decide what they want to do, but how they want to do it. So they're like, oh, okay, we're going to sell our product by doing a golfing tournament. Jordan, we want you to come and play golf. It's like, that doesn't work with you necessarily. Maybe I'm putting words in your mouth. Maybe you'd love to do a golfing tournament.

Speaker B: I think we're going through a time where everyone wants to get on board with influencer marketing. Everyone wants to work with influencers, whether it be on YouTube or on blog posts or on sponsored content. And sometimes, to be blunt, I don't think every brand suits influencer marketing. I don't think every brand needs to have an Instagram post and influencers working on it. It just doesn't suit their product. But they almost feel, well, this is me m making assumptions. They almost feel like they need to be part of it now. They need to get involved with it. And it's bad when a brand that shouldn't be on Instagram, doing Instagram posts, partners up with an influencer, uh, that will say yes to everything. And you'll get an underperforming post and it'll just look terrible. And it almost scapegoats the industry because some people will see that one person's content that influences content. He's put out with a terrible brand and a terrible brand message.

Speaker C: I feel like I need an example. Are we talking, like, say, for instance, like a crisp brand or something like that?

Speaker B: Yeah, just anything. I'm thinking like washing up liquids or washing powder. Well, maybe not washing powder, because some people could do that well, but, like, don't know. There's just certain products that. You don't think tonics, tea cakes go down well on Instagram.

Speaker A: Um, yeah, no, they would. They'd go down well on Instagram. I'VE got, uh, there's that. There's that girl. Is it Nikki Someborn. She makes.

Speaker C: You've got them.

Speaker A: Tonic's Tea Cake cushions.

Speaker C: This is an ad now.

Speaker A: A friend of mine made two cushions for me. I have them on my bed, but they are very much like that. Instagrammers.

Speaker B: Yeah. Would you agree with that? Would you. Do you think that there are brands out there that think we need to do an Instagram content push? Let's go find some influencers. And there isn't with men's lifestyle to take, for example, there isn't that many of us. So if there isn't someone that suits your product, then maybe you should wait until someone does or maybe put your money into something else.

Speaker A: I find it strange when brands don't act in a strategic and sensible way. I think there are. I agree with you. I think there are a lot of brands for whom Instagram and social media in general is a much more challenging space than they'd like to believe. Uh, m. I'll give you an example. Actually, Years ago I was chatting to a guy at uh, um, a random party, uh, some networking event, and his company make fencing for horse races. You know the white fencing that goes down the side of horse races.

Speaker B: Yep.

Speaker A: And he was. We had a meeting because he was like, I want to build our Instagram account. And I was a bit like, okay. And his strategy was just take photos of the fencing and say, we've just launched this new bit of fencing.

Speaker C: That is the nichest account I've ever heard.

Speaker A: Exactly. And I was kind of. I mean, he kind of laughed me out of the room. I was naively assuming he knew anything about marketing. My kind of pitch to him was, look, you know, he felt like his customers were on Instagram. I couldn't argue with that or not. But let's just say his customers were. But they're all into horse racing. Like, wouldn't it be better for him to work with an influencer, uh, or even just on his own to create content that was of value to the horse racing community, which was sponsored by and, um, produced by his company, this horse race fencing thing, but would attract an audience who would watch it and it wouldn't have a message in there about his fencing ever. It would just be about horse racing. But you know, this is kind of old school marketing. It's like why soap operas are called soap operas. They didn't use soap. They were just sponsored by soap companies. Like, you just sponsor the content. And people would go, I, uh, love that content. And they would feel warm and fuzzy about the brand. And when it came to buying horse racing, fencing, that's who they turn to. But, but he was just like you said, Jordan, he's like, oh, no, we've got, you know, we've got to go on Instagram, we've got to send some horse fencing to a blogger. Uh, they got a pose of it, uh, do a flat lay of horse fencing and you just like, would you do it? How much, how much would. Let's say he, he's on the phone now on another Skype call and he's saying, get me these two guys.

Speaker B: Sounds like deal or no deal.

Speaker A: Get me these two guys. Now. I, uh, don't. Money is no object. But they have to do. They have to do one Instagram shot of them with the product full length?

Speaker B: No, because it's just me leaning on a fence. There's no value for my audiences. No, when people say, uh, it frustrates you when people go, oh, but if you could get paid like £10,000, £100,000, would you do it? No. It still comes down to the simple question of does it suit my audience or does it suit what I produce? And if the answer is no, it doesn't matter how much money you're going to throw it.

Speaker C: Uh, that comes back to integrity in terms of content and ads and all the content that you put out there, your output, it's to do with integrity. That's massive.

Speaker A: That hits the nail on the head. I guess the only way you'd do it is if you decided it was game over.

Speaker C: I was just, I was just gonna

Speaker B: say that on a ban, you could

Speaker A: take, you could take that money, you could take a million quid and then you'd just be like, I'll lose all my audience. But.

Speaker C: So this is when we cut to Jordan on the beach with a bit of fence next to him.

Speaker A: No, actually, it segues nicely into that guy whose name has also escaped me. Everyone's name escapes me.

Speaker B: Um, you can see that we've pre planned this.

Speaker A: We've prepped, we've prepped, we've prepped. I've got notes. He, he only has. He's missing a tooth. An American photographer, lives in Alaska or somewhere cold.

Speaker B: 1924, US. His name, his name does escape us, actually. I will search it now once you continue to talk, though.

Speaker A: But I just thought it was interesting that he's the first person I've seen who's, he's like, quit. He's quit Instagram down tools.

Speaker B: Yeah, it actually says yeah, user, uh, user. Not found.

Speaker A: What? He actually deleted it. Oh, wow. So all that content, I mean, his content was. His content was beautiful.

Speaker B: That's crazy.

Speaker A: Did you see his final post?

Speaker B: Yeah, in my slightly hungover state, I did see the fact that he was. He was making a big song and dance about something, but I didn't actually see that he was quitting. What was his reasoning behind it?

Speaker A: Uh, he said it was very long and it's a shame you can't. I mean, it was very heartfelt in its. And honest. Well, I presume it's honest. Um, he said that he felt like he'd done a lot of soul searching and felt like he was pandering to Instagram as a social network and it was having a detrimental impact on his family life and his mental state and his ability to create the best work that he could. So he said, anyone who wants to follow me, get on my mailing list, come and see me on my website. But I'm only going to be producing content for me, for me now, not and for other paying people. Because he does a lot of brand work, doesn't it? And stuff. It's interesting. Like 600,000 followers, I think he had. I mean, that's not a small account, is it?

Speaker B: Uh, that's crazy. Fair play to him, though, like some people it does have. That's the thing behind the scenes that audiences probably don't see is the impact it has on people. When you're working on paid content, like the stress of when maybe a post doesn't go down as well, you're thinking, oh, what can I do better? Or you're refreshing to save more likes, or there's any more comments and it's just. It can have such a big impact on mental health.

Speaker A: Yeah. Uh, there's definitely a piece done in that.

Speaker C: That's one for part two.

Speaker A: But that's actually. I mean, it was, you know, that, that guy, I followed him for a while. He's very heartfelt in his posts, isn't he? He's always very honest and open. And actually there's a lot of YouTubers do it. They put, uh, up videos saying, this is the last video I'm ever going to do. I'm going to quit YouTube just to get their audience to all watch it and then write at the bottom and plead with them to come back. And then they go, ah, I'll come back. So initially, I initially thought, oh, uh, maybe that's that. And then I thought, I don't think this guy's that kind of person. Interesting, um, that he just deleted the account though, because that means, you know, even if in a month's time, a year's time, he thinks you can do

Speaker C: that, you can just deactivate it, but your content comes back.

Speaker A: Oh, does it? Uh, okay.

Speaker B: His name is Christian Watson.

Speaker C: Um, yeah, I know. He modelled at, uh, New York Fashion Week as well, didn't he? A couple of times.

Speaker B: Here's an odd one to put a bit of cynicism on it. What about if he's done any paid for content and he's now took the account down, is he then liable?

Speaker C: It's a good question.

Speaker A: I don't know. In the contract there should be something about the duration of content. I've always thought that in influencer contracts. Why there isn't? Because, you know, it doesn't say like, what, until you'll be 96 and you'll get a knock on the door and someone will go, oh, um, we just noticed you deactivate your Instagram account, Jordan, you owe us, um, that 250 quid back with interest for the last hundred years. But that's interesting. What would you say, what would you say to, uh. Because I think this is a question I genuinely don't know the answer to for once, How long would you say is reasonable? Because I think there should be a length of time, shouldn't there? Because you guys might change your, your lives or your minds or your content direction and you might think, you know, well, that horse fence post content I did, I want to delete. But obviously if you did that next week, that's not really fair on him. If you did it in six months, that's probably not fair, but two years,

Speaker C: do you reckon something like that's, um, interesting? Because I've never taken anything down, so I've never. No, I'm not. So I can't answer that.

Speaker B: I guess it's. Well, if you wanted to look at it in a plain way, it all comes down to looking at the contract. And if it doesn't say, if it says we want you to keep this up for six months before deleting it or whatever, then obviously you're okay. But if it's not even alluded to, then I presume you'd be okay. It's only when the client would say we want this to remain on your feed for, well, forever. I don't think I would delete a piece of paid content, though.

Speaker C: Yeah, you'd hope you'd made the content work for you more than the brand. Unless it embarrasses you what later on.

Speaker A: But if it doesn't, if it embarrasses you later on, are you that bothered? Are people gonna scroll back through 15 years of Instagram? If Instagram's still a thing, it could

Speaker C: well be worth deleting something if you felt it incriminated you in some way or someone was putting a case against you.

Speaker A: Um, okay, so I think we need a final thought from each of you. What advice would you give Matt, to somebody who is starting out in this world, maybe has had their first paid for opportunity? What do you think the first thing

Speaker C: they should do is hopefully, um, hopefully look at some examples from their people they may call role models or look up to, um, as you know, a good model to copy. I guess not copy as such, but just sort of take advice from. It's a tricky one though, isn't it? New people, the fact that I am 32 now and some people reading my blog at 16 and they actually want to, like some people at 16 year old now want to be celebrities.

Speaker A: There we go. Um, and the same question to you, Jordan. What would you advise someone who's just starting out and uh, maybe has their first paid for post?

Speaker B: I think obviously you'd be proud of where you've got to because I think when you get your first paid opportunity, it's such a big thing. But I think don't let the excitement take over and think, is it uh, is it right for me? And if it is, think how you can do it creatively, how you can work into the content you're already creating and then just remember to disclose and do everything that do well. Make sure that it's clear that it's an ad. But I'm sure people will be happy for you that it is an ad.

Speaker C: Oh dear. I can't, I can't. I can't compete with that. It's too profound. You're always asking is too profound.

Speaker A: That's a good point to end on.

Speaker C: I think it's worth, it's worth following up with some more, uh, chat about this because the subject's just endless really, isn't it? The fact that it's always changing and the fact that you were saying two weeks ago that um, ad could be anywhere in the content, but now it's in the top line suggests that we need to just keep doing this for the next 10 years.

Speaker B: There we go. Well, hopefully people have took something away from this and if, if people are still confused by everything, then maybe then we should open it up. Feel free to get in touch on Twitter and Instagram and the rest.

Speaker A: Uh, okay, well, I guess we have to thank everyone for listening. Everyone. We have to thank anyone who got to the end of this, uh, and have to say thanks to you, Matt.

Speaker C: See ya.

Speaker A: Thanks. There we go. And, uh, I say thanks to you, Jordan, for joining us too.

Speaker B: No problem at all, Nick. There's nothing I'd rather be doing at 9:45 on a Sunday evening.

Speaker A: Sam.